School of Humanities Med in Teaching English as a Foreign/International Language
Postgraduate Dissertation
Integrating Educational Technology and Web 2.0 Tools into Project – Based Learning to Enhance Young Learners’ Writing Skills and New Literacies
Irene Manidaki
Supervisor: Dr. Zafiri Makrina – Nina
Patras, Greece, September 2020
POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
Theses / Dissertations remain the intellectual property of students (“authors/creators”), but in the context of open access policy they grant to the HOU a non-exclusive license to use the right of reproduction, customisation, public lending, presentation to an audience and digital dissemination thereof internationally, in electronic form and by any means for teaching and research purposes, for no fee and throughout the duration of intellectual property rights. Free access to the full text for studying and reading does not in any way mean that the author/creator shall allocate his/her intellectual property rights, nor shall he/she allow the reproduction, republication, copy, storage, sale, commercial use, transmission, distribution, publication, execution, downloading, uploading, translating, modifying in any way, of any part or summary of the dissertation, without the explicit prior written consent of the author/creator. Creators retain all their moral and property rights.
2 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
Integrating Educational Technology and Web 2.0 Tools into Project – Based Learning to Enhance Young Learners’ Writing Skills and New Literacies
Irene Manidaki
Supervising committee: Supervisor: Co – supervisor: Dr. Zafiri Makrina – Nina Dr. Calfoglou Christina Hellenic Open University Hellenic Open University
Patras, Greece, September 2020
3 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
Dedication
To Eva and Marianna, my wonderful nieces
4 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Zafiri Makrina – Nina, for inspiring me to be a better teacher and for her immediate feedback, constructive advice, constant support and guidance throughout the present research and writing. I would also like to thank Dr. Calfoglou Christina, my second supervisor, for her insightful comments. Furthermore, I am deeply grateful to my wonderful 6th grade students for participating in this research and for being a constant source of inspiration to me. Without their invaluable contribution, this work would not have been completed. Last but not least, I would like to thank my family and my friends for their constant support and encouragement throughout my academic studies.
5 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Abstract
The purpose of the present dissertation is to investigate the application of educational technology and Web 2.0 tools into project – based learning (PBL) aiming to enhance young learners’ writing skills and New Literacy skills. To this end, a blended learning course, which was consisted of ten differentiated lessons regarding the teaching of the writing skill, was designed by the researcher for the 6th grade students of a state primary school in Crete. All lessons were based on the students’ needs and preferences, on the objectives of the Unified Curriculum for the foreign languages and on the 6th grade course book. Furthermore, an action research was conducted in which two groups participated; a control group which was taught through the traditional course book and an experimental group which was involved in the aforementioned differentiated instruction. The sixteen students of the experimental group were expected to improve their writing skills since they were actively engaged in project work. Using Google Docs and blogs and working collaboratively, they were also expected to familiarize themselves with educational technology and to acquire New Literacy skills. An A1/A2 KPG pre – test was distributed to both groups, before and after the differentiated instruction, to investigate the students’ level of writing skills and to evaluate their improvement regarding writing skills respectively. Qualitative research was also conducted: pre- semi – structured interviews with the students of the experimental group explored their preferences and perceptions of the writing process and also their awareness of ICT integration in a project – based environment. Post- semi – structured interviews were conducted as well to investigate the students’ attitudes concerning the effectiveness of project work in combination with Google Docs and blogs in terms of collaboration and process writing. The researcher also kept a diary concentrating on the use of Web 2.0 tools, writing processes and collaboration.
6 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
The research findings revealed that integrating PBL with educational technology and Web 2.0 tools (Google Docs and blogs) was an effective means of enhancing young learners’ writing skills and New Literacy skills.
Key words: Project – based learning, Google Docs, class blogs, process writing, collaborative writing, young learners.
7 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Περίληψη
Ο σκοπός της παρούσας διπλωματικής εργασίας είναι να διερευνήσει την εφαρμογή της εκπαιδευτικής τεχνολογίας και των εργαλείων Web 2.0 στη διδασκαλία με συνθετικές εργασίες (projects) με στόχο τη βελτίωση των ικανοτήτων παραγωγής γραπτού λόγου και Νέων Εγγραμματισμών σε μικρούς μαθητές. Για το σκοπό αυτό, στα πλαίσια συνδυασμένης μάθησης, η ερευνήτρια σχεδίασε μια σειρά δέκα μαθημάτων διαφοροποιημένης διδασκαλίας όσον αφορά την παραγωγή γραπτού λόγου για τους μαθητές έκτης τάξης ενός δημόσιου δημοτικού σχολείου στην Κρήτη. Όλα τα μαθήματα σχεδιάστηκαν λαμβάνοντας υπόψην τις ανάγκες και τις προτιμήσεις των συγκεκριμένων μαθητών, τους στόχους του Προγράμματος Σπουδών για τις ξένες γλώσσες και το σχολικό βιβλίο. Επιπλέον, διεξήχθη μια έρευνα δράσης στην οποία συμμετείχαν δύο ομάδες μαθητών: η ομάδα ελέγχου (control group) που διδάχτηκε μέσω του παραδοσιακού βιβλίου και η πειραματική ομάδα (experimental group) η οποία διδάχτηκε την παραγωγή γραπτού λόγου μέσω της διαφοροποιημένης διδασκαλίας. Οι δεκαέξι μαθητές της πειραματικής ομάδας αναμενόταν να βελτιώσουν τις ικανότητές τους στην παραγωγή γραπτού λόγου εμπλεκόμενοι ενεργά σε συνθετικές εργασίες (projects). Δουλεύοντας συνεργατικά με έγγραφα Google και το ιστολόγιο τάξης (blog), οι μικροί μαθητές αναμενόταν να εξοικειωθούν με την εκπαιδευτική τεχνολογία και να αποκτήσουν ικανότητες Νέων Εγγραμματισμών. Στους μαθητές και των δύο ομάδων διανεμήθηκε ένα τεστ Κρατικού Πιστοποιητικού Γλωσσομάθειας, επιπέδου Α1/Α2, πριν και μετά τη διαφοροποιημένη διδασκαλία, για να διερευνήσει το επίπεδο ικανοτήτων παραγωγής γραπτού λόγου και για να εκτιμήσει η ερευνήτρια τη βελτίωσή τους αντίστοιχα. Διεξήχθη επίσης ποιοτική έρευνα. Συγκεκριμένα, διεξήχθησαν ημιδομημένες συνεντεύξεις με την ερευνητική ομάδα, το περιεχόμενο των οποίων χρησιμοποιήθηκε από την ερευνήτρια αρχικά για να διερευνήσει τις προτιμήσεις και τις απόψεις των μαθητών σχετικά με τη διαδικασία παραγωγής γραπτού λόγου όπως επίσης και τις αντιλήψεις τους σχετικά με την ενσωμάτωση της εκπαιδευτικής τεχνολογίας στη μάθηση μέσω συνθετικών
8 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
εργασιών. Μετά τη διδασκαλία των συγκεκριμένων μαθημάτων οι μαθητές της ερευνητικής ομάδας παραχώρησαν εκ νέου μια ημιδομημένη συνέντευξη στην ερευνήτρια για να διερευνηθούν οι απόψεις τους σχετικά με τη διδασκαλία μέσω συνθετικών εργασιών σε συνδυασμό με έγγραφα Google και blogs όπως επίσης σχετικά και με τη διαδικασία παραγωγής γραπτού λόγου. Ημερολόγιο που κρατήθηκε από την ερευνήτρια χρησιμοποιήθηκε ως ένα ακόμη εργαλείο για τη συλλογή δεδομένων σχετικά με τη χρήση Web 2.0 εργαλείων και τη διαδικασία παραγωγής γραπτού λόγου. Τα αποτελέσματα της έρευνας κατέδειξαν ότι η ενσωμάτωση Web 2.0 εργαλείων (έγγραφα Google και ιστολόγιο) στη διδασκαλία μέσω συνθετικών εργασιών βελτίωσε τις ικανότητες παραγωγής γραπτού λόγου και Νέων Εγγραμματισμών στους μικρούς μαθητές.
Λέξεις – κλειδιά: διδασκαλία με συνθετικές εργασίες, έγγραφα Google, ιστολόγιο τάξης, διαδικασία παραγωγής γραπτού λόγου, συνεργατική παραγωγή γραπτού λόγου, μικροί μαθητές.
9 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
List of Abbreviations
AR Action Research CEFR The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages DI Differentiated Instruction EPS - XG The Unified Curriculum for Foreign Languages EFL English as a Foreign Language FL Foreign Language ICT Information Computer Technology KPG The State Certificate of Language Proficiency L1 First Language PBL Project – based Learning Ss Students T Teacher YL Young Learners
10 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
List of Tables/Graphs
Table 1: Pre – and post – tests results (scores – percentages) of the students of the experimental group...... 302
Table 2: Pre – and post – tests results (scores – percentages) of the students of the control group...... 302
Graph A: Variation between the pre- and post – tests results of the experimental group...... 303
Graph B: Variation between the pre- and post – tests results of the of the control group...... 303
11 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
TABLE OF CONTENTS Dedication...... 4 Acknowledgements...... 5 Abstract...... 6 Περίληψη...... 8 List of Abbreviations...... 10 List of Tables/Graphs...... 11 Table of Contents...... 12
Introduction...... 15
Chapter 1: Teaching English as a Foreign Language in a Greek State Primary School – the Educational Context...... 18 Introduction...... 18 1.1 EFL Teaching in Greek State Primary Schools - The Unified Curriculum for Foreign Languages and its compatibility with the State Certificate of Language Proficiency (KPG)...... 18 1.2 The 6th Grade Course Book and the Teacher’s Book in compliance with the EPS – XG...... 20 1.3 Teaching 6th Grade EFL Young Learners – Learning theories...... 21 1.4 Differentiated Instruction in a YLs’ Foreign Language class – Definition and Key Principles...... 23 Conclusion...... 25
Chapter 2: Project – based Learning...... 26 Introduction...... 26 2.1 Definitions and features of Project – based Learning...... 26 2.2 Stages of Project – based Learning…………………….………..….…….... 27 2.2.1 The planning stage…………………………………………………… 27 2.2.2 The implementation stage……………………………………………. 28 2.2.3 The evaluation stage………………………………………………..... 29 2.3 Benefits of using the PBL in a Foreign Language class...... 29 2.4 Teacher and Learners’ roles in PBL...... 31 2.4.1 The Teacher’s role...... 31 2.4.2 Learners’ roles...... 32 2.5 Implementing PBL in a Young Learners’ EFL class...... 33 2.6 Integrated Technology and Web 2.0 tools in PBL – Blended learning...... 34 2.7 New Literacies – 21st Century skills...... 35 Conclusion...... 36
Chapter 3: Teaching Young Learners Process Writing using Web 2.0 tools in a PBL environment...... 37 Introduction...... 37 3.1 Process writing approach – Stages...... 37 3.1.1 Pre – writing/Generating ideas/Planning stages...... 38 12 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
3.1.2 Drafting/Revising/Editing stages...... 38 3.1.3 Publishing stage...... 39 3.2 Web 2.0 tools and Writing instruction in Project – based Learning...... 39 3.2.1 Collaborative writing...... 39 3.2.2 Google Docs and their exploitation in the writing process...... 40 3.2.3 Blogs and their exploitation in the writing process...... 42 Conclusion...... 43
Chapter 4: The Research Methodology...... 44 Introduction...... 44 4.1 The aims of the research and the research questions...... 44 4.2 The research methodology: Action research...... 45 4.3 The participants...... 46 4.4 Data collection tools...... 48 4.4.1 Pre – and post – KPG writing tests...... 48 4.4.2 Semi – structured interviews...... 50 4.4.3 Teacher’s Diary...... 51 4.5 The differentiated PBL lessons...... 52 Conclusion...... 60
Chapter 5: Presentation and Analysis of the Results...... 61 Introduction...... 61 5.1 Results of the pre- semi – structured interviews...... 61 5.1.1 The first axis...... 62 5.1.2 The second axis...... 64 5.1.3 The third axis...... 66 5.2 The KPG pre – and post – test results...... 68 5.2.1. The pre – test results...... 68 5.2.2 The post – test results...... 70 5.3 Results of the post- semi – structured interviews...... 74 5.3.1 The first axis...... 75 5.3.2 The second axis...... 76 5.3.3 The third axis...... 80 5.4 The teacher’s diary...... 82 5.5 Discussion of the results...... 84 5.6 Educational implications...... 86 5.7 Limitations of the research and suggestions for further research...... 87 Conclusion...... 88
Concluding remarks...... 89
References...... 90
APPENDICES...... 111 APPENDIX I: The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages...... 112 APPENDIX II: The Unified Curriculum for the Foreign Languages...... 113
13 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX III: The 6th Grade Course Book contents...... 126 APPENDIX IV: Letter to the parents (Greek version)...... 134 APPENDIX V: Letter to the parents (English version)...... 136 APPENDIX VI: Pre- semi – structured interview questions (Greek version)...... 138 APPENDIX VII: Pre- semi – structured interview questions (English version)...... 142 APPENDIX VIII: KPG Pre- and Post – Test...... 146 APPENDIX IX: Lesson plans...... 151 APPENDIX X: Students’ Worksheets – Google Docs...... 223 APPENDIX XI: The Teacher’s Diary (extracts)...... 277 APPENDIX XII: Post- semi – structured interview questions (Greek version)...... 2 82 APPENDIX XIII: Post- semi – structured interview questions (English version)...... 286 APPENDIX XIV: Transcripts from the learners’ answers to the post- semi – structured interview questions...... 290 APPENDIX XV: Pre- and post – test results...... 302 APPENDIX XVI: Useful links and writing samples from the groups final products...... 304 APPENDIX XVII: Computer lab photographs...... 310
14 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Introduction
The advent of technology has inevitably presented a need to expose young learners to educational technology in the foreign language classroom, placing emphasis on Web 2.0 tools and using digital writing for real life communication (Richardson, 2010). Google Docs and blogs provide a collaborative writing environment for young learners, promoting creativity, critical thinking, decision making, peer feedback and socialization and encouraging students to become digital citizens (Warschauer, 1996; Thomson, 2008; Zhang, 2009; Suwantarathip & Wichadee, 2014; Kourtis – Kazoulis and Vlachos, 2014). Integrating Google Docs and Blogs in a project – based learning environment, young learners are offered chances to foster lifelong learning skills by inviting them to collaborate in order to solve real life problems and to create end products (Van Lam, 2011). This dynamic learning approach challenges learners to construct on their own learning changing the role of the teacher, who now becomes the facilitator, and that of the learners, who now become teachers and are also responsible for their own learning (Goodman & Stivers, 2010; Bell, 2010). Collaborative process writing opportunities can be offered to learners in PBL, as they can give and receive feedback, acquire communication skills and ultimately improve their writing skills. In light of the above, the researcher designed a blended learning course which consisted of ten differentiated lessons based on the learners’ needs and preferences and the objectives of the Unified Curriculum for foreign languages as well as and the 6th grade course book. The aim of the present research was to explore the extent to which the use of Google Docs and blogs enhance collaborative writing in a YLs’ classroom and to investigate whether the integration of Web 2.0 tools into project – based learning can improve young learners’ writing skills and New Literacies.
15 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
More specifically, the following research questions were posed: a) To what extent does project – based learning integrated with ICT enhance young learners’ New Literacy skills in a blended learning environment? b) Can Google Docs contribute to the development of collaborative writing in a young learners’ EFL class? c) Can blogs contribute to the development of collaborative writing in a young learners’ EFL class? d) How do Google Docs improve process writing skills in young learners? e) How do blogs improve process writing skills in young learners?
The current dissertation consists of five chapters. Chapter 1 presents the Greek educational context which concerns foreign language instruction. The aims and objectives of the Unified Curriculum for the foreign languages (EPS – XG), regarding A2 level, are presented and this includes its compatibility with the state Certificate of Language Proficiency (KPG). Inconsistencies between these official documents and the course book used, regarding writing skills as well as young learners’ needs, show the areas which require a differentiated approach to teaching writing. Also, the prevailing learning theories, especially those concerning the pre – teen age, and the key principles of Differentiated Instruction (DI) are briefly discussed. Chapter 2 presents definitions and features of project – based learning (PBL) along with its benefits in a young learners’ foreign language class. Also, the roles of the teacher and the learners as well as the ways in which PBL can be implemented in a young learners’ foreign language class are discussed. Lastly, the advantages of integrating technology and Web 2.0 tools in a PBL environment as well as the New Literacy skills learners should acquire to become digital citizens are also presented. Chapter 3 presents the process writing approach and its stages and also how Google Docs and blogs can be exploited in a PBL environment in order to help young learners improve both their collaborative writing skills and their individual writing skills. In Chapter 4 the aims of the research are outlined along with the research questions and a brief review of the action research which will be applied, by the researcher who is also the
16 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” teacher, to explore the initial research hypothesis. The participants, the tools that will be employed for the data collection and the differentiated lessons are also addressed in detail. Lastly, in Chapter 5, the results of the present research are presented and analysed and the research questions are answered. More specifically, the research results are thoroughly presented along with the possible implications regarding PBL and ICT integration in state primary schools. Certain limitations of the specific research are also depicted and suggestions for further research are also proposed.
17 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Chapter 1: Teaching English as a Foreign Language in a Greek State Primary School – the Educational Context
Introduction
The first chapter of this dissertation will present the Greek educational context which concerns foreign language instruction. The aims and objectives of the Unified Curriculum for foreign languages (EPS – XG), regarding A2 level, will be presented and this includes its compatibility with the state Certificate of Language Proficiency (KPG). Inconsistencies between these official documents and the course book used, regarding writing skills as well as young learners’ needs, will show the areas which need a differentiated approach to teaching writing. In this regard, the prevailing learning theories, especially those concerning the pre – teen age, and the key principles of Differentiated Instruction (DI) will briefly be discussed.
1.1 EFL Teaching in Greek State Primary Schools - The Unified Curriculum for the Foreign Languages and its compatibility with the State Certificate of Language Proficiency (KPG)
Foreign language teaching became compulsory in all Greek state primary schools in 1991, and was introduced in the last three grades. In 2003 it was extended to the last four primary school education grades (Alexiou & Mattheoudakis, 2013). EFL is a compulsory subject in all grades since 2010. According to Richards (2001) curriculum development focuses on the skills, knowledge and values learners should acquire in school and the experiences and ways which should be provided and used in order to bring about the intended learning outcomes. The current Unified Curriculum for all foreign languages (EPS – XG) which are taught in Greek state schools (Government Gazette, 2016) was first
18 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” implemented in 2016 aiming to develop learners’ oral and written mediation and interaction skills, learning and communication strategies, thus enhancing their intercultural awareness as well as their communication ability (see Appendix II, pp. 113 – 125). It is the first unified curriculum for all foreign languages in Greek schools and it is based on specific proficiency levels which were determined by descriptors, which take into consideration the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (Council of Europe, 2001) and which are also in line with the specifications of the KPG exam (see App I. p. 112). EPS – XG descriptors consist of detailed statements concerning the goals learners are expected to achieve in each level. They define actions which learners should take in order to reach the desired educational level. KPG descriptors serve a different purpose, in the sense that they determine the use of language candidates are expected to have acquired, by the time of the exam, depending on the proficiency level they wish to be certified for. EPS – XG is an innovative curriculum since it focuses on meaning and fluency rather than form and accuracy and it promotes real life communication with the use of new technologies attempting to connect communicative competence in the foreign language with the digital literacy of the learners. It adopts a learner – centred approach encouraging FL teachers to adapt the material they have been provided with or even create new material based on the learners’ needs and the needs of the society in which they live in order to achieve their educational goals. It is accepted that learners who attend the same class are not at the same ability level. More particularly, they differ from each other in maturity, experience and interests, thus endorsing differentiated instruction principles according to which each student is a unique personality with unique previous experiences and knowledge which has been acquired in various environments (Levy, 2008). Concerning A2 level writing skills, learners are expected to be able to produce, initially, simple and, later, more complicated written speech describing habits, responding when information or questions are asked, expressing complaints or dissatisfaction and writing short biographies and short stories using tenses appropriately. Finally, their written mediation skills are expected to be improved, as learners are encouraged to use information found in authentic texts in their mother tongue in order to produce written texts in the FL. 19 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
1.2 The 6th Grade Course Book and the Teacher’s Book in compliance with the EPS – XG
The course book used in the 6th grade class is “English 6th Grade” (Efraimidou, Frouzaki & Reppa, 2009) and is distributed, free of charge, to all young learners by the Greek Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs. It includes a Student’s Βοok, a Workbook, a Class Audio CD and a Teacher’s Βοok. According to the authors it is intended for learners who are at a Pre – Intermediate level and is consistent with the A2 Level of the CEFR (Council of Europe, 2001). They also argue that the learners’ needs, interests, age and background knowledge have been taken into consideration in designing the material. Regarding the course book’s activities, they claim to be of a communicative nature engaging learners in real life situations and enhancing critical thinking and learner autonomy (Efraimidou, Frouzaki & Reppa, 2009). It is a well – organized book divided into ten units (each unit is subdivided into three lessons) which focus on a specific topic each (see App. III, pp. 126 – 133). Writing activities are found, mostly, towards the end of each unit (Lesson 3 refers to a project for practicing the language taught in the unit) where learners are provided with model texts and are asked to produce a variety of genres (articles, posters, poems, emails, biographies) which relate to the unit topic. Besides model texts and a variety of writing activities, learners are provided with guidance (vocabulary tips and strategies) only in some cases and with visual material which is sometimes irrelevant to the task, unclear or needs an explanation from the teacher. When authentically – presented material (reading input for example) is used to motivate learners to write, since “authentic” presentation is very important (Berardo, 2006), the vocabulary used is more advanced than A2 level and learners are asked to write longer texts than the ones the CEFR specifications require at an A2 level; such as short and simple formulaic notes and sentences connected with “and”, “but”, “because” and short personal letters.
20 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Process writing techniques are not available (pre – writing activities for brainstorming and generating ideas, chances to make drafts and edit their own products or their peers’), unless the teachers use their own materials to serve this purpose. Writing tasks are performed, mostly, individually so learners do not have the chance to collaborate with their peers so as to develop their interaction and communicative skills, as well as their metacognitive strategies. Even though some of the tasks are contextualized, having a purpose and an audience in mind (Reichelt, Lefkowitz, Rinnert & Schultz, 2012), so that learners become involved in real life activities (Hyland, 2013), the fact that the audience is imaginary may demotivate learners and render them reluctant to write. Last but not least, the authors also present the principles of differentiated instruction/learning, as well as instructions on how to deal with the diversity and heterogeneousness of the class (in the Teacher’s Book). They also encourage teachers to use Appendices which contain differentiated tasks that might meet the diverse needs of all learners (Efraimidou, Frouzaki & Reppa, 2009). Projects are also encouraged as they are open – ended and are also an excellent basis for differentiated instruction/learning (Efraimidou, Frouzaki & Reppa, 2009). Even so, the needs of the learners of each particular class are not met since the authors have pre – created these activities estimating on what the specific age group learners’ needs and language level might be.
1.3 Teaching 6th Grade EFL Young Learners – Learning theories
As Nunan (2010) states, the term “young learner” covers a chronological span from around three to fifteen years of age. Here young learners are 11 – year – old 6th grade primary school students. Teaching FL to 6th graders is a challenging task since not all of them share the same language, social and cognitive development, therefore their individual needs, interests and styles should be taken into consideration (Bouniol, 2004) when planning lessons. Eleven – year – old students have gone through earlier developmental stages, according to the Piagetian theory (1951), and have reached the formal operations 21 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” stage during which abstract thinking is possible so, guided by the teacher, they can be engaged in problem – solving situations and can also become actively involved in discovering meaning and answers, thus gaining learner autonomy. They can construct meaning and can also gain an understanding on their experiences (Cameron, 2001; Harmer, 2001), thus becoming active learners and thinkers. As Wood (1998) states, learners should be encouraged to become active and constructive, and to become involved in a variety of practical problem – solving activities in order to develop knowledge and intelligence. Cognitively, “perception, memory, concept formation, language and symbolization” (Fisher, 1997, p. 1) are the skills that match the learners’ age, motivating and making them enthusiastic to make sense of everything around them. Thus, the activities designed by the teacher must be enjoyable and appropriate for the learners’ age so that students can be challenged to achieve higher cognitive levels. Vygotsky’s (1978) Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) places emphasis on the quality of interaction with adults or more capable peers who aid in language learning, thus helping learners develop and acquire knowledge. By providing instructional support and guidance, the teacher helps learners develop their skills through the process of “scaffolding” which refers to the steps taken in carrying out tasks so that novice learners are provided with comprehensive input thus becoming able to interact with advanced peers and to concentrate on a specific goal and, finally, to achieve it (Bruner, 1978; Hyland 2013). Activating their background knowledge, provision of useful vocabulary and structures, and demonstration of problem – solving processes are some techniques which can help learners gradually become less dependent on their teacher or advanced peers. By assigning contextualized tasks and real – life project themes, language learning becomes meaningful and motivating since it involves learners in the process of socialization (Zafiri & Zouganeli, 2017). Lastly, Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences Theory (1983), gives a new perspective to the term “intelligence”, and suggests that there are at least eight different types of intelligences1 which allow individuals to infer to the world in different ways and at a different pace. As the unique profile of each learner is a combination of all
1 linguistic, logical/mathematical, visual/spatial, kinaesthetic, musical, naturalistic, interpersonal, intrapersonal 22 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” intelligences, personalization of education and a variety of activities should be incorporated in the curriculum such as role – playing, simulations, word games, designing, organizing, etc, in order to help learners to challenge all forms of their intelligences, make the best use of their strengths and cooperate during the learning process instead of competing with their peers (Guild, 1997; Bas, 2008; Armstrong, 2009; Chen & Liu, 2013). Above all, as Krashen (1981) supports, a low anxiety environment is a prerequisite for acquiring the foreign language. Therefore, YL should be involved in free from boredom and anxiety tasks which can enhance their comprehension and acquisition. Using the FL in a social context for real – life communication reasons, in group activities, for example, renders learning an enjoyable process and helps learners to acquire new language encouraging them to feel positive, self – confident and motivated.
1.4 Differentiated Instruction in a YLs’ Foreign Language Class – Definition and Key Principles
Today’s young learners’ FL classes, in Greek primary schools can be defined as heterogeneous since the only common characteristic of learners is their age. Diverse cultures, economic backgrounds, proficiency levels (due to the fact that learners attend different level afternoon classes in private language schools), learners with identified learning problems, such as dyslexia, who need special educational support, learners who do not share the same interests, styles, preferences and motivation and pre – teenage learners of both genders render FL teaching a challenging procedure, as learners’ ability to think, understand ideas and learn differs widely as Tomlinson (2001) states. Heacox (2012) describes differentiated instruction (DI) as the changing of pace, level and kind of instruction provided, to meet individual learners’ needs, styles and interests, allowing them to demonstrate what they have learned using their strengths and interests.
23 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
This powerful instructional FL teaching tool is clearly supported by the Unified Curriculum for foreign languages which stresses that the content and the teaching methods and techniques should be determined by factors which relate to the learners and the diverse learning environments (Government Gazette, 2016). As soon as FL teachers realise that learners’ differences are not only normal but that they are actually assets to the classroom community and that every student has the capacity to learn, they become aware that it is their responsibility to maximize learners’ chances for success based on their language skills and individual advantages rendering themselves advocates for every student in their class (Tomlinson, 2014). Differentiated instruction is aligned with Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of learning which considers learners within their own social and cultural backgrounds and supports that their previous experiences and knowledge attribute meaning to newly acquired ones. Thus, learners are treated as unique personalities whose social and cultural backgrounds influence their academic progress (Subban, 2006). The relationship between teacher and learners is reciprocal as students respond to their teacher’s prompting in an attempt to become autonomous and self – sufficient learners and, therefore, they gain awareness of their own skills and abilities and enhance responsibility for their own learning and their own lives (Lawrence – Brown, 2004). Learners’ preferences to learn also relate to the types of intelligences they have (Gardner, 1999), so teachers, after having identified their learners’ interests and learning profiles, proactively plan and carry out “varied approaches to content, process and product in anticipation of and response to learners’ differences in readiness, interest and learning needs” (Tomlinson, 2001, p. 7). Differentiated instruction allows content variation without losing sight of the curriculum in order for all learners to achieve their learning goals (Levy, 2008; Tomlinson, 2014). The teaching process can be differentiated thus engaging learners in critical and creative thinking, involving them in more complex or abstract activities or by simply using various ways to teach them what they have to learn (Heacox, 2012). Regarding product differentiation, learners can be asked to create and present products according to their strength (Heacox, 2012; Levy, 2008).
24 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Conclusion To sum up, the present chapter demonstrated the Greek educational context regarding foreign language instruction. It is true that proficiency level descriptors of the EPS – XG are consistent with the KPG ones. However, the course book does not meet learners’ needs thus, as concerning writing skills, differentiated instruction is proposed, as it is compatible with prevailing learning theories, the EPS – XG, the KPG and the learners’ needs. The next chapter provides an insight on project – based learning and its implementation in a young learners’ foreign language class.
25 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Chapter 2: Project – based Learning
Introduction
In this chapter, definitions and features of project – based learning (PBL) are presented along with its benefits in a YLs’ foreign language class. Also, the roles of the teacher and the learners as well as ways in which PBL can be implemented in a YLs’ foreign language class are discussed. Lastly, the advantages of integrating technology and Web 2.0 tools in a PBL environment as well as the New Literacy skills which learners should acquire to become digital citizens will be presented.
2.1 Definitions and Features of Project – based Learning
Project – based learning is a student – centred and teacher – facilitated approach to learning (Bell, 2010), which engages learners in the acquisition of knowledge while working on a “project”. This is defined by the Merriam – Webster Online Dictionary as “a task or problem engaged in usually by a group of learners to supplement and apply classroom studies”2 and by the Macmillan Online Dictionary as “a piece of work that involves collecting detailed information about something”3. Instead of following a rigid lesson plan that results in specific learning objectives and outcomes, learners are urged to investigate a topic worth learning more about, encouraging them to use authentic language in order to communicate as in real – life situations outside the FL classroom (Fried – Booth, 1997). Emphasizing learner – centeredness, the purpose of PBL is to foster lifelong learning abilities contextualizing learning by solving real life problems (Van Lam, 2011) and offering learners chances to develop confidence, self – esteem and independence collaborating on a task defined by themselves (Fried – Booth, 2002).
2https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/project#other-words 3 https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/project_1 26 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Two essential components of PBL are required according to Blumenfeld et al (1991): a question or problem that learners can be responsible for and which they can investigate or solve by asking questions, exchanging ideas, predicting, designing plans and drawing conclusions communicating information to others and creating a series of specific products (an article, a report, a video, a poster etc) which can be shared. Peers and teachers can give feedback but, most importantly, the learners themselves can revise and reflect on their own knowledge which has been constructed through the process of their own generation. Additional features are involved besides the driving question and the end product: PBL projects are not school – like or peripheral to the curriculum but realistic and central tasks (Thomas & Mergendoller, 2000) which integrate language skills through a number of activities (Hedge, 1993). The use of authentic FL materials, the importance of learners’ participation, as PBL is mostly student – driven, giving them ownership of the project, and the fact that it extends over a specific period of time (from a week up to a year) allows learners to collaborate with each other and to work on their own, to reflect on both the process and the product and to become responsible for their own learning (Thomas, 2000; Stoller, 2006). The use of technology as a cognitive tool is also a distinctive feature of PBL which provides ample access to information, interaction and collaboration opportunities among learners through the social media and the tools for product creation (Krajcik et al., 1994).
2.2 Stages of Project – based Learning
Three main stages must be completed within PBL, according to Fried – Booth (2002); these are the planning, implementation and evaluation stages.
2.2.1 The planning stage
Learners are introduced or agree on a topic in collaboration with the teacher depending on the project type: structured, semi – structured or unstructured in terms of the degree to which the project is defined by the teacher (Van Lam, 2011). 27 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Students’ prior knowledge and background schemata are activated, which is important particularly for EFL learners who may occasionally be struggling with unfamiliar vocabulary, helping them pursue more cognitively challenging tasks (Cummings, 2009). Formation of groups and assigning roles are also included in the planning stage. As social interaction and collaboration amongst learners, particularly with the more skilled ones, leads to effective learning according to the socio – cultural theory, heterogeneous groups might be ideal, taking into account learners’ relationships as this could influence the groups’ dynamics (Dornyei, 2003). Finally, decisions regarding resources of information, methodology to be followed, the end product and the timetable are also made.
2.2.2 The implementation stage
At this stage, learners are expected to carry out the tasks which involve gathering information outside the classroom, connecting the school with the real world, or surfing the Web as integrating technology as a tool for discovery, collaboration and communication helps learners to achieve essential learning goals using new means (Chao, 2013). Groups take into consideration what is required for their project, analyze, evaluate and organize information, improving high – order thinking skills and enhancing engagement and motivation to achieve their goal (Muresan, 2009). Means and space (conventional or electronic) to store everything learners collect is essential and should be provided by the teacher so that learners can easily retrieve their material (Fried – Booth, 2002) and avoid distractions and wasting time. Learners prepare themselves for the language demands and the challenges of organizing their materials and presenting their final products, receiving feedback from their instructor, which might involve editing and revising written reports or feedback on the organization of their ideas, pronunciation and voice projection (Stoller, 2002). The final products are completed at this stage and they have various forms decided upon by the groups in the planning stage (leaflets, posters, radio podcasts, videos, poems, essays, blog entries etc.). Presentation of the final products takes place in the classroom in front of the students’ peers or their parents or can be shared online using 28 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” wikis, blogs, and the social media (Facebook, Edmondo, Twitter etc). Being aware of the existence of a real audience, who might comment or give feedback to them, helps learners to monitor their own work thus developing their metacognitive strategies (O’ Maley & Chamot, 1990).
2.2.3 The evaluation stage
Learners evaluate their own performance reflecting on how well they collaborated in groups, how they negotiated and shared opinions, respecting other group members’ ideas (Bell, 2010). Besides process, they evaluate their products, based on criteria presented in the planning stage, improving their awareness of their strengths and weaknesses in order to become autonomous learners. Students are also encouraged to give constructive feedback to their peers thus improving their emotional intelligence and social learning (Robin, 2016).
2.3 Benefits of using the PBL in a Foreign Language Class
According to Blumenfeld et al. (1991, p. 374) “learners need to be cognitively engaged with subject matter over an extended period of time” in order to benefit from PBL. This promotes their active participation in the teaching/learning process and invites them to work upon authentic problems similar to real life situations. YL can be motivated not only because they realize that they gain useful knowledge for the future but also because they enhance creativity and flexibility in solving PBL problems (Bell, 2010). Fried – Booth (2002) advocates that the route to the end product helps learners develop confidence and independence while they are collaborating on tasks which are very similar to real world situations. They not only improve their social skills but they also discover personal goals, talents and interests working with other learners and negotiating with them to make decisions. Depending on the driving question, PBL engages learners in purposeful communication to complete authentic tasks which deal with real world problems, having the opportunity to use authentic 29 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” language in a relatively natural context which adds value to their learning (Solomon, 2003). Students are also encouraged to integrate all four skills naturally and to acquire essential lifelong skills such as research, planning, organization and time management (Fleming, 2000). They improve high – order thinking skills as they apply, analyze, synthesize and evaluate procedures (Crawford & Brown, 2002) and metacognitive skills since they are encouraged to evaluate their own performance and reflect on the whole process. Individual and group autonomy is acquired and enhanced throughout all PBL stages as project work “allows for a wide scope of self – determined action for both the individual and the small group of learners within a general framework of a plan which defines goals and procedures” (Legutke & Thomas, 1991, p. 160). Learners decide on the members and the names of the groups, they assign roles to, plan schedules and decide on the end products (planning stage). They are provided with choices for resources and information to be used, organization of the materials and presentation of the products (implementation stage). Lastly, in the evaluation stage, learners take responsibility of their own learning and evaluate both process and product thus developing autonomy which has also been defined as the capacity to take control of one’s own learning (Benson, 2001). Creativity involves production, in other words making something (a video, a poster, a story, etc) as the root of the word suggests “to bring into being” (Hayes, 2004, p. 281). The same occurs in a PBL environment in which both the teacher and the learners are responsible for the creation of the questions and the activities. Learners work creatively in an attempt to achieve their final goal – product, in role – playing, in drawing, in writing scripts and so on – allowing themselves to apply multiple intelligences and to create learning opportunities based upon their personal interests, styles and strengths. In developing their intelligences learners make learning not just a preparation for life but a part of it (Bas, 2008). Recent advances in educational technology allow teachers to provide a technology rich PBL environment so that learners do not have to leave the classroom to search for resources and information as the Internet has not only become an interactive and social environment which facilitates learners’ collaboration inside and outside the classroom (Kourtis – Kazoulis & Vlachos, 2014) but it also provides learners with “a 30 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” growing plethora of resources” (Stevens, 2014, p. 1). Learners are encouraged to search for, locate, critically evaluate information, and download pictures and videos so that new literacy skills are improved (Sylvester & Greenidge, 2009).
2.4 Teacher and Learners’ roles in PBL
In this section the roles of the teacher and the learners in a project – based learning environment will be analysed.
2.4.1 The Teacher’s role
As project – based learning is a learner – centred approach to learning, it focuses on a creative process in which the role of the teacher differs from the one in a traditional learning environment where the teacher explains, writes on the board, uses the course book and provides all the teaching materials to the learners who passively receive what the teacher offers (Shu, 2004). In a PBL environment the teacher can be a planner, a coordinator and a participant when needed, as s/he needs to design activities which help and prepare learners to meet the project’s requirements, to foster reflective discussion in the classroom by inviting all learners to define problems and to ask questions and, particularly in mixed ability classes, to participate as an equal in the activities with his or her learners if necessary (Zhang, 2017). Fried – Booth (2002) advocates that the teacher evaluates and monitors the language being used as a passive background figure and states that the more passive the teacher appears to be the more successful the project will be regarding learners’ autonomy and independent learning. S/he encourages learners to participate in group work and to collaborate with peers by communicating with them through the use of the FL so as to improve interaction as speakers and as listeners, as the teacher is the only live user of the foreign language, who can demonstrate to them how it works for communication purposes (Papaefthymiou – Lytra, 2014).
31 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
In a PBL environment, supported by educational technology, the teacher needs to become familiar with a range of learning materials, tools and applications, including Web 2.0 tools, in order to offer guidance to the learners, to provide them with resources so as to prevent them from wandering around aimlessly on the Web and to encourage them to “use technology safely and effectively” (Bell, 2010, p. 42). The teacher should also function as a facilitator of all forms of learning, enhancing all learners’ strengths, as each one of them has “a repertoire of skills for solving different kinds of problems” (Gardner, 2006, p. 21). Scaffolded instruction should be provided by the teacher assisting learners to bridge the gap between the actual level of their development and what they can achieve when provided with adult guidance (Vygotsky, 1978). Lastly, the teacher monitors and assesses the whole procedure, the learners’ progress individually and as groups and when learners produce an end product, they are given constructive feedback. The language used in PBL is just “a tool which provides learners access to extensive knowledge of the chosen topic and answers to the questions raised in the project” (Muresan, 2009, p. 3). A “gentle correction” is used (Harmer, 1991, p. 201) not insisting on repetitions of the correct versions of mistakes as a creative atmosphere during project work is essential for learners to achieve their goals.
2.4.2 Learners’ roles
In a learner – centred approach, such as PBL, the learners’ roles have also been changed. Learners are active participants in the teaching/learning process, working alongside with their teacher and constructing knowledge by relying on their own background knowledge. Real world projects challenge them to become researchers instead of passively expecting to receive information from their teachers. They search for information, analyse and interpret data, critically evaluate recourses and make decisions about using them in the creation of their products. They can be organizers of their own work and time – managers and they become autonomous and motivated by being 32 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” encouraged to take full responsibility for their learning (Worthy, 2000), they plan and carry out activities such as role – playing, discussions, interviews, surveys and locate resources to solve a problem (Fleming, 2000). Learners also work as team members and collaborators, acting as good listeners and negotiators as they have to communicate productively and respectfully taking into consideration the opinion of the other members of the group in order to solve problems. They are peer scaffolders aiding novice learners to reach the highest level of development and to improve their skills interacting with more advanced learners (Hyland, 2013). Lastly, throughout the evaluation stage of PBL, learners become monitors and assessors of the whole procedure and self – evaluators of the product and critical friends according to Bell (2010), giving constructive feedback to peers, increasing motivation and social skills and making them aware of their own strengths by improving their self – esteem.
2.5 Implementing PBL in a Young Learners’ EFL class
Teaching young learners a foreign language is a challenging experience which requires competent teachers with sufficient theoretical knowledge for young learners who take into account their special features, interests and needs (Puskás, 2016) and understand the way they learn in general and, more particularly, the way they learn a foreign language (Hughes, 2014). Since motivation is essential in foreign language learning (Dӧrnyei, 1994), a positive learning environment needs to be created in order to motivate learners and urge their active participation in the learning process. PBL is an authentic mode of teaching which provides learners with opportunities to solve real world problems (Blumenfeld et al., 1991), to have fun in the classroom, to collaborate with peers, and to enhance their intrinsic motivation, thus encouraging them to learn English for reasons of entertainment and communication (play computer games, download music or films, chat using their social media accounts such as Facebook, Instagram etc). 33 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Projects can involve a range of topics and settings, a variety of hands – on activities and final products to be created so that they can easily be adapted to suit the learners’ needs and proficiency level in order for them to gain knowledge in various subjects, to develop their cognitive skills and to become independent learners (Korosidou & Griva, 2013). Integration of skills and communication opportunities which are incorporated in project – based learning help learners to interact meaningfully, to develop communicative competence and to acquire learning strategies such as listening carefully, rephrasing, asking questions, giving examples etc. so as to avoid communication breakdowns (Richards, 2005).
2.6 Integrated Technology and Web 2.0 tools in PBL – Blended Learning
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) is considered a useful tool which enhances learning experiences offering learners a great variety of resources and ways to communicate inside and outside the classroom in real and authentic contexts. Studying the foreign language within its cultural context helps learners to feel that they are citizens of a global classroom as they practice worldwide communication and interaction with native speakers (Lee, 2000) and familiarize themselves with cultural changes completing and publishing their final products for a wider audience to read. Using educational technology in a PBL class motivates learners and promotes learner – centred and interactive learning as a rapid expansion of technology has led teachers and learners to use the World Wide Web for personal use not only as a means of communication but also as a limitless source of information and as an application which will be used in order to achieve their goal (Yang, 2009). Furthermore, technology enables teachers to adapt activities and authentic teaching materials according to their learners’ needs (Chapelle, 2008) and to facilitate language learning as learners are exposed to FL input and interact at their own pace thus enhancing autonomy and independent learning (Benson, 2001).
34 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
By using technology and Web 2.0 applications (Weblogs, wikis etc) and online word processors such as Google Docs, learners use not only verbal but written communication to interact with their teacher, their peers, and also with other Internet users who may have access to the application. Thus, they become involved in a real – life “written dialogue” and improve their writing and reading skills while at the same time they also become independent from their teacher and class peers as they can work at any time or at any place (Lai & Kritsonis, 2006). Using various technologies (videos, comics, digital stories, podcasts etc), they express their creativity and increase their interest gathering information relevant to the project’s questions which they use to create their final products (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). Collaborative learning is promoted as learners work in groups in front of their computers assigning authentic roles to themselves (leader, researcher, typist, art director), or by sharing their opinions in order to solve real life problems thus taking control of their own learning (Kundu & Bain, 2006). However, the exploitation of technology tools can also transpire through the integration of face – to – face teaching activities and collaborative learning opportunities, known as blended learning which provide an “exciting environment for teaching and learning the English language” (Challob, Bakar & Latif, 2016, p. 231). Since the teacher’s role is still considered critical, as learners’ FL needs should be organized and well – structured, blended learning methods provide opportunities for computer mediated language learning and, simultaneously, teacher guidance and encouragement to learn (Vlachos, 2010).
2.7 New Literacies – 21st Century skills
Lankshear & Knobel (2006) state that, due to the changes that occur at a global scale in technology, the media and communications, new literacies, which involve abilities to use the new media and the Internet effectively, are essential. Skills such as inquiring, interacting, collaborating, synthesizing, creating and presenting, in addition to the conventional print – based literacies, prepare learners to succeed in a digital
35 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” world (Summey, 2013). In fact, New Literacies build upon and go beyond Old Literacies “to include new reading, writing, viewing and communication skills required by the many new ICTs that continue to appear in our lives” (Leu, Kinzer, Coiro & Cammack, 2004, p. 496). More specifically, new literacies entail digital literacy and media literacy, according to Willem, Aiello & Bartolome (2007). Digital literacy involves the acquisition of new digital technology skills which are crucial not only in education but also at work, leisure and active citizenship. Media literacy involves skills related to the critical analysis and evaluation of information which allow learners to become critical thinkers and creative producers of messages using images, sounds and texts (Willem, et al., 2007). Kellner (1997) also mentions information literacy, involving the ability to access information in old print media and hypertexts, websites and links rendering learners aware of safety guidelines, able to construct meaning to synthesize and to evaluate. Therefore, teachers will be increasingly challenged to guide learners within information environments that continually change and introduce learners to new and emerging professional development needs and priorities in order to help them to take advantage of new technologies (Leu et al., 2004).
Conclusion
The second chapter aimed at describing the three stages of PBL and, was based on the underpinning of theories which exist. There was also an attempt to present the benefits of PBL in a FL classroom. The roles of the teacher and learners were also presented. The implementation of PBL with technology and Web 2.0 tools has proven to help learners acquire communication and New Literacy skills. The next chapter will explore process writing and will also attempt to present how Google Docs and blogs can be exploited in the writing process which exists within a PBL environment.
36 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Chapter 3: Teaching Young Learners Process Writing using Web 2.0 tools in a PBL environment
Introduction
The purpose of the third chapter is to present the process writing approach and its stages and also to show how Google Docs and blogs are exploited in a PBL environment in order to help young learners improve both their collaborative writing skills and their individual writing skills.
3.1 Process Writing approach - Stages
Writing is described by White & Arndt (1991, p. 3) as a “form of problem solving which involves such processes as generating ideas, discovering a voice with which to write, planning, goal – setting, monitoring and evaluating what is going to be written as well as what has been written and searching for language with which to express meaning”. It is considered to be a recursive generative process (Schmitt, 2002), during which learners have the chance to reflect on their ideas, plans and language and receive feedback from their peers and the teacher thus developing their own personal approach to writing (Sutikno, 2008) as well as their metacognitive strategies. Process writing can be facilitated in a PBL environment, as learners are invited to create products throughout a process of investigating, designing, experimenting, collecting and analysing data, creating and reflecting on their work (Blumenfeld et al., 1991).
37 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
3.1.1 Pre – writing/Generating ideas/Planning stages
As writing is a “complex cognitive process” (Nunan, 1999, p. 273) learners need to acquire the appropriate cognitive schemata or knowledge of vocabulary and topics in order to produce an effective product. Pre – writing activities are used to generate ideas on context and structure using both the FL and the mother tongue thus facilitating their planning, as switching between languages can be beneficial particularly for novice learners throughout higher level operations such as planning (Woodall, 2002). Brainstorming tasks for generating ideas such as mind maps, spider grams and the use of reading texts, pictures, videos, songs and the Web, stimulate learners, particularly the young ones, and activate prior knowledge and content schemata enabling them to plan their writing.
3.1.2 Drafting/Revising/Editing stages
Having planned their writing, learners write their first draft, revise and edit it, acquiring cognitive skills crucial to the process – based approach to writing. Furthermore, this recursive nature of writing helps learners improve their skills as peer feedback activities allow for negotiation of meaning (Flower, 1994). They negotiate ideas with peers and the teacher thus becoming engaged in activities during which they can exchange meaning using the foreign language and collaborate to achieve their goal which is a coherent purposeful text. Learners revise their texts moving backwards and changing structures and vocabulary before they move forward as many times as needed for a satisfactory end product. Thus, the writing process is a non – linear and generative one as “writers discover and reformulate their ideas as they attempt to approximate meaning” (Zamel, 1983, p. 165). When working in pairs or groups, particularly in heterogeneous classes, learners develop knowledge through “scaffolding” as they receive sufficient support to promote learning (Hyland, 2013, p. 118). Peer correction throughout the process gives learners the chance to become critical readers and eventually to become more self – reliant writers (Rollinson, 2005), enhancing their sense of a real audience with authentic readers. 38 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
3.1.3 Publishing stage
The final step involves publishing after proofreading and polishing texts. In this stage the teacher provides written or oral feedback emphasizing on language structures and providing for effective writing. This is done so that learners will become trained in both accuracy and in making their texts explicit for their readers including what needs to be written against what can be implied (Hyland, 2008). After finalizing their writing, final products are published enabling learners to communicate their ideas with peers, other teachers, parents, even the world, using Web 2.0 tools such as blogs, wikis, YouTube, etc. Having a real audience motivates learners and challenges them to write as they feel involved in problem solving activities (Hyland, 2013) and it also helps them to negotiate with real readers (Calfoglou & Sifakis. 2004).
3.2 Web 2.0 tools and Writing instruction in Project – based Learning
The following section will present the Web 2.0 tools which will be used in the specific research and their exploitation in the writing instruction in project – based learning.
3.2.1 Collaborative writing
Even though writing is generally considered an individual activity, in PBL environments learners are engaged in pair or group work writing tasks which require the production of a shared final product where group members engage in substantive interaction and share decisions and responsibility for the document (Allen et al., 1978). Based on social constructivism which holds that learners develop knowledge when interacting with others (Vygotsky, 1978), collaborative writing enables them to co –
39 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” construct knowledge involving them in the negotiation of meaning during which they contribute ideas and comprehend messages fostering generative and reflective thinking (Fung, 2010). Co – writers are assigned specific roles and responsibilities at every stage of the writing process and in every task, they are engaged in. They may write and review their texts individually and share their work with peers getting and providing feedback and suggestions and sharing knowledge or they may work together to produce a collective product which includes individual texts (Saunders, 1983). When working collaboratively in writing activities learners enhance their social skills as they work together to achieve a common goal, being responsible for their peers’ learning just as they are responsible for their own learning (Dotson, 2001). They improve autonomy and commitment to self – learning enhancing their ability to carry out individual and shared activities (Garrison & Vaughan, 2011) and develop critical skills as they analyse texts and ideas producing their own products (Speck, 2002). Collaborative writing can be facilitated with technology and Web 2.0 tools offering learners time and place flexibility as well as options to review their texts or view the corrections of their peers. Tools such as wikis, blogs and online processors, Google Docs, for example, allow for various Web – based collaborative tasks developing learners’ distinct processes (Kessler, Bikowski, & Boggs, 2012) increasing their individual autonomy and stimulation to write (Kessler & Bikowski,2010).
3.2.2 Google Docs and their exploitation in the writing process
In our technological era in which digital writing is used for real life communication, learners expect computers and technology to play an important role in the foreign language classroom (Lynch & Campos, 2014). Google Docs, an online version of the word processor, is part of a free, web – based software office suite within Google Drive service which enables learners to create and edit documents, spreadsheets and presentations, to create surveys and display them on blogs and 40 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” websites (Franco, 2010). This online tool allows learners to create, edit and store their documents online, working individually or collaboratively with their peers (Thomson, 2008), without being experts in word processing since it is easy to use and, and it also includes an auto saving mode and free online storage data space which can easily be used by young learners and is simultaneously accessed worldwide (Firth & Mesureur, 2010). Google Docs is a powerful tool which facilitates collaborative writing in the EFL classroom (Suwantarathip & Wichadee, 2014), improving writing skills through the recursive process of drafting and editing while creating the final product. Young learners can be engaged in group work writing activities enhancing motivation, as they feel part of a community (Warschaueur, 1996) and also develop their social interaction skills being able to work at their own pace with their peers and their teacher in and out of the EFL classroom synchronously and asynchronously in their own stress – free environment which may be their home. Being collaborators with their peers and their teacher, learners have the chance to become actively involved in a learner – centred procedure so they increase intrinsic motivation satisfying their needs for new experiences and fun in the FL classroom (Papaefthymiou – Lytra, 2014). Process writing is facilitated using Google Docs as the specific tool permits not only drafting, editing, revising and redrafting writing products but also offers a revision history presenting changes which help learners to develop metacognitive strategies monitoring and evaluating their own progress (O’ Malley & Chamot, 1990). Allowing peer feedback, Google Docs offer new learning opportunities for both givers and receivers (Corgan, Hammer, Margolies & Crossley, 2004) and gives learners the chance to search Web engines (Google, etc), evaluate online sources and make decisions concerning the use of information, thus improving critical thinking (Shaughnessy, Viner & Kennedy, 2018). In a PBL environment, Google Docs allow learners to collaborate outside the class time instead of finding a suitable time for all group members to meet in order to work on their projects and allow the teacher to monitor their work using history revision in order to locate each one’s improvements and weaknesses, as a different colour is used for each editor and immediate feedback is given thus facilitating the procedure. 41 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
3.2.3 Blogs and their exploitation in the writing process
One of the Web 2.0 tools which could be useful in a YL’s classroom is weblog (or blog) which is defined as “a Web page that serves a publicly accessible personal journal for an individual” by Webopedia4. It is a free online journal where people can publish their reflections and experiences, exchange information without place and time constraints and improve their knowledge thus meeting their needs and interests (Godwin – Jones, 2008). Since it is as easy to create and maintain, as creating a Microsoft Word Document5 (Yang, 2009), even novice young learners find it more interesting and attractive than traditional classroom practices. They can add pictures and audio files, besides texts, enhancing their creativity and motivation, stimulating their interests (Parousi, 2014) and promoting critical thinking skills, essential for language learning skills (Kourtis – Kazoulis & Vlachos, 2014). Since posts are not organized by content but in a reverse chronological order with the most recent ones placed at the top, blogs can be used as an online assessment portfolio which reflects learners’ development of writing allowing them to reflect on their own work (Zhang, 2009) and giving the teacher the chance to monitor their progress. Based on constructivism (Vygotsky, 1978) and on the social interaction theory, all three types of blogs (teacher, learner, class) (Campbell, 2003) can be used as learning communities encouraging learners to explore websites following links, exchanging ideas and sharing opinions. Blogs encourage learners to study individually, work collaboratively in class activities and also interact by using comments on peers’ and teacher’s posts, thus acquiring new literacy skills as well as high order thinking skills thus eventually become autonomous learners (Nickolson & Galguera, 2013; Lee, 2001). Process writing can be facilitated using blogs in a FL class as it can be enriched through the use of authentic topics from reference resources thus focusing on the learners’ needs and interests (famous people, sports, music, the environment, popular computer games etc). In this way learners become eager bloggers and active members of digital communities (Avgerou & Vlachos, 2016). Knowing that they
4 An online encyclopaedia dedicated to computer technology 5 The most popular word processing program 42 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” have a personal space to write in a community and a real audience, learners not only try to produce high quality work but give constructive feedback to peers throughout the process of planning, drafting, revising and editing before they post their final entries (Artvianti, 2013). Blog entries allow commenting on them giving learners the chance to exchange ideas, learn the “netiquette6” and create a pleasant learning atmosphere amongst learners. Blogs can also serve as an environment for project – based learning as, besides opening classroom doors for learners to enter and explore resources, they can support collaborative work, provide opportunities for them to create connected communities and to learn from each other when working on the same project as well as to reflect on their own products (Alsamadani, 2018).
Conclusion
In the third chapter, the writing skill was explored as well as the Web 2.0 tools (Google Docs and blogs) which may improve young learners’ written communicative competence and New Literacy skills if appropriately applied. In the following chapter the target context, the methodology and action research tools which will be employed as well as the suggested differentiated instruction for the teaching of writing will be described.
6 the framework of customs and rules that govern how Internet users behave (Strawbridge, 2006). 43 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Chapter 4: The Research Methodology
Introduction
Having established the teaching context and the theoretical framework of the research, the aims of the research are outlined, in this chapter, along with the research questions and a brief review of the action research approach which was applied by the researcher to explore the research hypothesis. The participants, the tools that were employed for the data collection and the differentiated instruction which was applied will also be addressed in detail.
4.1 The aims of the research and the research questions
Taking into account the Web 2.0 tools characteristics, namely Google Docs and blogs, and the New Literacies specifics, the proposed by the researcher five months of differentiated instruction aimed to investigate the effectiveness of the integration of Web 2.0 tools into project – based learning in connection with young learners’ writing skills and New Literacies. The extent to which the use of Google Docs and blogs enhances collaborative writing in a YLs’ class will also be investigated. More specifically, the following research questions were posed: 1) To what extent does project – based learning integrated with ICT enhance young learners’ New Literacy skills in a blended learning environment? 2). Can Google Docs contribute to the development of collaborative writing in a young learners’ EFL class? 3) Can blogs contribute to the development of collaborative writing in a young learners’ EFL class? 4) How do Google Docs improve process writing skills in young learners? 5) How do blogs improve process writing skills in young learners?
44 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
4.2 The research methodology: Action research
The current research was conducted within an action research framework aiming at improving the effectiveness of teaching writing to young learners by involving them in project work enriched with Web 2.0 tools and educational technology, since the most important tenet of action research is the close link between teaching and researching as teachers conduct a research in order to gain a better understanding and improvement of the effectiveness of their teaching (Dornyëi, 2007). Kemmis & McTaggart (1988, p. 5) define action research as “a form of collective self – reflective inquiry undertaken by participants in social situations in order to improve the rationality and justice of their own social or educational practices and the situations in which these practices are carried out”. Since its main focus within an educational context is to encourage teachers to become involved in their own practice becoming researchers (Stenhouse, 1975), action research is a method of exploring and solving problem issues in order to improve education through change (McNiff, 2013). Likewise, Kemmis (2009) states that action research is a critical and self – critical process which aims at changing practitioners’ practices, the way they understand them and, also, the conditions in which they practice. Kemmis & McTaggart (1981) and Altrichter & Gstettner (1993) propose the same four stages in their suggested action research procedures: problem identification, intervention planning, plan implementation, data collection and finally evaluation and reflection on the success of intervention. Teachers are required to process knowledge of the curriculum objectives and also recognise their class’s diversity and complexity concerning not only gender, ethnicity and culture but also language skills, needs, interests and styles in order to adapt teaching the way that best suits their learners (Barberos, Gozalo & Padayogdog, 2017). In light of the above, the present research was conducted in a State Primary School in Crete over a period of five months from October 2019 until February 2020. The lessons for the experimental group took place every Wednesday during the sixth teaching hour of the timetable and every Thursday during the first two consecutive
45 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” teaching hours and were taught in the school computer lab so that students had the chance to work in groups in front of their personal computers. The research followed the steps of action research; the researcher, who was also the teacher, identified the problem and developed a plan to improve it, she acted on the plan, collected and analysed data to assess its effectiveness on the specific teaching context and, lastly, she reflected on the process and made decisions for further planning (Mertler, 2012b; Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988). To triangulate, qualitative research was also conducted: pre – semi – structured interviews, with the students of the experimental group, explored their preferences and perceptions of the writing process and also their awareness of ICT integration in a project – based environment. Post – semi – structured interviews were conducted to investigate the students’ feelings concerning the effectiveness of project work in combination with Google Docs and blogs in terms of collaboration and process writing. Furthermore, the researcher kept a diary concentrating on the use of Web 2.0 tools, task completion, time management, motivation, writing processes and collaboration. The writing skills of both groups of students were assessed through a State Certificate of Language Proficiency (KPG) test, before and after the implementation of the differentiated instruction. The same KPG test was used as a pre – and post – intervention assessment tool, as will be described below.
4.3 The participants
The present dissertation aims to explore whether the integration of technology and Web 2.0 tools, more specifically Google Docs and blogs, can enhance 6th grade students’ writing skills and develop their New Literacy skills through the application of project – based learning to a greater extent than the course book – based tuition. Thus, for the purposes of this research an experimental and a control group were formed. The researcher has been teaching English to both groups for four years so she is fully aware of their strengths, weaknesses, learning styles and preferences.
46 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Both groups have been taught Information and Communication Technology for three years. More specifically, sixteen 6th grade students (eight girls and eight boys) of a state primary school in Iraklion, aged about eleven years of age whose proficiency level ranges from A1 (beginners) to A2 (pre – intermediate), according to the Common European Framework of Reference (Council of Europe, 2001), constitute the experimental group. They are all highly motivated students who enjoy doing group work activities which accommodate their different learning styles and competence, in addition to the course book material. Most of them enjoy learning the FL using new technologies and watching videos on YouTube, listening to music and being involved in real life communication activities as long as they have the chance to become active and autonomous learners. Twelve students are of Greek origin so their L1 is the Greek language. The mother of one of the girls comes from Serbia so they speak both Greek and Serbian at home. The rest of them (three in total) come from Albanian families, so they are also bilingual. Two boys and one girl have been diagnosed with dyslexia by the Greek Centre for Educational and Counselling Support (ΚΕΣΥ in Greek) so they face learning difficulties especially with their writing skills. One of the boys is an ardent user of the computer and spends all his free time playing online games and talking to players from all over the world using the English language as a common code of communication, so his oral and digital writing skills are of a higher level compared to other learners’. On the contrary, the other boy and the girl are very low – profile learners who prefer group work activities and often refuse to read aloud, to speak or to present their work in class. Furthermore, all students also attend different level afternoon classes at private English language schools, so the specific 6th grade class is considered a mixed ability class, especially concerning their writing achievement. The participants, being early adolescents develop distinct and perhaps different views to their parents, and their peers’ opinions seem to be more valuable to them than those of their parents (Crosnoe, 2000) The aforementioned students seem to ask for their peers’ approval more than their parents’ and teachers’ and, due to the fact that they have been in the same class for six years and they seem to get on well with
47 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” each other, when it comes to group work activities, they prefer gender – segregated groups since girls’ interests differ to those of the boys’ (Kroger, 2007). The control group consists of fourteen 6th grade students (nine girls and five boys) who attend the same primary school and are at approximately the same proficiency level as the experimental group. They are also eager to participate in group work activities and welcome real - life communication tasks which allow them to become actively involved in the teaching/learning process. One of the boys is bilingual, as he is of Albanian origin. Two girls have been diagnosed with dyslexia by the Greek Official Centre of Diagnosis and Support (KΕΣΥ in Greek) and face severe learning difficulties concerning their writing skills. The majority of the specific group of students (twelve in total) attend afternoon classes at private English language schools so the control group is also considered a mixed ability class since the students’ proficiency level ranges from A1 (beginners) to A2 (pre – intermediate), according to the Common European Framework of References (Council of Europe, 2001).
4.4 Data collecting tools
For the needs of this research, a variety of tools were used for data collection in order to triangulate and, thus, ensure its validity and reliability (Carr & Kemmis, 1986). These tools will be analysed below.
4.4.1 Pre – and post – KPG writing tests
Tests are one of the most powerful tools for collecting data since they can detect differences between, for example, two groups of students, according to Dornyëi (2007) and Dimitrov & Rumrill (2003). For the needs of this research pre – and post – intervention tests were administered to the learners of both the experimental and the control groups. KPG tests are based on the CEFR principles and use the levels of proficiency set by them (Council of Europe, 2001), so they provide consistent and stable results every time they are used establishing reliability and, therefore, validity of the certification 48 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” procedure, namely the degree to which a test actually measures what it claims to measure, rendering it a vital tool to be relied upon (KPG Handbook, 2013). Since the Greek state encourages its primary school students to sit for the KPG, the researcher has chosen the specific test as a data collection tool. The A1/A2 level pre – test, focused on the writing skill, was distributed to the students before the application of differentiated instruction at the beginning of this research, aiming to determine students’ prior knowledge and level of writing competence. It was derived from the KPG examination procedure and had already been taken by candidates in May 2017 (see App. VIII, pp. 146 – 150). The same test was administered to the students of both groups after the completion of the intervention of the project – based lessons in order to determine whether there was improvement of the students’ writing skills and to what extent. Furthermore, they were expected to offer an understanding on the extent to which the teaching methods implemented throughout the intervention had been effective for the students of the experimental group regarding the effectiveness of the integration of educational technology and Web 2.0 tools (Google Docs and blogs) into project – based learning on learners’ writing skills. All the activities of both writing tests were evaluated according to criteria related to the students’ overall ability to complete the writing tasks and the quality of writing production, namely spelling and punctuation, vocabulary range, accuracy and appropriacy. Activities 2 and 4 were also assessed on the basis of two extra criteria for assessing overall language performance: text organization, cohesion and coherence. All the criteria are formulated by the KPG which propose the following Likert scale to measure the quality of the writing production (https://rcel2.enl.uoa.gr/kpg/): 1= Unsatisfactory 2= Nearly satisfactory 3= Moderately satisfactory 4= Satisfactory 5= Fully satisfactory
49 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
4.4.2 Semi – structured interviews
In order to self – assess her practice and make decisions on the planning of the differentiated instruction based on the students’ cognitive level and needs, preferences and attitudes regarding their writing skills, the researcher used semi – structured interviews before and after the differentiated intervention (see App. VII, pp. 142 – 145 & App. XIII, pp. 286 – 289) . Since interviews enable the collection of verbal and non – verbal information, they are considered to be a powerful and flexible research tool (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2007). More particularly semi – structured interviews, give researchers the ability to use not only pre – set questions, thus guiding and directing the interviewees, but also encourage them to elaborate on the matters raised thus fulfilling the purposes of the interview (Dornyëi, 2007). Semi – structured interviews have been validated as ideal tools for collecting qualitative data. Both participants, interviewer and interviewee, produce questions and answers participating in an interpersonal talk (Qu & Dumay, 2011) as the interviewer tries to understand the world from the interviewee’s point of view adjusting the questions throughout the process (Berg, 2009; Elliot, 1991). For the needs of this research the semi – structured interviews were based on six main axes encouraging students to express their opinions regarding their cognitive level in the FL, their needs and difficulties concerning their writing skills and the strategies they activate during the teaching and learning of the writing skill, their attitudes towards PBL and ICT integration in the English language classroom and towards Web 2.0 tools and collaboration in a PBL environment and, lastly, students’ attitudes towards process writing and Web 2.0 tools. All interviews were conducted in one of the school classrooms which was vacant and the interviewees were asked whether they would like to be interviewed in English or in their mother tongue which in this case was Greek. All the students opted for Greek so the researcher attempted to “create a friendly atmosphere of trust and confidence” (Kothari, 2004) so that all students would feel comfortable during the interview to express their views (Alshenqeeti, 2014). The students’ parents had already been informed and reassured about the protection of the students’ personal data. Parents were also informed about the five –month intervention as the researcher 50 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” sent them a letter explaining the context of the research and justifying the teaching practices, the use of the educational technology and the Web 2.0 tools during classes as well as the safe use of the Internet throughout the teaching/learning procedure (see App. IV, pp. 134 – 135). During the process, data was collected through note taking and recording which was then transcribed aiming at a clear understanding of the students’ views and experiences (Mills et al. 2010). Since the teacher – researcher has been teaching the specific students for four years, rapport with the interviewees had already been established, therefore, she tried to avoid showing approval or disapproval using verbal or nonverbal cues in order to maintain a positive relationship with them (Qu & Dumay, 2011). The students were provided with opportunities to express themselves in their own words on crucial issues (Hobson & Townsend, 2010), as the researcher asked open – ended questions thus facilitating their spontaneous responses and eliciting their experiences before and after the intervention.
4.4.3 Teacher’s Diary
For the purposes of triangulation (Bechhofer & Paterson, 2000), the researcher employed a third tool to collect qualitative data thus enhancing the validity and reliability of her findings (Sagor, 2000). This was a diary (see App. XI, pp. 277 – 281) which was kept by her and involved classroom action recording, notes from classroom observations, ideas, plans, students’ feelings, reactions and thoughts and the documenting of the different stages of the research process which allowed the researcher to monitor the teaching intervention and critically reflect on the research methods and her own role as a researcher (Altrichter, Posch & Somekh, 1993). As McNiff (2013) suggests, the diary should be kept regularly after each of the differentiated PBL lessons so that significant incidents or important items are not forgotten and this is exactly what the teacher – researcher did. The researcher observed the students throughout the procedure, having the chance to gather authentic data rather than second hand accounts enabling herself to focus on what was really happening in the school computer lab, the amount of teacher and learner talk, 51 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” students’ motivation and participation, group collaborative work, behaviours among students, even non – verbal ones or things that participants might not feel free to discuss during the post – semi – structured interviews (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2007). Furthermore, the teacher’s diary played a crucial role in collecting data which concerned the participants’ attitudes towards the use of Google Docs, blogs and process writing allowing the researcher to identify problems and difficulties students had to face during the lessons so that she could facilitate the procedure according to their needs.
4.5 The differentiated PBL lessons
As discussed in Chapter 2 of this dissertation, PBL is a learner – centred and teacher – facilitated approach to learning which involves learners in student – driven, realistic projects, central to the curriculum and focused on authentic questions which students have to encounter, working collaboratively but relatively autonomously, exploiting technology – based tools as well as traditional resources, in order to create a real world end product (Thomas, 2000). Therefore, for the purposes of this research, ten differentiated PBL writing lessons were designed for the experimental group by the researcher based on the objectives of the Unified Curriculum for foreign languages and the 6th grade course book provided by the Greek Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs and they were taught in the school computer lab. The ten lessons have been differentiated according to the content and the students’ proficiency level, needs and preferences as they were drawn on the pre – semi – structured interviews and the pre – tests results. Web 2.0 tools (Google Docs and blogs) and educational technology were integrated into all stages of the PBL lessons aiming to enhance collaborative writing and to improve the students’ process writing skills and New Literacy skills. Five Gmail accounts were created by the researcher and were assigned to the groups in order to use them in the PBL lessons. As will be analysed in detail below,
52 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Google Docs were used during the planning stage to motivate students with the exploitation of authentic YouTube videos and other applications, such as Quizlet and Voki, and through a variety of meaningful tasks, to challenge them in order to activate their prior knowledge and to introduce new vocabulary. During the implementation stage Google Docs are exploited encouraging students to follow links in order to collect, analyze and synthesize information, critically evaluating it, and finally creating tangible and shareable products which are meaningful for them in order to learn effectively (Harel & Papert, 1991). A class blog was also created for the needs of the this research, which functions as an online portfolio that displays the students’ work and, simultaneously, gives them the chance to make their products public for a real audience, to critically reflect on their own improvement (Zhang, 2009) in the evaluation stage and also comment on their peers’ products enhancing their high order thinking skills. Furthermore, the specific class blog offers students learning resources and links (Godwin – Jones, 2003) allowing their self – exploration within the topic (Efimova & Fiedber, 2003). All PBL lessons were focused on the writing skill. Students worked in mixed ability groups of three or four in a process writing framework contributing to decision making on all aspects of writing, throughout all the stages of process writing, and the creation of their final product (content, language, structure, visuals, music etc) promoting a sense of “co – ownership” (Storch, 2005). Lastly, all PBL lessons blend traditional teaching strategies which focus mostly on verbal/linguistic and logical/mathematical intelligences with new technology ones which offer a variety of challenges and choices accommodating different intelligences (interpersonal, intrapersonal, spatial and visual), learning preferences and styles in order to increase motivation as students use their special talents (Fleming, 2000). More specifically, the first lesson (see App. IX, pp. 151 – 157 & App. X, pp. 223 – 227) which is entitled “Rule the Internet” aims to familiarize students with PBL, Google Docs and Blogger application and sensitize them on the netiquette, the framework of the rules that govern how the Internet users behave (Strawbridge, 2006) and the risks its use might entail. The integration of technology in the FL classroom and the students’ involvement in new concepts aims to promote collaboration and
53 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” autonomy, active learning and critical thinking enhancement and eventually it may lead to the improvement of the students’ process writing skills. Giving students the opportunity to talk about their personal experiences with the Internet, in the beginning of the lesson, helps them to activate their prior knowledge and to connect real life with the FL classroom. The tasks they deal with during the implementation stage aim to lessen the students’ fear for the Internet, Web 2.0 tools and the use of computers in the FL classroom, to motivate them and to stimulate their interest not only on the topic, but also on project work, and to facilitate the procedure providing them with the necessary vocabulary. By engaging them in creating the final product, which is a poster with their own Internet rules, the researcher intends to promote learners’ autonomy as they plan and create their own products collaborating with peers and making their own decisions, such as assigning roles to the members of the groups and choosing the resources which are suitable for their research, even the music and visuals (pictures and video) which they will use to enrich their products. New Literacy skills are also enhanced as students reflect on the provided online resources, they analyse, combine and evaluate data working collaboratively to create their products. Having the opportunity to go through this process, students improve their process writing skills as they plan, write the first draft, revise their peers’ drafts and edit their own. In order for the students to feel safe, traditional practices are blended with the new technology ones so that students can use their notebooks for the writing of their first drafts. In addition, it is more convenient for them to exchange notebooks and revise each other’s texts and to edit theirs. Throughout the revising stage of process writing, students confirm that the requirements of the final product have been complied and after that stage they deal with structure, grammar and possible spelling mistakes. After the researcher’s feedback, students make their first attempt to create a new Google Document since they have now been reassured that using Google Docs is as easy as using an offline word processor, such as Microsoft Word, and they proceed to the creation of their first digital writing text. In the evaluation stage, the groups take the final step of the process which is to invite their peers, as collaborators, to their Google Document so as to be able to discuss and critically evaluate all the other groups’ products. The researcher presents 54 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Blogger application and the class blog, informing the students that this is the class online space upon which all products will be posted. Having a real audience and being informed that the specific blog will be accessible to the wider Internet after the completion of this research, learners are encouraged to produce meaningful pieces of writing and to use authentic language in order to communicate (Noytim, 2010). The second lesson is entitled “How well do you know your friends?” (see App. IX, pp. 158 – 163 & App. X, pp. 228 – 233). It is based on Unit 2 (Lesson 2) of the official course book and it aims to teach students how to write a short autobiography. In the planning stage authentic YouTube videos arouse the students’ interest on the topic, motivate them and connect the real world with the FL classroom (More, 2015). A brainstorming task follows which invites students to work collaboratively and complete a table uploaded on a Google Document. Their prior knowledge is activated as they discuss the topics which they consider important at a preteen age, brainstorming useful vocabulary and practicing digital writing skills. The project’s topic is introduced along with the requirements the final products should fulfil, useful phrases they might need and the criteria their products will be evaluated upon. Also, the researcher uploads and explains a “language mistakes code” which students have to use during the revising stage of the process writing. Collaboration, real life communication using the FL, critical thinking, creativity, peer scaffolding, group work and New Literacy skills are enhanced during the implementation stage as students, working individually first, plan, write their autobiographies, exchange their texts with their peers, give and receive feedback, revise, edit and have their texts revised by the teacher. Groups assign authentic roles to their members (typist, art director, music director and leader) and, after choosing one of the group’s autobiographies to be posted on the blog, they enrich it with a picture downloaded from the Internet and a YouTube video. By sharing their opinions and interacting with each other, students become responsible for the improvement for their own learning (Bruner, 1983). During the evaluation stage, students reflect on the learning process, their strengths and weaknesses and their products, and give feedback to their peers by making comments on their posts. Reflective questions enhance their high order thinking skills and metacognitive strategies. 55 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
The third lesson is entitled “What if?” and aims to teach students how to write country reports (see App. IX, pp. 164 – 169 & App. X, pp. 234 – 240). It is based on Unit 1 (Lesson 3) and it starts with an online exploration of Greece following a link found on a collaborative Google Document. They use technology and authentic online material and have the chance to use the FL to talk about real life topics such as food, holidays, music, Geography and sports. They are allowed to watch videos, explore museums and to look at pictures of Greece in order to create expectations on the topic of the lesson and to generate ideas which will be used in the implementation stage. Then, as pre – writing tasks, groups are invited to work on the same Google Document and answer questions concerning different issues and aspects of life in our country. By presenting their answers in class, students become aware of the structure of a country report which they are invited to create during the next stage. Also, useful links and a blog post are available for them to facilitate the procedure and to offer them inspiration. By reading the model text students become aware of the language they are asked to perform and prepare themselves for the production of the written product (Widdowson, 1983). Students’ creativity and imagination are stimulated when they are allowed to “create” their own country which gives them initiative and renders them autonomous learners. Once again, the final products are posted on the class blog and are also presented in class, peer evaluation and self – reflection on their reports follow, involving students in real life communication. Critical thinking, collaboration and a sense of achievement are increased as the reports are commented upon by the groups and the researcher. The fourth lesson is based on Unit 2 (Lesson 1) and is entitled “Good food = Good life”. The lesson aims to teach students how to create a daily healthy menu for their “School lunches” programme, which was something they participated in during the running school year, and to justify their food choices according to the given requirements (see App. IX, pp. 170 – 177 & App. X, pp. 241 – 245). YouTube videos and brainstorming tasks offer them useful information and relevant vocabulary along with two links, for a set of useful words on Quizlet and an online Dictionary, and the ability to surf the Internet to visit any website they consider helpful for the creation of 56 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” their product. Thus, students are offered autonomy, independence and responsibility for planning and carrying out the tasks working on the driving question and investigating resources (Van Lam, 2011). Students are engaged in process writing to prepare their final products interacting with each other using the FL to discuss and make decisions which concern their posts’ visuals and their comments on their peers’ posts. Moreover, throughout the last stage, collaborative and reflective environment is promoted, as well as the enhancement of high order thinking skills as they analyse, evaluate and reflect upon various perspectives (Lee, 2011). The fifth lesson is entitled “What’s the story behind the stories?” and it is based on Unit 5 (Lesson 1). Its aim is to teach students how to create stories (see App. IX, pp. 178– 185 & App. X, pp. 246 – 251). Starting with personal questions about likes and dislikes, students’ interest in the topic is stimulated and motivation is increased as they watch a YouTube video about the story of Romeo and Juliet. The groups, working on their own Google Document, complete a table in order to realize the main characteristics of a story. They are invited to use “highlight”, “copy” and “paste” functions in order to familiarize themselves with the use of Google Docs and digital writing. The task that follows, which involves the use of adjectives to describe a person’s appearance, character and way of living, helps the students to brainstorm vocabulary and ideas and use their own imagination in the FL class. They have to complete a story map individually, making their own choices which will be used for the creation of the group’s final product. Photocopies are used for this task as it is essential for the learners to focus on their stories first and then the digital medium (Ohler, 2005/2006). Then, they collaboratively create their final product having two choices which concern its publication, as PBL projects incorporate learner autonomy, choices and responsibility to a greater extent than traditional projects (Thomas, 2000). The first choice is that they can create a post on the class blog including two pictures downloaded from the Internet and the second choice is to make a video which will include four pictures painted by them. Thus, they are encouraged to take initiative and make decisions, not only regarding their group story, which will be a combination of the group members’ stories, but also regarding the final product. A story plan is available for them to facilitate the writing process and increase self – confidence of
57 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” low – proficiency students. Choices are also provided regarding the presentation of their products during the evaluation stage. The sixth lesson is entitled “A life lesson” and it is based on Unit 9 (Lesson 1) of the course book (see App. IX, pp. 186 – 194 & App. X, pp. 252 – 255). The groups work on separate Google Docs to complete a table with the things they consider important in their lives and, while presenting, they highlight the ones they have in common with the other groups. Students are encouraged to watch authentic videos and transfer information in tables, to brainstorm new vocabulary so as to become aspired for the tasks which will follow, in order to become sensitized on environmental issues and also to become active viewers. A Quizlet set of words is available for them and two Voki avatars are used to motivate learners who have to work collaboratively to create a blog post suggesting solutions which will help people to reverse the environmental problems which were discussed earlier. Their final products will also be used for the class podcast – participation in the European School Radio competition7. Process writing is followed and the students are encouraged to surf the Internet to find information and pictures, to watch the videos which have been provided again and use online dictionaries and Quizlet in order to create their products. They revise their peers’ texts based on a checklist focusing on the problematic areas which groups have to reconsider before publishing their posts. The seventh lesson, which is entitled “Ready for holidays?” is based on Unit 5 (Lesson 2) of the course book and aims to teach students how to write an informal email based on a holiday experience (see App. IX, pp. 195 – 200 & App. X, pp. 257– 260). Pre – writing activities activate students’ prior knowledge and help them to connect real life with the FL through visuals and classroom discussion. A series of questions and useful notes guide them throughout the writing process during the implementation stage. Quizlet application, Google maps, links and surfing the Internet offer the students the opportunity to practice their research skills, their critical thinking skills, as well as their collaboration and process writing skills. The eighth lesson is based on Unit 5 (Lesson 1) and it is entitled “Guess what?” It aims to teach the students how to write a short story (see App. IX, pp. 201 – 207 & App. X, pp. 261 – 265). Meaningful tasks involving group work, short – memory
7 «Κάν’ το ν’ ακουστεί 2020» 58 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” practice, active viewing and brainstorming ideas promote students’ active participation in the teaching – learning procedure rendering them autonomous learners. A story board, a story plan and a model text, which are uploaded on the class blog, along with useful links and vocabulary on Quizlet increase the low – proficiency of students’ and strengthen their confidence, while at the same time, it lessens their anxiety on process writing. The ninth lesson, based on Unit 8 (Lesson 3), is entitled “Who’s the right guy?” and aims to teach students how to write an advice letter (see App. IX, pp. 208 – 214 & App. X, pp. 266 – 269). A variety of activities are offered during the planning stage to help students to embed new vocabulary and render them capable of using it, blending traditional techniques with new technology ones. They are encouraged to think positively about themselves in order to increase self – confidence, and thus to lessen their anxiety. Students are also offered guidelines through useful phrases and links but, at the same time, choices are provided which concern the type of the final product and the way of presenting it during the evaluation stage. The tenth lesson, “Speak up now!”, is also based on Unit 8 (Lesson 3) and aims to teach students how to give advice and also to sensitize them about bullying which is an issue that students might face during their school years (see App. IX, pp. 215 – 222 & App. X, pp. 270 – 276). An email which was sent to our school from “The Smile of the Child” organization is presented to them, inviting them to participate in the action “Speak up now8”, for the school day against bullying (March 6th). In a class discussion and after watching a video which had been created by the 6th grade English class of the specific school two years ago (2018), they all decided to participate in this action with a class video. Being exposed to a plethora of activities, students not only activate their prior knowledge and become motivated but they also have the opportunity to become informed, to research about the topic and critically evaluate their resources in order to create their final product. Choices are offered regarding the groups’ final products (finish a story, create a dialogue or a comic strip) as well as the way of presenting them, besides posting them on the class blog. The dialogues and
8 https://milatora.gr/ 59 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” the advice which are included in the groups’ products, along with their paintings, will be used for the class video – participation and will also be uploaded on the class blog.
Conclusion
In this chapter, the aims of the action research and the research questions were presented along with the participants and the tools which were employed for the data collection. Furthermore, the differentiated instruction lessons were thoroughly described. After analysing and comparing the results of the tests which were administered to both the experimental and the control groups and after the analysis of the data received from the semi – structured interviews and the teacher’s diary, the researcher will be able to answer the research questions which were set earlier. The research results will be presented in the next chapter.
60 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Chapter 5: Presentation and Analysis of the Results
Introduction
In this chapter the results of the present research are presented and analysed and the research questions are answered. More specifically, the results of the tests which were administered to both the experimental and the control groups are thoroughly presented along with the data received from the pre- and post- semi – structured interviews and the teacher’s diary. Possible implications regarding PBL and ICT integration in state primary schools are also depicted along with certain limitations of the specific research and suggestions for further investigation.
5.1 Results of the pre- semi – structured interviews
Analysing interview data is, according to Cunby, Marshal & Cullock (2011, p. 137) “a multistep sense – making endeavour”. Conducting semi – structured interviews means that the researcher has to follow an interview schedule with a preconceived set of questions (McDonough & McDonough, 1997) which include open – ended questions so that personal responses can be provided (McNiff & Whitehead, 2006). Data was gathered which was transcribed and analysed based on axial coding in order to reduce and simplify it and also expand and convert it into meaningful units (Cunby, Marshal & Cullock, 2011). To begin with, the demographic findings showed that all sixteen students who participated in the specific research own at least one electronic device (computer, laptop, mobile phone or tablet) and an Internet connection at home which are all used for entertainment and communication purposes justifying the researcher’s decision to integrate ICT in the FL classroom since they seem to be familiar with new
61 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” technologies and speak the digital language of computers, video games and the Internet and can thus be considered Digital Natives (Prensky, 2001).
5.1.1 The first axis
The first axis deals with the students’ opinions regarding their cognitive level in the FL. All students expressed positive feelings and attitudes on the way the English language is taught in the specific teaching context and half of them named English as their favourite subject (see Graph 1). However, eight students stated that they would prefer less noise during classes and three said that they would like to be assigned less vocabulary activities as homework. Collaborative work and projects were amongst students’ preferences when they were asked to express their opinions concerning the way FL has been taught so far (see Graph 2).
Students' attitudes about the way English is taught in school
7 9
nice perfect - I enjoy it very much
Graph 1: Students’ attitudes towards the way English is taught in school
This valuable piece of information and the fact that more than half of the students (10 in number) considered reading as one of their strengths and only three of them were confident about their writing skills intrigued the researcher and prompted her to become involved in this action research as a means of improving the learning environment and the way writing is taught aiming ultimately at enhancing students’ writing skills (Grundy, 1994).
62 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
What is more, when they were asked to discuss their overall weaknesses regarding learning English, eight students mentioned spelling and grammar rules and two more admitted that finding and using the appropriate vocabulary is a real challenge for them (see Graph 3).
Students' preferences during learning English in school
I like all we do in class 1 pronunciation 1 spelling 1 grammar 1 vocabulary 2 collaborative work 4 projects reading 6 3 0 2 4 students 6
Graph 2: Students’ preferences regarding learning English in school
Students' weaknesses regarding learning English
weak memory 3 nothing 1 writing 2 vocabulary 2 speaking 1 pronunciation 1 spelling 4 grammar rules during writing 3 too much homework 1 0 2 students 4
Graph 3: Students’ weaknesses regarding learning English
63 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
5.1.2 The second axis
The second axis includes questions which concern students’ attitudes towards writing as a productive skill and their own needs and difficulties regarding the specific skill. A crucial information derived by the pre- semi – structured interview was that not one student expressed an explicitly negative attitude towards writing as half of the students (eight out of sixteen) answered that they like writing tasks (see Graph 4). They justified this positive attitude saying that they like creating things and expressing their ideas and also that they are good at writing. Mixed feelings were reported by four students who admitted that, even though they face difficulties, they consider writing tasks “nice”. The rest of them stated that it is difficult for them to write. One student denoted that writing tasks make her feel nervous as she faces difficulties regarding the specific skill.
Students' attitudes towards writing skill
I like it 1 3 mixed feelings 8 (difficult but nice)
4 difficult
nervous
Graph 4: Students’ attitudes towards writing skill
Students’ responses, regarding their difficulties (see Graph 5), reveal that vocabulary is their main difficulty as 62% of the students are worried about using the appropriate words in writing tasks. Furthermore, brainstorming ideas and expressing them appropriately, constructing accurate sentences, correct spelling and handwriting are additional difficulties which were mentioned. It’s worth mentioning that three of the male students state that they would perform better in writing tasks if they were given more time, as they believe it would be easier for them to remember known vocabulary and to brainstorm ideas. 64 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Difficulties students face during writing
spelling/ugly handwriting 5
time difficulties 4
expressing ideas appropriately 4
construct accurate sentences 4
generate ideas 4
vocabulary 11 0 5 10 15
students
Graph 5: Difficulties students face during writing
The students’ answers, regarding their writing skills, also reveal that all of them would like to improve their writing skills through topics they are interested in. Their suggestions were seriously taken into consideration by the researcher, when designing the differentiated PBL lessons, since enjoyable learning opportunities, which can increase the students’ motivation to write, can be provided to them in a blended learning environment such as this specific one (Challob, Bakar & Latif, 2016). Moreover, all students consider that PBL integrated with educational technology would enhance their writing skills due to the fact that they would be working in groups, which was fun for them. Regarding the Web 2.0 tools, the researcher suggested that students seemed willing to learn how to use them in the writing process, even though the majority of them have never heard of them. More specifically, 68% of the participants were not familiar with blogs and Google Docs and how the aforementioned are used. Five students reported that they might have been aware of them but they have never used them.
65 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
5.1.3 The third axis
The third axis includes questions which endeavour to reveal the strategies students activate in order to overcome the difficulties they face during the writing process (see Graph 6). All students replied that they would ask the teacher for clarifications in cases where they cannot comprehend the instructions or in cases of vocabulary or grammar inadequacy. Only three of them stated their preference to exhaust other options (try harder or look it up in their notebook) before asking for help. Turning to their peers for help also seemed to be one of the strategies for almost half of the students (43%).
Strategies students use when they need clarifications or in cases of vocabulary or grammar inadequacy
ask the teacher 7 6 try harder - then ask the teacher 3 ask the peers for help - then ask the teacher
Graph 6: Strategies students use when they need clarifications or in cases of vocabulary or grammar inadequacy
Group work is considered helpful during writing tasks for the majority of students (68%) due to the fact that they shared their ideas and cooperated by making decisions as groups and there was also a lot of peer support. However, when working in groups, a small minority of students would feel more comfortable asking the teacher for help. Yong (2010) also proved that during process writing students could be aided by their interaction with their peers, sharing knowledge and making decisions collaboratively, even dealing with conflicts.
66 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
It is also indicated that when they write, most of the students (81%) prefer that the class is quiet so that they can concentrate, plan and perform to the best of their abilities (see Graph 7). Motivational material and an inspired atmosphere seemed to improve the writing performance of four of the students. These findings are in line with Lowyck & Clarebout’s (2004) research which proved that students’ positive attitudes towards the learning environment could facilitate language learning. Surprisingly enough, due to her age, one of the girls mentioned that she performs better when she is fully aware of the reason why she has to write.
I perform better during writing tasks when...
the teacher helps me 1
I know why I have to write a text 1
model texts are provided 1
there is a motivational atmosphere 3
the class is quiet 13
work individually 5
work in groups 11 0 5 10 15
Graph 7: Students’ preferences during writing tasks in the FL classroom
Lastly, all students replied that they revise their assignments before handing them in, however only 43% of them are involved in all the stages of process writing (generating ideas, drafting, revising, editing, redrafting and publishing).
67 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
5.2 The KPG pre – and post – test results
In this section the results of both the pre – and the post – test results will be presented and analysed.
5.2.1. The pre – test results
As was pointed out in the previous chapter, a KPG writing test was administered to the students of both the experimental and the control group before the intervention, which took the form of differentiated instruction to the first group. The pre – tests were applied so as to detect differences between the students of the two groups (if any existed) and to diagnose the strengths and weaknesses of the students who participated in the experimental group regarding their writing skill (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2007). The duration of the pre – test was 50 minutes and the students of both groups needed several clarifications which concerned the types of the tasks and the output expectations before they started responding to the activities. The students were informed that they would be graded only for the needs for this research in order to lessen their anxiety. This is an effective factor which may affect students’ achievements in learning a foreign language (Gardner, 1985). The results of the pre – test (see App. XV, pp. 302 – 303) revealed that the students of both groups were approximately at the same level of writing competence, as no significant difference was noticed between the mean scores of the two groups (see Graphs 8, 9 and 10). However, due to the fact that two of the students of the experimental group (L2 and L16) scored over 80%, the group’s pre – test average score increased slightly. It is also worth mentioning that the students with the lowest scores from both the experimental and the control groups seem to need more time to complete all the activities of the test, since, even though they had produced two or three moderately satisfactory texts, they failed to receive a grade which is higher than 1 out of 5 in one or two of their activities. The communicative purpose of their answers was not
68 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” achieved as the answers which were provided were either not comprehensible or they didn’t provide any answers at all.
Graph 8: The pre – test results of the experimental group
Graph 9: The pre – test results of the control group
69 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Graph 10: The pre – test average results of both groups
5.2.2 The post – test results
The same KPG test was administered as a post – test to both groups after the completion of the intervention in order to investigate if there were any differences regarding the writing performance of the students of the two groups. The duration of the test was also 50 minutes. There was a positive reaction on behalf of the students when they realized that they had to take the same test for the second time. All students (except for one who attended the control group) completed all four activities of the post – test (see App. XV, pp. 302 – 303). On the whole, the results (see Graphs 11 and 12) revealed that 12 out of the 14 students of the control group scored higher than they scored in the pre – test while all students of the experimental group not only achieved higher scores but also managed to complete all four activities before the time expired.
70 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Graph 11: Comparison of the pre – and post – test results of the experimental group
Graph 12: Comparison of the pre – and post – test results of the control group
More specifically, the performance of the students who attended the control group increased by 13.85%, on average. However, the students of the experimental group, who were exposed to PBL lessons integrated with ICT and process writing, raised their score by 26.96%, on average (see Graph 13).
71 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Graph 13: Comparison of the increase of both groups’ total achievement
It is worth mentioning that the scores of the female students who attended the experimental group increased by 31.7% while the achievement of the male students who also attended the experimental group increased by 22.18%. In the control group, on the other head, female students increased their writing performance by 13.27% while male students by 14.9% on average (see Graphs 14 and 15).
Comparison of the increase of the female and male students' achievement (experimental group) (%)
31,75 40 30 22,18 20 10 0 Female Male
Graph 14: Comparison of the increase of the female and male students’ achievement (experimental group) 72 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Comparison of the increase of the female and the male students' achievement (control group) (%)
14,9
15 13,27 14 13 12 Female Male
Graph 15: Comparison of the increase of the female and male students’ achievement (control group)
Moreover, 68.75% of the students of the experimental group (11 students in total), who had scored under 50% in the pre – test, increased their achievement by 30.18% in the post – test. Respectively, eleven students of the control group (78%), who had scored under 50% in the pre – test, increased their scores by 15.4%. Lastly, the two learners of the experimental group who had scored over 80% in the pre – test scored 100% in the post – test. None of the students in the control group scored 100% in the post – test which came as no surprise as none of the students, of the aforementioned group, managed to score over 80% in the pre – test either. All in all, it can be concluded that the students of the experimental group, who were taught the differentiated PBL lessons integrated with educational technology and Web 2.0 tools, significantly improved their writing performance (see Graph 16).
73 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Experimental group overall writing performance in pre - and post - KPG tests (%)
29,96 Variation
Experimental group 78,81 Post - test
45,78 Pre - test
0 50 100
Graph 16: Experimental group overall writing performance in pre- and post – KPG tests (%)
5.3 Results of the post- semi – structured interviews
All in all, post- semi – structured interview results reveal all students’ positive disposition towards the integration of Web 2.0 tools (Google Docs and blogs) and educational technology into project – based learning (see App. XIV, pp. 290 – 301). After the differentiated instruction lessons, all students of the experimental group claimed that their writing skills were improved due to the collaborative work which they conducted and due to the use of Google Docs and blogs as well as the process writing framework which they followed. Before analysing the three axes of the interview, it should be noted that all students would like to continue working in a PBL environment, which is an encouraging outcome.
74 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
5.3.1 The first axis
Questions which concern students’ attitudes towards PBL and ICT integration in the FL class are included in the first axis which explores the improvement of their New Literacy skills. All students expressed positive feelings in dealing with project – based learning. They seem to have enjoyed all ten lessons, mostly due to the collaborative work they were engaged in, while doing them, as thirteen learners (81%) mentioned that this was the main reason why they were enthusiastic about it. They suggested that the implementation stage was the most interesting one, not only due to the chance which they were given to research, explore resources and discover things, dealing with topics which covered their interests and created fun in the FL classroom (Papaefthymiou – Lytra, 2014) but also due to the collaborative work in which they participated (see Graph 17). This finding is in line with the findings of other researches which revealed that students consider collaborative learning as a significant PBL feature (Praba, Artini & Ramendra, 2018; Al-Rawahi & Al-Mekhlafi, 2015).
Reasons why students enjoyed PBL lessons
discover new things 2 had to think and create 2
collaboration with peers 13 work with computers 2 learn new vocabulary 1 Fun and interesting 3 Interesting topics 16 0 5 10 15 20
Students
Graph 17: Reasons why the students of the experimental group enjoyed PBL lessons
Regarding the integration of ICT in the foreign language class, all students reported that it contributed to the development of new skills as they became familiar with Web 2.0 tools through which they not only improved their vocabulary but also
75 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” enhanced their writing skills (see Graph 18). Moreover, as all students use technology for communicative purposes, they stated that they welcomed Web 2.0 tools since they also had the chance to promote their digital writing to a great extent. Their responses also revealed that their New Literacy skills were enhanced throughout the creation of their final products, as PBL offers them the chance to use online sources, explore a wide range of materials and evaluate them thus enhancing their high order thinking skills. They became creative producers of messages using texts, videos and images and increased their ability to access online information and, most importantly, to become critical thinkers and evaluators of resources and new information. In Paroussi’s research (2014) similar findings were revealed as students acquired New Literacy skills using computers and a class blog in a blended – learning environment. They reported that they developed functional skills in online searching to locate information, critical thinking skills and digital literacies thus enhancing their writing skills too.
Students' attitudes about developing their New Literacy skills
Guess the content of websites 14
Evaluate resources 14
Use a search engine and Surf the Intenet 16 Copy & paste 16 Digital writing 16
Students
Graph 18: Students’ attitudes towards the development of New Literacy skills
5.3.2 The second axis
Students’ attitudes towards Web 2.0 tools and collaboration in a PBL environment were probed into using the questions of the second axis. Collaborative work was assessed positively by all students as they stated that they became organizers of their
76 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” own work, they assigned roles to the group members, which where interchangeable according to their individual skills and preferences, becoming, therefore, autonomous learners and developing their social interaction skills (see Graphs 19 and 20). In Zhou, Simpson and Domizi’s (2012) research on Google Docs as a collaborative writing tool, the majority of the thirty – five participants rated their experience with Google Docs positively and considered it as a useful Web 2.0 tool for group work. Working on Google Docs facilitates collaborative writing thus allowing all groups to share documents online and to edit them in real time. This brought to the surface mixed feelings amongst the students in the planning stage of the first two or three PBL lessons, mostly due to technical reasons (such as slow Internet connection and lack of sound). However, the vast majority of the participants (81%) described the procedure as a “very nice” one. As for the reasons why students enjoyed working on Google Docs, the sharing of ideas and suggestions, discussing them and making decisions as groups as well as becoming autonomous learners, were the main reasons. A few students reported having mixed feelings about using Google Docs as it was a new Web 2.0 tool and they needed time to learn how to use it in class. Similar findings in Jeong (2016) showed the students’ affirmative perceptions concerning the use of Google Docs as a collaborative writing tool and as a peer – editing experience.
Students' attitudes towards Google Docs as a collaborative Web 2,0 tool
1 2 very nice & fun
good enough
13 difficult because it is a new tool
Graph 19: Students’ attitudes towards Google Docs as a collaborative Web 2.0 tool
77 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
I enjoyed collaborative work using Google Docs because .....
we made group decisions 6
I gave and received peer feedback 4
I expressed my opinion 4
I shared ideas with my peers 8 0 2 4 6 8
Students
Graph 20: Reasons why students enjoyed collaborative work using Google Docs
Regarding the exploitation of blogs during all the stages of PBL lessons, all participants, except one, declared that it was a positive experience which offered them chances to exchange ideas with their peers and made them feel proud of themselves when they were approved (see Graph 21). Huang’s (2016) research also revealed that using blogs in writing classes was considered entertaining by the participants due to its collaborative nature and the peer feedback which they received (see Graph 22). Giving and receiving feedback from their peers during the evaluation stage was characterized as a beneficial and effective experience which contributed to the development of high order thinking skills thus allowing them to actively participate in the teaching/learning process by viewing their final products from various viewpoints and reflecting on them, thus enhancing their metagognitive skills and their learning performance. In her research with junior high school students, Daskalogiannaki (2012) argued that, working with blogs, students gradually enhanced their writing skills and developed cognitive and metacognitive skills. Vurdien’s (2013) research also proved that blogging can improve writing skills, fostering collaboration and encouraging students to understand the effect of their peers’ feedback. Providing written comments to their peers’ blog posts, though, provoked contrasting attitudes, since almost half of the participants expressed their willingness to write comments and also their concerns about their peers’ reactions resulting in 78 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” producing very short positive comments which, however, offered them encouragement and a view of appreciation.
Students' attitudes towards blogs as a collaborative Web 2.0 tool
1 2 1 helpful 2 very nice & fun good enough better than Google Docs indifferent 10
Graph 21: Students’ attitudes towards blogs as a collaborative Web 2.0 tool
I enjoyed collaborative work using the class blog because ....
It was easy 1
we made group decisions 2
feedback from peers was helpful 13 I expressed my opinion freely 9 we shared ideas & opinions 4
0 5 10 15
Students
Graph 22: Reasons why learners enjoyed collaborative work using the class blog
79 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
5.3.3 The third axis
The third axis includes questions which denote the participants’ attitudes towards process writing and Web 2.0 tools. The data exhibit that all students are satisfied with their participation in process writing except for one male participant who admitted that he didn’t participate in the first two stages of process writing (generating ideas and writing the first draft) as he is generally reluctant to share his ideas due to his low self – esteem (see Graph 23). The rest of the students (15) stated that the collaborative work which took place during the use of Google Docs helped them to a great extent to enrich their vocabulary which is an encouraging outcome considering that meaningful communication cannot happen without words to express a variety of meanings (McCarthy, 1990). In addition, Boas (2011) showed that technology integrated with process writing helped the participants of her research to improve their writing skills and collaborative work.
Students' attitudes towards the improvement of their writing skills using Google Docs
15
13 13 Students
improve generate new sentence vocabulary ideas structure
Graph 23: Students’ attitudes towards the development of their writing skills using Google Docs
Regarding the class blog, it is used in various ways throughout process writing. Providing links, visuals and model texts, the class blog was considered by all the students as an appealing and effective medium which allows them to improve their style of writing, enriching their vocabulary and, as twelve students reported,
80 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” generating new ideas. Model texts are used productively throughout the writing process (Tardy, 2006) and they are considered as an essential tool which enhances the students’ sense of security (Melissourgou & Frantzi, 2015). Half of the students noticed an improvement in grammar and syntax thus meeting their personal needs and difficulties (see Graph 24). Similar findings were revealed in the research conducted by Avgerou & Vlachos (2016) among junior high school students. The vast majority of them admitted that blog writing improved their vocabulary, the quality of ideas, grammar and syntax.
Students' attitudes towards the improvement of their writing skills using blogs 12 12 12
8
Students
improve enrich generate writing improve vocabulary new ideas style grammar and syntax
Graph 24: Students’ attitudes towards the improvement of their writing skills using blogs
Difficulties were reported by half of the students during the stage of generating ideas and writing the first draft, which were addressed through brainstorming activities, links and videos offered on Google Docs or through the class blog, which also helped the majority of the students to generate new ideas and express their thoughts on a topic and enhance their writing skills (see Graph 25). The findings of this research are in agreement with Daskalogiannaki’s (2012) research which revealed that blog entries and videos helped students to trigger their background knowledge and encouraged them to generate ideas regarding a specific topic. It was also revealed that thirteen out of the sixteen students were satisfied with their personal improvement on the texts’ structure and content. Not only they produced longer texts
81 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” but they also improved their organization and punctuation skills. All participants mentioned that collaboration with their group partners was crucial to improving their writing skills. Revising each other’s texts and receiving feedback from their peers are the two most critical stages of process writing according to the majority of the participants as they reported that through this procedure their writing skills were enhanced to a great extent. This finding is also in line with previous studies (Anastasiadou, 2015; Meletiadou, 2012) which showed the students’ appreciation of peers’ feedback. Similarly, Quintero’s (2008) research with 17 students showed that feedback was an essential factor which helped students to produce longer and more complex texts.
Students' attitudes towards the most helpful stages of process writing 7 6
2 2 1
Students
publishing
receiving receiving
drafts
ideas
feedback/editing
revising each others' others' each revising writing the first draft first the writing
brainstorming/generating brainstorming/generating Graph 25: Students’ attitudes towards the most helpful stages of process writing
5.4 The teacher’s diary
Valuable qualitative data was also provided by the diary the researcher kept on the students’ attitudes towards the use of Google Docs, blogs and process writing throughout the PBL lessons (see App. XI, pp. 277 – 281). The diary’s findings were based on observations which were made throughout the lessons (Bailey, 1990) and
82 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” which were written by the researcher after the teaching sessions (Griffee, 2012). These findings revealed that all students enjoyed all ten differentiated lessons, as they were designed according to their proficiency level, preferences and needs. Their eagerness increased especially during the semi – structured projects, when they were allowed to search for online information, watch videos and use their imagination to create their final products, thus acquiring “the type of knowledge construction that every student in today’s world needs to master” (Bender, 2012, p. 22). They familiarized themselves with the Web 2.0 tools which were used in class quite easily and after the 5th PBL lesson they asked to learn new ways to exploit them during the creation and publication of their products, requesting for more learner autonomy. All participants’ attitudes towards Google Docs were positive as they did not only familiarize themselves easily with them but were also willing to switch them on and use them as soon as they took their seats in front of the computers. They asked for clarifications and explanations, mostly in the first four lessons, giving the researcher the chance to monitor and facilitate the procedure but gradually they became more independent and were eager to work in groups and make their own decisions. All groups worked well throughout all stages of the PBL lessons, assigning roles to the members and encouraging each other to practice on all aspects of the technology which was offered to them. Especially, during the evaluation stage students were eager to write comments on the other groups’ posts as it simulated real life communication amongst people of their age. They commented considering the rules of Netiquette (which were studied in the first lesson) in order to be polite, to respect each other’s work and to focus on the strengths of the posts instead of their weaknesses or omissions. Concerning the process writing stage, all participants worked collaboratively, thus acquiring multiple perspectives on the lessons’ topics sharing ideas and knowledge (Challob, Bakar & Latif, 2016), thus encouraging novice students to write too. However, two of them were reluctant to participate in writing the first draft as they were not confident enough to share their ideas with their peers. Throughout the process writing stage, students used the mother tongue most of the time in order to communicate with each other and the FL to answer to the teacher’s questions. 83 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Revising their peers’ drafts caused anxiety to the learners during the first three or four lessons, as it was a new experience for them. Thus, they needed time to adjust and to realize that this stage was one of the most essential and effective stages for most of them, according to the answers they gave to the post- semi – structured interview questions. Initially, learners focused on vocabulary, spelling and punctuation mistakes; therefore, the researcher provided them with revising criteria in order to instruct them and facilitate the procedure (see App. X, pp. 224, 230 – 231, 244, 251, 260). They were excited to be engaged in evaluating their final products in the last stage of the PBL lessons showing leniency to their peers’ work and, simultaneously, they were eager to notice problematic areas and make suggestions. Lastly, concerning time management, the participants gradually managed to overcome their difficulty to keep themselves in line with the time requirements for the creation of their final products. All in all, the findings of the teacher’s diary confirmed the fact that the participants, working in a PBL environment, improved their process writing skills, as their work now conveyed meaningful messages and, by exploiting Google Docs and blogs they developed New Literacy skills.
5.5 Discussion of the results
After analysing the results of both the pre – tests and the post – tests, the students’ responses to the semi – structured interviews, and the teacher’s diary, certain conclusions can be drawn and answers can be provided to the aforementioned research questions. Regarding the first research question, “to what extent does PBL integrated with ICT enhance young learners’ New Literacy skills in a blended learning environment”, the results confirmed the effectiveness of the integration of Web 2.0 tools into PBL concerning the enhancement of young learners’ New Literacy skills. According to the responses of the students of the experimental group to the post – semi – structured interview, they were engaged in enjoyable and authentic activities having the chance
84 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” to use Web 2.0 tools in order to research, explore resources, analyse information and work collaboratively, to create their final product, developing high order thinking skills which helped them reach a higher language proficiency level (Soufi, Saad & Nicolas, 2015). Not only did they become familiar with Web 2.0 tools, by exploiting them, they also became aware of the effectiveness of new technologies in the FL classroom (Nickolson & Galguera, 2013; Lynch & Campos, 2014). The enhancement of the students’ New Literacy skills was accomplished as they declared that, after the intervention, they became more capable of locating information and critically evaluating its usefulness and, furthermore, they were able to synthesize information and to produce meaningful messages (Shaughnessy, Viner, & Kennedy, 2018); Leu et al., 2004). In relation to the second research question, “can Google Docs contribute to the development of collaborative writing in a young learners’ EFL class and the third research question, “can blogs contribute to the development of collaborative writing in a young learners’ EFL class, the same results reveal that all the students of the experimental group were inspired to work collaboratively with both Google Docs and blogs. Google Docs and blogs increased their responsibility towards the writing task, promoted their individual skills and the sharing of expertise and all this allowed them to feel approved by their peers (Harmer, 2007; Lankshear & Knobel, 2007; Chinnery, 2008) and also helped them to enhance their writing skills. It might be worth mentioning at this point that the results suggest a possible relationship between gender and writing performance since female participants outperformed males in KPG writing post – tests. Lastly, both Web 2.0 tools provided learners with opportunities to be exposed to online materials (websites, texts, videos, online dictionaries etc) beyond their language competence, thus learning the foreign language (Krashen, 1982). Regarding the fourth research question, “how do Google Docs improve process writing skills in young learners”, the research outcomes revealed that Google Docs are totally compatible with the process – based writing approach as they can be exploited in the pre – writing/generating ideas stage in order to help students to activate their prior knowledge and to introduce new vocabulary thus helping them to generate ideas about the topic they explore. Also, links can be included in Google Docs to enable 85 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” students to collect, analyse and critically evaluate information helping them throughout the process of writing, revising and editing their drafts in order to create meaningful texts. The vast majority of the research participants reported that Google Docs improved their process writing skills as, due to their collaborative nature of the specific tool, they managed to develop their writing skills drafting, revising their peers’ work and receiving their peers’ feedback (Suwantarathip & Wichadee, 2014). The students, who had revealed in the pre – semi – structured interview that they were not involved in process writing, stated that drafting, revising and redrafting during the intervention, was an effective process which enhanced their writing skills. Lastly, regarding the fifth research question, “how do blogs improve process writing skills in young learners”, the findings indicate that the class blog functioned not only as an appealing source of links, visuals and model texts which allowed them to plan their work, enrich their vocabulary and generate new ideas but also as a real life context and a specific audience which helped them to make the writing process meaningful (Hyland, 2009) and enabled them to practice the final step of process writing, namely publishing their products, and communicating their ideas with their peers, their teacher, their parents, even the world. To sum up, PBL integrated with Web 2.0 tools (Google Docs and blogs) seems to be an effective way of enhancing young learners’ writing skills and New Literacy skills.
5.6 Educational implications
The results of this research entail certain educational implications. First of all, implementing differentiated instruction in mixed ability classes based on the students’ proficiency level, needs and preferences can benefit all students, as teachers need to understand and respond to their differences in order to help them to succeed (Tomlinson, 2001). Also, as PBL engages students in solving real life problems that need to be solved (Hung, 2009), they develop real world skills, critical thinking skills
86 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” and communicative skills, as they work collaboratively analysing and synthesizing information to solve problems (Duch, Groh & Allen, 2011). By integrating ICT in a PBL environment, especially Google Docs and blogs, and by allowing students to work in mixed ability groups made them enjoy the learning process and take responsibility of their own learning, since they were provided with supportive peer and teacher feedback in order to emphasize their strengths, develop essential skills and strategies and work upon their various weaknesses (Sousa & Tomlinson, 2011). One of the main goals of this research was to enhance the specific young learners’ writing skills. According to the data gathered, they developed process writing skills working collaboratively and actively participating in the learning process. By using Google Docs and the classroom blog in a blended learning environment, they were able to share ideas, revise each other’s drafts and provide feedback, redraft (Storch, 2005) and write for a much larger audience thus practicing and developing their writing skills.
5.7 Limitations of the research and suggestions for further research
Despite the positive findings that have been revealed from the analysis of this research data, certain limitations must be outlined. Firstly, technological difficulties such as lack of sound and slow Internet connection caused stress and impatience to the participants. The use of the overhead projector during the planning and the evaluation stages was also occasionally problematic so the students had to gather around the researcher’s computer to watch videos or to evaluate the group’s blog posts. This resulted in time issues since some groups faced difficulties in completing their final products within the time limits which they were given. Moreover, since the present research involved sixteen 6th grade participants with specific needs and preferences in a specific learning situation, it is considered a small – scale action research, the results of which cannot be generalised to all students of
87 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” the Greek state primary schools, who have different learning styles, face different difficulties and have different interests. Further research on a larger sample, involving students of all grades, is suggested aiming to investigate to what extent PBL integrated with Google Docs and blogs can enhance young learners’ writing skills and New Literacy skills in Greek state schools in order to draw safer conclusions. Lastly, since both of the Web 2.0 tools, which were integrated in the FL classroom for the needs of this research, can also be exploited as a form of asynchronous communication amongst students or between the teacher and the students (Crystal, 2006), this aspect of the tools also needs to be researched. Thus, more thorough results, concerning the effectiveness of the proposed integration of tools, in a young learners’ teaching context, will be revealed.
Conclusion
In the fifth chapter the findings of the present research were analysed and discussed, so that the research questions which were set by the researcher could be answered, along with the research limitations and suggestions for further research. Given the implications these findings have on educational practices, it could be supported that ICT and Web 2.0 tools integration in a PBL environment could enhance young learners’ writing skills and New Literacy skills.
88 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Concluding remarks
This dissertation attempted to investigate the effectiveness of the integration of educational technology and Web 2.0 tools into project – based learning in connection with young learners’ writing skills and New Literacies. Also, the extent to which the use of Google Docs and blogs enhance collaborative writing in a YLs’ classroom was also investigated. The analysis of the data which was collected during the research, confirmed the research hypothesis. Due to the fact that it was a small scale research, further research on a larger sample is suggested, involving students who attend all grades of primary school, in order to draw safer conclusions regarding the extent to which PBL, integrated with Google Docs and blogs, can enhance young learners’ writing skills and New Literacy skills in Greek state schools.
89 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
References
Alexiou, T., & Mattheoudakis, M. (2013). ʽIntroducing a foreign language at primary level: Benefits or lost opportunities? The case of Greece.ʼ Research Papers in Language Teaching & Learning, 4/1.
Allen, N., Atkinson, D., Morgan, M., Moore, T. and Snow, C. (1987). ‘What experienced collaborators say about collaborative writing’. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 1/2: 70-90.
Al-Rawahi, L.S. & Al-Mekhlafi, A.M. (2015). ‘The effect of online collaborative projectbased learning on English as a Foreign Language learners’ language performance and attitudes.’ Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Gulf Perspectives, 12/2: 1-18.
Alsamadani, H. A. (2018). The Effectiveness of Using Online Blogging for Students' Individual and Group Writing. International Education Studies, 11/1: 44-51.
Alshenqeeti, H. (2014). ‘Interviewing as a Data Collection Method: A Critical Review.’ English Linguistic Research, 3/1: 39-45, at https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hamza_Alshenqeeti/publication/269869369_Inte rviewing_as_a_Data_Collection_Method_A_Critical_Review/links/55d6ea6508aed6a 199a4fd34/Interviewing-as-a-Data-Collection-Method-A-Critical-Review.pdf, accessed: May 2020.
Altrichter, H., & Gstettner, P. (1993). Action research: a closed chapter in the history of German social science?. Educational Action Research, 1/3: 329-360.
Altrichter, H., Posch, P., & Somekh, B. (1993). Teachers investigate their work: An introduction to the methods of action research. New York: Routledge.
90 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Anastasiadou, A. (2015). ‘Feedback revisited: The impact of peer commentary on students’ attitudes and writing performance in the EFL classroom.’ An - Najah Univ. J. Res. (Humanities), 29/2: 369-402.
Armstrong, T. (2009). Multiple intelligences in the classroom (3rd Edition). USA: ASCD Publications.
Artvianti, E.I.D. (2013). ʽThe Use of Classroom blog in Teaching Writing to Junior High School Students.ʼ Journal of English and Education, 1/1:59 – 67.
Avgerou, E., & Vlachos, K. (2016). ʽThe blog as an innovative tool for the development of the writing skill in the Greek EFL class.ʼ Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning, 7/1: 212.
Bailey, K. M. (1990). ‘The use of diary studies in teacher education programs.’ In Richard, J. C. & Nunan, D. (Eds), pp. 215-226. Cambridge: C.P.U.
Barberos, M., Gozalo, A., Padayogdog, E., (2017). ʽThe effect of the teacher's teaching style on students' motivation action research.ʼ Accessed from https://steinhardt.nyu.edu/departments/teaching-and-learning/research/practitioner- action-research/effect-teachers-teaching
Bas, G. (2008). ʽImplementation of Multiple Intelligences Supported Project-Based Learning in EFL/ESL Classrooms.ʼ Institute of Education Sciences. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ed503870 Assessed: May 2020.
Bas, G. (2008). ʽIntegrating multiple intelligences in ESL/EFL classrooms.ʼ The Internet TESL Journal, 14/5. http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Bas- IntegratingMultipleIntelligences.html Assessed: May 2020.
Bechhofer, F., & Paterson, L. (2000). Principles of research design in the social sciences. Psychology Press. 91 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Bell, S. (2010). ʽProject-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future.ʼ The clearing house, 83/2, 39-43.
Bender, W. N. (2012). Project-based learning: differentiating instruction for the 21st century. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.
Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Harlow, England; New York: Longman.
Berardo, S. A. (2006). ‘The use of authentic materials in the teaching of reading’. The Reading Matrix, 6/2, 60 – 69. http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/berardo/article.pdf?origin=publication_detail
Berg, B. (2009). Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R.W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M. & Palincsar, A., (1991). ʽMotivating Project-Based Learning: Sustaining the Doing, Supporting the Learning.ʼ Educational Psychologist, 26: 3-4, 369-398, DOI: 10.1080/00461520.1991.9653139
Boas, I. V. (2011). ʽProcess writing and the Internet: Blogs and Ning networks in the classroomʼ. In English Teaching Forum (Vol. 49, No. 2, pp. 26-33). US Department of State. Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Office of English Language Programs, SA-5, 2200 C Street NW 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20037.
Bouniol, P. & Zouganeli, K. (2004). Teaching English to Young Learners, Vol. 1. Patras: Hellenic Open University, pp. 65- 123.
Bruner, J. (1978). ʽThe Role of Dialogue in Language Acquisitionʼ. In A. Sinclair, R. J. Jarvella & W.J. M. Levelt (eds.), The Child’s Conception of Language (S.241–256). Berlin & New York: Springer. 92 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Bruner, J. S. (1983). In search of mind: Essays in autobiography. New York: Harper.
Calfoglou, C. & Sifakis, N, (2004). Language learning skills and materials (Oracy and Literacy), Vol. 2: Teaching Reading and Writing. Patras: Hellenic Open University.
Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Campbell, A. P. (2003). ʽWeblogs for use with ESL classes.ʼ The Internet TESL Journal, 9/2. http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Campbell-Weblogs.html
Carr, W. & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical Education knowledge and action research. London: Falmer.
Challob, A. A. I., Bakar, N. A., & Latif, H. (2016). ʽCollaborative Blended Learning Writing Environment: Effects on EFL Students' Writing Apprehension and Writing Performance.ʼ English Language Teaching, 9/6: 229-241.
Chao, C. C. (2013, November). ʽCreative Language Learning Projects with Digital Media.ʼ In PACLIC 27 Workshop on Computer-Assisted Language Learning, pp. 512- 519.
Chapelle, C. A. (2008). ‘Computer assisted language learning’. In Spolsky, B. & Hult, F. M. (Eds.) The Handbook of Educational Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 585-595.
Chinnery, G. (2008). ʽON THE NET You’ve Got some CALL: Google Assisted Language Learning.ʼ Language Learning and Technology, 12/1: 3 – 11.
Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education (5th ed.). New York: Routledge. 93 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Corgan, R., Hammer, V., Margolies, M., & Crossley, C. (2004). ʽMaking your online course successful. Business Education Forum.ʼ 58/3: 51-53.
Council of Europe, (2001). ‘Common European Framework for Languages’, Council of Europe, Democracy, Education and Languages, Language Policy, at http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Cadre1_en.asp , accessed: November 2019.
Crawford, C. M., & Brown, E. (2002). ‘Focusing Upon Higher Order Thinking Skills: WebQuests and the Learner-Centered Mathematical Learning Environment.’ Educational Resources Information Centre (ERIC).
Crosnoe, R. (2000). ʽFriendships in childhood and adolescence: The life course and new directions.ʼ Social psychology quarterly, pp. 377-391.
Crystal, D. (2006). Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cummins, J. (2009). Supporting ESL students in learning the language of science. from https://assets.pearsonschool.com/asset_mgr/legacy/200728/SciAut0404585MonoCum mins_844_1.pdf retrieved August 2019
Daskalogiannaki, E. (2012). ʽDeveloping and assessing EFL students' writing skills via a class-blog.ʼ Research Papers in Language Teaching & Learning, 3/1.
DeCuir-Gunby, J. T., Marshall, P. L., & McCulloch, A. W. (2011). ʽDeveloping and using a codebook for the analysis of interview data: An example from a professional development research project.ʼ Field methods, 23/2: 136-155.
Dendrinos, B., & Karavas, K. (2013). ʽThe KPG Handbook: Performance Descriptors and Specifications.ʼ https://rcel2.enl.uoa.gr/kpg/files/KPG_Handbook_17X24.pdf
94 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Dimitrov, D. M., & Rumrill Jr, P. D. (2003). Pretest-posttest designs and measurement of change. Work, 20/2: 159-165.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Dörnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and Motivating in the Foreign Language Classroom. The Modern Language Journal. 78/3: 273-284.
Dotson, J.M. (2001). ‘Cooperative Learning Structures Can Increase Student Achievement’. Kagan Online Magazine at https://www.kaganonline.com/free_articles/research_and_rationale/increase_achieve ment.php accessed: September 2019.
Duch, B. J., Groh, S. E., & Allen, D. E. (2001). ʽWhy problem-based learning? A case study of institutional change in undergraduate education.ʼ In B. Duch, S. Groh, & D. Allen (Eds.), The power of problem-based learning, pp. 3–11. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Efimova, L., & Fiedler, S. (2003). ʽLearning webs: Learning in weblog networks.ʼ In P. Kommers, P. Isaias, & M. B.Nunes (Eds.), Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference Web Based Communities 2004, pp.490–494. Lisbon: IADIS Press.
Efraimidou, H., Frouzaki, F. & Reppa, H. Z. (2009). English 6th Grade, Pupil’s book. Athens: Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs, Pedagogical Institute.
Efraimidou, H., Frouzaki, F. & Reppa, H. Z. (2009). English 6th Grade, Teacher’s book. Athens: Ministry of Education and Religious Affairs, Pedagogical Institute.
95 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Elliot, J. (1991). Action research for educational change. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
Firth, M., & Mesureur, G. (2010). ʽInnovative uses for Google Docs in a university.ʼ Jalt call journal, 6/1: 3-16.
Fisher, R. (1997). ʽYoung learners’ special interest group.ʼ IATEFL Newsletter, 17, 7- 10.
Fleming, D. S., 2002. A Teacher’s Guide to Project – based Learning. Rowman & Littlefield Education
Flower, L. (1994). ʽThe construction of negotiated meaning A social cognitive theory of writing. Carbondale.ʼ IL: University of Southern Illinois Press.
Franco, C. P. (2010). ʽTeaching Using Google.ʼ The Internet TESL Journal http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Franco-Google/
Fried-Booth, D. L. (1997). Project work. (8th Ed.) Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fried-Booth, D., L. (2002). Project work (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University. Press
Fung, Y. M. (2010). ‘Collaborative Writing Features’. RELC Journal, 41/1: 18-30.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1985). The Mind's New Science, New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books. 96 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Gardner, H. (2006). Changing minds: The art and science of changing our own and other people’s minds. Harvard Business Review Press.
Garrison, D.-R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2011). ʽBlended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines. San Francisco.ʼ CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Godwin-Jones, R. (2003). ʽBlogs and wikis: Environments for online collaboration.ʼ Language learning & technology, 7/2: 12-16.
Godwin – Jones, B. (2008). ʽEmerging technologies: Web – writing 2.0: Enabling, documenting, ad assessing writing online.ʼ Language Learning and Technology, 12/2: 7 – 13.
Goodman, B., & Stivers, J. (2010). ʽProject-based learningʼ. Educational psychology, 1-8.
Government Gazette. (2016). FEK 2871, ʽThe Unified Curriculum for the foreign languages.ʼ Ministry of Education, Research and Religious affairs, Vol. 2, pp. 30321 – 30388.
Griffee, D. (2012). An Introduction to Second Language Research Methods: Design and Data (first edition). USA: Tesl-Ej Publications.
Grundy, S. L. 1994. ʽThe Curriculum and Teaching.ʼ In E. Hatton (Ed.) Understanding Teaching, pp. 27-33. Sydney: Harcourt Books.
Guild, P.B. (1997). ‘Where do the learning theories overlap?’ Educational Leadership, 55/1.
Harel, I., & Papert, S. (1991). ʽSoftware design as a learning environment.ʼ In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism, pp. 41–84. Norwood, NJ: Ablex
97 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching (4th ed.). Essex, England: Pearson Education.
Harmer, J. (2001). ʽThe practice of language teaching.ʼ The Practice of English Language Teaching. 3rd ed. Oxford: Longman, pp. 164-188.
Harmer, J. (1991). ʽThe practice of English teaching.ʼ London & New York: Longman.
Hayes, D. (2004). ʽUnderstanding creativity and its implications for schools.ʼ Improving schools, 7/3: 279-286.
Heacox, D. (2012). Differentiating instruction in the regular classroom: How to reach and teach all learners (Updated anniversary edition). Free Spirit Publishing.
Hedge, T. (1993). ʽKey Concepts in ELT: Fluency and Project.ʼ ELT Journal, 3: 275- 277. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/47.3.275
Hobson, A. J., & Townsend, A. J. (2010). ʽInterviewing as educational research method(s).ʼ In Educational research and inquiry: Qualitative and quantitative approaches, pp. 223-238. Continuum.
Huang, H. (2016) ‘Students and the Teacher’s Perceptions on Incorporating the Blog Task and Peer Feedback into EFL Writing Classes through Blogs’. Journal of Advances in English Language Teaching, 4/5: 60-67.
Hughes, A. (2014). ʽFive courses for 3–6/7-year-old learners of British English as a foreign language.ʼ Elt Journal, 68/3: 330-344.
Hung, W. (2009). ʽThe 9-step problem design process for problem-based learning: Application of the 3C3R model.ʼ Educational Research Review, 4/2: 118-141.
98 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Hyland, K. (2013). ʽWriting in the university: education, knowledge and reputation.ʼ Language teaching, 46/1: 53-70.
Hyland, K. (2009). Teaching and researching writing (2nd ed.). London: Pearson.
Hyland, K. (2008). ʽWriting theories and writing pedagogies.ʼ Indonesian Journal of English LanguageTeaching. 4 /2: 91-110.
Jeong, K-O. (2016). ʽA Study on the Integration of Google Docs as a Web-based Collaborative Learning Platform in EFL Writing Instruction.ʼ Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 9/39, DOI: 10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i39/103239.
Kellner, D. (1997). ‘Media literacies and critical pedagogy in a multicultural dociety. Online vourse materials for 253A.’ in Education, Technology and Society, at https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrP4lCwF.Ve72QAPAEM34lQ;_ylu=X3oDMTBy aW11dnNvBGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg-- /RV=2/RE=1592100912/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fpages.gseis.ucla.edu%2ffacult y%2fkellner%2fessays%2fmedialiteraciescriticalpedagogy.pdf/RK=2/RS=zOwsn3wP OtdeAG0vTAAFfmdczGY- assessed: November 2019.
Kemmis, S. (2009). ʽAction research as a practice‐based practice. Educational Action
Research.ʼ 17: 463-474. At https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233133766, assessed: November 2019.
Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner. Victoria, Australia: Deakin University Press.
Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (eds) (1981). The Action Research Planner (first edition). Geelong, Vic: Deakin University Press.
99 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Kessler, G., & Bikowski, D. (2010). ʽDeveloping collaborative autonomous learning abilities in computer mediated language learning: Attention to meaning among students in wiki space.ʼ Computer Assisted Language Learning, 23/1: 41–58.
Kessler, G., Bikowski, D., & Boggs, J. (2012). ʽCollaborative writing among second language learners in academic web-based projects.ʼ Language Learning & Technology, 16/1: 91–109. http://llt.msu.edu/issues/february2012/kesslerbikowskiboggs.pdf
Korosidou, E. & Griva, E. (2013). ʽMy Country in Europe: A Content-based Project for Teaching English as a Foreign Language to Young Learners.ʼ Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4/2:229-243.
Kothari, C.R. (2004) Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. 2nd Edition, New Age International Publishers, New Delhi.
Kourtis-Kazoullis, V. & Vlachos, K. (2014). ‘The evolution of CALL and current research in new media.’ Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning, 3/1:4- 15, at http://rpltl.eap.gr/images/2014/05-01-004-Intro.pdf accessed: January 2019.
Krajcik, J.S., Blumenfeld, P.C., Marx, R.W. & Soloway, E. (1994). ‘A collaborative model for helping middle grade science teachers learn project-based instruction’. The Elementary School Journal, 94/5: 483-497.
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. University of Southern California.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Institute of English (New York): Language teaching methodology series.
Kroger, J. (2007). Identity development: Adolescence through adulthood (2nd ed.). Sage Publications, Inc. 100 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Kundu, R., & Bain, C. (2006). ʽWebQuests: ‘Utilizing technology in a constructivist manner to facilitate meaningful preservice learning.’ Art Education, 59/2: 6 – 11.
Lai, C. C., & Kritsonis, W. A. (2006). ‘The advantages and disadvantages of computer technology in second language acquisition’, Doctoral Forum: National Journal for Publishing and Mentoring Doctoral Student Research, 3/1: 1-6.
Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2007). ‘Researching new literacies: Web 2.0 practices and insider perspectives’. E-Learning and Digital Media, 4: 224-240.
Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2006). ʽNew literacies: Changing knowledge in the classroom.ʼ London, England: Open University.
Lawrence-Brown, D. (2004). ʽDifferentiated instruction: Inclusive strategies for standards based learning that benefit the whole class.ʼ American Secondary Education, 32/3: 34-62.
Lee, Y. C. (2011). ʽEnhancing pedagogical content knowledge in a collaborative school-based professional development program for inquiry-based science teaching.ʼ Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning & Teaching, 12/ 2, at: https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/download/v12_issue2_files/leeyc.pdf accessed: January 2019.
Lee, K. W. (2000). ‘English teachers’ barriers to the use of computer-assisted language learning’. The Internet TESL Journal, 6/12: 1-8.
Lee, K. W. (2000). ‘English teachers’ barriers to the use of computer-assisted language learning’. The Internet TESL Journal, 6/12: 1-8.
Legutke, M. & Thomas, H. (1991). Process and Experience in the Language Classroom. London: Longman.
101 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J. L., & Cammack, D. W. (2004). ʽToward a theory of new literacies emerging from the Internet and other information and communication technologies.ʼ Theoretical models and processes of reading, 5/1: 1570-1613.
Levy, H. M. (2008). ‘Meeting the needs of all students through differentiated instruction: Helping every child reach and exceed their standards.ʼ The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 81/4: 161-164. https://cmapspublic3.ihmc.us/rid=1H1QY8XZ7-25JSBFS-58D/Levy_DI.pdf
Liu, H. J. & Chen, T. H. (2013). ʽForeign language anxiety in young learners: How it relates to multiple intelligences, learner attitudes, and perceived competence.ʼ Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4/5: 932 – 938.
Lowyck, J., Elen, J., & Clarebout, G. (2004). ʽInstructional conceptions: Analysis from an instructional design perspective.ʼ International Journal of Educational Research, 41/6: 429-444.
Lynch, A. B. & Campos, J. L. E. (2014). ʽThe Use of Technological Tools in the EFL Class.ʼ Revista De Modernas, 20:427 – 434.
McCarthy, M. (1990). Vocabulary acquisition. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
McDonough, J., & McDonough, S. (1997). Research methods for English language teachers. Great Britain: Arnold.
McNiff, J. (2013). Action research: Principles and practice. Routledge.
McNiff, J. & Whitehead, J. (2006). All You Need to Know About Action Research. UK: Sage Publications.
102 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Meletiadou, E. (2012). ‘The impact of training adolescent EFL learners on their perceptions of peer assessment of writing.’ RPLTL, 3/1: 240-251. http://rpltl.eap.gr/images/2012/03-01-240-Meletiadou.pdf assessed: May 2020.
Melissourgou, M., Frantzi, K. (2015). ‘Testing Writing in EFL Exams: The Learners’ Viewpoint as a Valuable Feedback for Improvement’. Procedia: Social and Behavioural Studies, 199: 30-37.
Mertler, C. A. (2012b). Action research: Improving schools and empowering educators (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mills, A. J., Eurepos, G. & Wiebe, E. (Eds). (2010). Encyclopedia of case study research. SAGE Publications Ltd.
More, N.B. (2015). ‘Student Attitudes Towards the Integration of YouTube In Online, Hybrid And Well – Assisted Courses: An Examination Of The Impact Of Course Modality On Perception.’ MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 11/1: 55 – 73.
Muresan, E. I (2009). ʽStudent Performance, Student Motivation and Project Work in the EFL Classroom: Is There a Link?ʼ International Journal of Learning, 16/7:1-14.
Nicholson, J. & Galguera, T. (2013). ʽIntegrating new literacies in higher education: A self-study of the use of Twitter in an education course.ʼ Teacher Educatioν Quarterly, 40/3: 7-26.
Noytim, U. (2010). ʽWeblogs enhancing EFL students’ English language learning.ʼ Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2/2: 1127-1132.
Nunan, D. (2010). Teaching English to young learners. Anaheim University.
103 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Nunan, D. (1999). Second Language Teaching & Learning. Heinle & Heinle Publishers, 7625 Empire Dr., Florence, KY 41042-2978.
O’Maley, J. & Chamot, A.U. (1990). Learning Strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ohler, J. (2005/2006). ‘The world of digital storytelling.’ Educational Leadership 63: 44-47.
Papaefthymiou‐Lytra, S. (2014). ʽL2 lifelong learning/use and new media pedagogies.ʼ Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning. 5/1:16‐33 at http://rpltl.eap.gr/images/2014/05-01-016-Papaefthymiou-Lytra.pdf, accessed: December 2018
Paroussi, M. (2014). ʽBlogging in a blended-learning pedagogical model, as a medium for the enhancement of 6th grade primary school learners' writing skills and e- literacies.ʼ Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning, 5/1: 181.
Piaget, J. (1951). ʽPrincipal factors determining intellectual evolution from childhood to adult life.ʼ In Organization and pathology of thought: Selected sources, pp. 154- 175). Columbia University Press.
Praba, L. T., Artini, L. P., & Ramendra, D. P. (2018). ʽProject-based learning and writing skill in EFL: are they related?.ʼ In SHS Web of Conferences, 42, p. 00059. EDP Sciences.
Prensky, M. (2001). ʽDigital natives, digital immigrants.ʼ On the horizon, 9/5.
Puskas, A. (2016). The Challenges and Practices of Teaching Young Learners. J. Selye University.
104 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Qu, S. Q., & Dumay, J. (2011). ʽThe qualitative research interview.ʼ Qualitative research in accounting & management.
Quintero, L.M. (2008). ‘Blogging: a way to foster EFL writing’. Colombian Applied Linguistic Journal, 10: 7‐49.
Reichelt, M., Lefkowitz, N., Rinnert, C., & Schultz, J. M. (2012). ʽKey issues in foreign language writing.ʼ Foreign Language Annals, 45/1: 22-41.
Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Ernst Klett Sprachen.
Richards, J. C. (2005). Communicative language teaching today. Cambridge University Press.
Richardson, W. (2010). Blogs, wikis, podcasts, and other powerful web tools for classrooms. Corwin press.
Robin. B. (2016). ‘The Power of Digital Storytelling to Support Teaching and Learning.’ Digital Education Review, 30.
Rollinson, P. (2005). ‘Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class’. ELT Journal. Vol. 59/1: 23 – 30.
Sagor, R. (2000). Guiding school improvement with action research. Ascd.
Saunders, W.M. (1989). ‘Collaborative writing tasks and peer interaction’. International Journal of Educational Research, 13/1: 101-112.
Schmitt, N. (2002). An Introduction to Applied Linguistics. (Ed.). London: Arnold & Oxford University Press.
105 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Shaughnessy, M., Viner, M. & Kennedy, C. K. (2018). ʽSearch Engines and Critical Thinking, Evaluation and Investigation.ʼ World Journal of Education Research, 5/2: 107 – 116.
Shu B., (2005). Outline of Foreign Language Education. Wuhan: Huazhong Normal University Press.
Solomon, G. (2003). ‘Project-Based Learning: a Primer.’ Technology and Learning, 23/6
Soufi, N., Saad, K., & Nicolas, M. O. D. (2015). ‘Blogs as a way to enhance EFL reading classes in a Lebanese tertiary institution.’ Teaching English with Technology, 15/1: 31-47.
Sousa, D. A., & Tomlinson, C. A. (2011). Differentiation and the brain: How neuroscience supports the learner-friendly classroom. Solution Tree Press.
Speck, B. W. (2002). Facilitating students’ collaborative writing. California: Jossey- Bass.
Stenhouse, L. (1975). ʽThe teacher as researcher.ʼ In In Qf Brints Reuder, E835, Open. Stevens, V. (2014). ‘The Elephants in the Fire Hoses.’ TESL‐EJ, 17/4, at https://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume17/ej68/ej68int/, assessed: March 2020.
Stoller, F. (2006). ʽEstablishing a Theoretical Foundation for Project-Based Learning in Second and Foreign Language Contexts.ʼ 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.
106 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Stoller, F.L. (2004). ʽContent-Based Instruction: Perspectives on Curriculum Planning.ʼ Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24: 261-283.
Storch, N. (2005). ‘Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections’. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14: 153-173.
Strawbridge, M. (2006). Netiquette: Internet etiquette in the age of the blog. Software Reference.
Subban, P. (2006). ʽDifferentiated instruction: A research basis.ʼ International Education Journal, 7/7: 935-947.
Summey, D. C. (2013). Developing digital literacies: A framework for professional learning Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press doi: 10.4135/9781483387901
Sutikno, M.K. (2008). ʽResponding to students’ writing. (Teaching writing or assessing it?).ʼ Journal Pendidikan Penabur, 10/7: 51-59.
Suwantarathip, O. & Wichadee, S. (2014). ‘The effects of collaborative writing activity using Google Docs on students’ writing abilities.’ The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13/3, at http://www.tojet.net/articles/v13i2/13215.pdf , accessed: November 2018.
Sylvester, R., & Greenidge, W. L. (2009). ʽDigital storytelling: Extending the potential for struggling writers.ʼ The reading teacher, 63/4: 284-295.
Tardy, C. (2006). ʽResearching first and second language genre learning: A comparative review and a look ahead.ʼ Journal of Second Language Writing, 15: 79– 101.
107 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Thomas, J. W., & Mergendoller, J. R. (2000). ʽManaging Project-Based Learning: Principles from the Field.ʼ Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans
Thomas, J. W. (2000). ʽA review of research on project-based learning.ʼ San Rafael, CA: Autodesk Foundation.
Thomson, J.,( 2008). ʽDon't be afraid of the web 2.0.ʼ Education Digest, 74/4: 19-22.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms. ASCD.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Ascd.
Van Lam, N. T. (2011). ‘Project-based learning in teaching English as a foreign language.’ VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 27/2: 140 – 146
Vlachos, K. (2010). ʼComparing face-to-face with blended learning in the context of foreign language education.ʼ In Comparative Blended Learning Practices and Environments (pp. 250-276). IGI Global. At https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrJQ4wTwOVef3sAByQM34lQ;_ylu=X3oDMTB yaW11dnNvBGNvbG8DaXIyBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg-- /RV=2/RE=1592144020/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fwww.igi- global.com%2fchapter%2fcomparing-face-face-blended- learning%2f38077/RK=2/RS=D0BaCiaDsnmQtu3x_fYO0ThqZFs-
Vurdien, R. (2013). ʼEnhancing writing skills through blogging in advanced English as a Foreign Language class in Spain.ʼ Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26/2: 126-143.
108 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Warrschauer, M. (1996). ʽComputer Assisted Language Learning: an Introduction.ʼ In Fotos, S.(ed) Multimedia language teaching. Tokyo: Logos International, pp. 3-20, at http://www.ict4lt.org/en/warschauer.htm, accessed: December 2018.
White, R. & Arndt, V. (1991). Process Writing. London: Longman.
Widdowson, H. (1983). ʽNew starts and different kinds of failures.ʼ In Freedman, A., Pringle, I. & Yalden, J. (Eds.), Learning to Write: First Language/Second Language. London: Longman.
Willem, C., Aiello, M., & Bartolomé, A. R. (2007). ʽBlended Learning and New Literacies.ʼ The International Journal of Technology, Knowledge & Society, 2: 3-9.
Wood, D. (1998). Aspects of teaching and learning (pp. 157-177). London: Routledge/Open University Press.
Woodall, B. R. (2002). ʽLanguage-switching: Using the first language while writing in a second language.ʼ Journal of Second Language Writing, 11/1: 7-28.
Worthy, J. (2000). Teachers' and students' suggestions for motivating middle-school students to read. In YEARBOOK-NATIONAL READING CONFERENCE, 49: 441- 451. https://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/project_1 https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/project#other-words https://www.webopedia.com/
Yang, S. H. (2009). ʽUsing Blogs to Enhance Critical Reflection and Community of Practice.ʼ Educational Technology & Society, 12 /2: 11–21. 109 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Yong, M.F. (2010). Collaborative writing features. RELC Journal ,4/1: 18-30.
Zafiri, M. & Zouganeli, K. (2017). ‘Toward an Understanding of Content and Language Integrated Learning Assessment (CLILA) in Primary School Classes: A Case Study.’ Research Papers in Language Teaching and Learning, Vol. 8/1: 88 – 109. http://rpltl.eap.gr
Zamel, V. (1983). ʽTeaching those missing links in writing1.ʼ ELT Journal, 37/1: 22- 29.
Zhang, D. (2009). ʽThe Application of Blog in English Writing.ʼ Journal of Cambridge Studies, 4/1: 64 – 72.
Zhang, L. (2017). ʽAnalysis on the Role and Functions of Teachers, Teaching Materials and Learners in the Multimedia-aided English Classroom—Based on the Study of Linfen No. 1 Senior School.ʼ Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 7/11: 1132-1138
Zhou, W., Simpson, E., & Domizi, D. P. (2012). ʽGoogle Docs in an out-of-class collaborative writing activity.ʼ International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 24/3: 359-375.
110 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDICES
111 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX I: THE COMMON EUROPEAN FRAMEWORK OF REFERENCE FOR LANGUAGES Common reference levels
Can understand with ease virtually everything heard or read. Can summarize information from different spoken and written sources, reconstructing arguments and accounts in a coherent presentation. C2 Can express him/herself spontaneously, very fluently and precisely, differentiating finer shades of meaning even in more complex situations. PROFICIENT USER Can understand a wide range of demanding, longer texts, and recognize implicit meaning. Can express him/herself fluently and spontaneously without much obvious searching for expressions. C1 Can use language flexibly and effectively for social, academic and professional purposes. Can produce clear, well-structured, detailed text on complex subjects, showing controlled use of organizational patterns, connectors and cohesive devices. Can understand the main ideas of complex text on both concrete and abstract topics, including technical discussions in his/her field of specialization. Can interact with a degree of fluency and spontaneity B2 that makes regular interaction with native speakers quite possible without strain for either party. Can produce clear, detailed text on a wide range of subjects and explain a viewpoint on a topical issue INDEPENDENT giving the advantages and disadvantages of various options. USER Can understand the main points of clear standard input on familiar matters regularly encountered in work, school, leisure, etc. Can deal with most situations likely to arise whilst travelling in an area where B1 the language is spoken. Can produce simple connected text on topics which are familiar or of personal interest. Can describe experiences and events, dreams, hopes & ambitions and briefly give reasons and explanations for opinions and plans. Can understand sentences and frequently used expressions related to areas of most immediate relevance (e.g. very basic personal and family information, shopping, local geography, employment). Can A2 communicate in simple and routine tasks requiring a simple and direct exchange of information on familiar and routine matters. Can describe in simple terms aspects of his/her background, immediate BASIC environment and matters in areas of immediate need. USER Can understand and use familiar everyday expressions and very basic phrases aimed at the satisfaction of needs of a concrete type. Can introduce him/herself and others and can ask and answer A1 questions about personal details such as where he/she lives, people he/she knows and things he/she has. Can interact in a simple way provided the other person talks slowly and clearly and is prepared to help.
112 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX II: THE UNIFIED CURRICULUM FOR THE FOREIGN LANGUAGES (In blue font: The aims and objectives regarding the KPG – the descriptors of the writing skill – A1 and A2 levels)
ΕΦΗΜΕΡΙΔΑ ΤΗΣ ΚΥΒΕΡΝΗΣΕΩΣ ΤΗΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΗΣ ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΑΣ 9 Σεπτεμβρίου 2016 - ΤΕΥΧΟΣ ΔΕΥΤΕΡΟ - Αρ. Φύλλου 2871 ΑΠΟΦΑΣΕΙΣ Αριθμ. 141417/Δ2 Ενιαίο Πρόγραμμα Σπουδών για τις ξένες γλώσσες στο Δημοτικό και στο Γυμνάσιο . Ο ΥΠΟΥΡΓΟΣ ΠΑΙΔΕΙΑΣ, ΕΡΕΥΝΑΣ ΚΑΙ ΘΡΗΣΚΕΥΜΑΤΩΝ Έχοντας υπόψη: 1. Τις διατάξεις του άρθρου 4 παρ. 11 εδαφ. ε και του άρθρου 5 παρ. 11 εδαφ. γ του Ν. 1566/1985 (Α΄ 167), όπως τροποποιήθηκαν και ισχύουν με τις διατάξεις του άρθρου 7 παρ 1, 2 του Ν. 2525/1997 (Α΄ 188) “Ενιαίο Λύκειο, πρόσβαση των αποφοίτων στην Τριτοβάθμια Εκπαίδευση, αξιολόγηση του εκπαιδευτικού έργου και άλλες διατάξεις”. 2. Τις διατάξεις του άρθρου 2 παρ. 3 περ. α υποπ. ββ του Ν. 3966/2011 (Α΄ 118) «Θεσμικό πλαίσιο των Πρότυπων Πειραματικών Σχολείων, Ίδρυση Ινστιτούτου Εκπαιδευτικής Πολιτικής, Οργάνωση του Ινστιτούτου Τεχνολογίας Υπολογιστών και Εκδόσεων «ΔΙΟΦΑΝΤΟΣ» και λοιπές διατάξεις». 3. Το Προεδρικό Διάταγμα υπ’ αριθμ. 73/2015 (Α΄ 116) «Διορισμός Αντιπροέδρου της Κυβέρνησης, Υπουργών, Αναπληρωτών Υπουργών και Υφυπουργών». 4. Τις διατάξεις του άρθρου 90 του κώδικα Νομοθεσίας για την Κυβέρνηση και τα Κυβερνητικά όργανα που κυρώθηκε με το άρθρο πρώτο του Π.δ. 63/2005 (Α΄ 98). 5. Την με αριθμ. 23/30-06-2016 πράξη του Δ.Σ. του Ινστιτούτου Εκπαιδευτικής Πολιτικής. 6. Το γεγονός ότι από την απόφαση αυτή δεν προκαλείται δαπάνη σε βάρος του κρατικού προϋπολογισμού, αποφασίζουμε: Άρθρο μόνον
113 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Το Ενιαίο Πρόγραμμα Σπουδών για τις ξένες γλώσσες στο Δημοτικό και στο Γυμνάσιο ορίζεται ως εξής: ΕΝΙΑΙΟ ΠΡΟΓΡΑΜΜΑ ΣΠΟΥΔΩΝ ΓΙΑ ΤΙΣ ΞΕΝΕΣ ΓΛΩΣΣΕΣ (ΕΠΣ- ΞΓ) ΑΠΟ Γ΄ ΔΗΜΟΤΙΚΟΥ ΕΩΣ Γ΄ ΓΥΜΝΑΣΙΟΥ Το Ενιαίο Πρόγραμμα Σπουδών για τις Ξένες Γλώσσες (ΕΠΣ-ΞΓ) αφορά τις γλώσσες που περιλαμβάνονται στα ισχύοντα ωρολόγια προγράμματα και συγκεκριμένα την Αγγλική ως πρώτη ξένη γλώσσα, η οποία είναι υποχρεωτική σε όλες τις τάξεις του Δημοτικού και του Γυμνασίου, καθώς επίσης τη Γαλλική και τη Γερμανική ως δεύτερες ξένες γλώσσες, οι οποίες προσφέρονται κατ’ επιλογήν από την Ε’ Δημοτικού. Το ΕΠΣ-ΞΓ αφορά επίσης και άλλες γλώσσες που περιλαμβάνονται στο Γυμνάσιο, π.χ. η Ιταλική, και γλώσσες που μπορεί να περιληφθούν στο μέλλον, ως υποχρεωτικές ή επιλογής, ανεξαρτήτως των ωρών που προβλέπονται για τη διδασκαλία της καθεμίας εξ αυτών. ΣΚΟΠΟΣ ΤΟΥ ΕΠΣ-ΞΓ Το ΕΠΣ-ΞΓ αποτελεί εργαλείο για τη διδασκαλία και μάθηση κοινωνικά προσδιορισμένης χρήσης της ξένης γλώσσας με σκοπό την ανάπτυξη ικανοτήτων κατανόησης και παραγωγής νοημάτων όπως αυτά δηλώνονται στο κοινωνικοπολιτισμικό πλαίσιο παραγωγής τους, σε γραπτά και προφορικά κείμενα διαφορετικών ειδών λόγου. Προδιαγράφει τους προσδοκώμενους στόχους και οργανώνει τη γλωσσική ύλη κατά επίπεδο γλωσσομάθειας, με βάση την εξάβαθμη κλίμακα του Συμβουλίου της Ευρώπης. Στόχος είναι οι μαθητές/τριες να αναπτύσσουν επικοινωνιακή ικανότητα, γλωσσική επίγνωση, διαπολιτισμική συνείδηση και διαμεσολαβητική ικανότητα και παράλληλα να προετοιμάζονται για εξετάσεις βάσει των οποίων θα μπορούν να αποκτήσουν Κρατικό Πιστοποιητικό Γλωσσομάθειας.
Η ΦΥΣΗ ΤΟΥ ΕΠΣ-ΞΓ Το ΕΠΣ-ΞΓ είναι πρόγραμμα σπουδών (curriculum), όχι αναλυτικό πρόγραμμα (syllabus) και είναι κοινό για όλες τις ξένες γλώσσες του σχολείου και ενιαίο για το Δημοτικό και Γυμνάσιο. Προσδιορίζει τους γενικούς και επιμέρους δείκτες επικοινωνιακής επάρκειας από το επίπεδο Α1 (στοιχειώδης γνώση) μέχρι το επίπεδο 114 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Β2 (καλή γνώση της γλώσσας). Το επίπεδο Β (Β1 και Β2 που αντιστοιχεί σε έναν «ανεξάρτητο χρήστη της γλώσσας») είναι το επίπεδο γλωσσομάθειας που είναι επιθυμητό να έχουν αποκτήσει όλοι/ες οι μαθητές/τριες στην πρώτη ξένη γλώσσα, ολοκληρώνοντας την υποχρεωτική τους εκπαίδευση. Επιθυμητό επίσης είναι να έχουν αποκτήσει το επίπεδο Α («βασικός χρήστης της γλώσσας») στη δεύτερη ξένη γλώσσα. Οι δείκτες επικοινωνιακής επάρκειας του ΕΠΣ-ΞΓ είναι συστοιχισμένοι με τους δείκτες του Κοινού Ευρωπαϊκού Πλαισίου Αναφοράς για τις Γλώσσες (Συμβούλιο της Ευρώπης, 2001) αλλά έχουν προκύψει από ερευνητικά δεδομένα γλωσσικής χρήσης που έχουν παραχθεί από υποψηφίους στις εξετάσεις του Κρατικού Πιστοποιητικού Γλωσσομάθειας (ΚΠΓ), με το οποίο το ΕΠΣ-ΞΓ συνάδει, στο πλαίσιο σύνδεσης της ξενόγλωσσης εκπαίδευσης στο σχολείο με την πιστοποίησή της. Η περιγραφή των δεικτών συνίσταται σε αναλυτικές δηλώσεις σχετικά με τις δράσεις ή ενέργειες που αναμένεται να είναι σε θέση να κάνουν οι μαθητές/τριες σε κάθε επίπεδο, προκειμένου να θεωρούνται επαρκείς χρήστες της γλώσσας στο εν λόγω επίπεδο. Η κάθε δήλωση είναι ένας «περιγραφικός» δείκτης (περιγραφητής) της επικοινωνιακής επάρκειας των μαθητών/τριών. Οι δείκτες που περιλαμβάνονται στο ΕΠΣ-ΞΓ έχουν προδιαγραφεί και σταθμιστεί βάσει αναλυτικών διαβαθμισμένων περιγραφών των γλωσσικών ικανοτήτων στις γλώσσες του σχολικού προγράμματος (αγγλικά, γαλλικά, γερμανικά). Οι περιγραφές αυτές προκύπτουν από ποικίλες πηγές (προηγούμενα προγράμματα σπουδών, διδακτικά/σχολικά εγχειρίδια, εγχειρίδια περιγραφής του γλωσσικού προφίλ του μαθητή/χρήστη των ξένων γλωσσών, προδιαγραφές εξετάσεων γλωσσομάθειας) και συμπληρώνονται από εμπειρικά δεδομένα και αποτελέσματα μελετών που εστιάζουν στον Έλληνα χρήστη της ξένης γλώσσας. Οι δράσεις ή ενέργειες που περιγράφονται είναι συνεπείς με τις προδιαγραφές του ΚΠΓ, αλλά διαφέρουν από τους συγκεκριμένους δείκτες επικοινωνιακής επάρκειας του ΚΠΓ, αφού οι τελευταίοι εξυπηρετούν διαφορετικό σκοπό. Οι περιγραφητές του ΚΠΓ προσδιορίζουν τη χρήση της γλώσσας που αναμένεται από τον υποψήφιο τη στιγμή των εξετάσεων, σύμφωνα με τις ενότητες των εξετάσεων και τις κατηγορίες δοκιμασιών του οργάνου μέτρησης, αναλόγως του επιπέδου γλωσσομάθειας στο οποίο ο υποψήφιος επιθυμεί να πιστοποιηθεί. Αντίθετα, οι περιγραφητές του ΕΠΣ-ΞΓ ορίζουν σε ποιες δράσεις ή ενέργειες θα πρέπει να εκπαιδευτούν οι μαθητές/τριες κατά επίπεδο. 115 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Ορίζουν επίσης σε ποιο βαθμό πρέπει να μπορούν να επιτελούν τις επικοινωνιακές αυτές δράσεις, δηλαδή ποια γλωσσικά μέσα θα πρέπει να μπορούν να χρησιμοποιούν –ανάλογα με το επίπεδό τους– προκειμένου να επικοινωνούν με τον αποτελεσματικότερο δυνατό τρόπο σε ποικίλα κοινωνικά περιβάλλοντα. Οι δείκτες επικοινωνιακής επάρκειας του ΕΠΣ-ΞΓ σε κάθε επίπεδο είναι σε απόλυτο συσχετισμό με τις ενότητες του ΚΠΓ, οι οποίες εξετάζουν τα εξής: • Ενότητα 1: Κατανόηση γραπτού λόγου και γλωσσική επίγνωση • Ενότητα 2: Παραγωγή γραπτού λόγου και γραπτή διαμεσολάβηση • Ενότητα 3: Κατανόηση προφορικού λόγου • Ενότητα 4: Παραγωγή προφορικού λόγου και προφορική διαμεσολάβηση. Οι δράσεις/ενέργειες του ΕΠΣ-ΞΓ που περιγράφονται αμέσως παρακάτω αφορούν, ειδικότερα, τις εξής επικοινωνιακές δραστηριότητες: • Κατανόηση γραπτού λόγου • Παραγωγή γραπτού λόγου και γραπτή διάδραση • Γραπτή διαμεσολάβηση • Κατανόηση προφορικού λόγου • Παραγωγή προφορικού λόγου και προφορική διάδραση • Προφορική διαμεσολάβηση Επειδή σημαντικό κομμάτι της επικοινωνίας των νέων σήμερα γίνεται με τη χρήση των νέων τεχνολογιών και η καθημερινή τους πραγματικότητα τούς επιτρέπει να έρχονται σε επαφή με περισσότερα κείμενα σε οθόνη παρά σε χαρτί, επιχειρεί να συνδέσει την επικοινωνιακή επάρκεια στην ξένη γλώσσα με τον ψηφιακό εγγραμματισμό των μαθητών/τριών. Επιχειρεί δηλαδή να συμπεριλάβει στο σύστημα διαβάθμισης των επιπέδων γνώσης της ξένης γλώσσας περιγραφητές που έχουν σχέση με τη χρήση των νέων τεχνολογιών στην επικοινωνία, κάτι για το οποίο δεν υπάρχει προηγούμενο στη διεθνή πρακτική. Με βάση τα παραπάνω γίνεται σαφές ότι το ΕΠΣ-ΞΓ ακολουθεί τη λογική ότι ένα πρόγραμμα σπουδών είναι σκόπιμο να προδιαγράφει τα στοιχεία του γνωστικού αντικειμένου που πρέπει να διδαχτούν και όχι το πότε ακριβώς ή το πώς θα πρέπει διδαχτούν, αφού ο επιμερισμός της ύλης, οι μέθοδοι, οι τεχνικές διδασκαλίας κ.τλ. καθορίζονται από παράγοντες που έχουν άμεση σχέση με το μαθητικό δυναμικό τους και τα διαφορετικά περιβάλλοντα μάθησης. Από τα επίπεδα γλωσσομάθειας της 116 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
εξάβαθμης κλίμακας αυτά τα οποία προβλέπονται για την υποχρεωτική εκπαίδευση είναι τα εξής: Α1, Α2, Β1 και Β2. Τα αναμενόμενα επίπεδα γλωσσομάθειας βάσει των προβλεπόμενων ωρών διδασκαλίας στο Δημοτικό είναι τα ακόλουθα:
Α΄ ξένη γλώσσα Δημοτικό Γ΄ τάξη A1- Δ΄ τάξη A1 Ε΄ τάξη A1+ Στ΄ τάξη A2-
Ι. Περιληπτικοί δείκτες επικοινωνιακής επάρκειας Ακολουθούν οι περιληπτικές περιγραφές των επικοινωνιακών ενεργειών ή δράσεων τις οποίες θα πρέπει να είναι σε θέση να φέρουν σε πέρας οι μαθητές/τριες κάθε επιπέδου, ώστε να θεωρούνται επαρκείς χρήστες της ξένης γλώσσας (γλώσσας- στόχου) στο εν λόγω επίπεδο. Συγκεκριμένα, οι μαθητές/τριες στα επίπεδα Α1 και Α2 θα πρέπει να μπορούν: Α1 • να κατανοούν και να παράγουν προτάσεις με απλή δομή, με λέξεις ευρείας χρήσης και τυποποιημένες εκφράσεις, προκειμένου να ανταποκριθούν σε ανάγκες της καθημερινής ζωής. • να χαιρετούν, να συστήνονται, να δίνουν ή να ζητούν πληροφορίες για τον εαυτό τους, να ευχαριστούν, να κατονομάζουν αντικείμενα, να περιγράφουν έναν χώρο, ένα άτομο κ.τλ. • να κάνουν διάλογο (σε προσομοίωση) με ομιλητές που γνωρίζουν καλά τη γλώσσα-στόχο, προκειμένου να εξυπηρετήσουν βασικές ανάγκες επικοινωνίας υπό την προϋπόθεση ότι ο συνομιλητής τους μιλάει αργά και είναι πρόθυμος να βοηθήσει την επικοινωνία. • να αποδίδουν στην ελληνική ένα μήνυμα διατυπωμένο στην ξένη γλώσσα. Α2 • να κατανοούν και να παράγουν σύντομα και πολύ απλά δομημένα κείμενα που αφορούν σε δραστηριότητες καθημερινής ρουτίνας.
117 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
• να περιγράφουν καθημερινές τους συνήθειες ή να δίνουν πληροφορίες για στοιχεία του άμεσου περιβάλλοντός τους (π.χ. για τον χώρο διαβίωσης ή εργασίας τους, για την οικογένειά τους κ.τλ.). • να επικοινωνούν (σε προσομοίωση) με ομιλητές που γνωρίζουν καλά τη γλώσσα-στόχο, ανταλλάσσοντας πληροφορίες για ζητήματα προσωπικού ενδιαφέροντος ή άμεσης ανάγκης. • να διατυπώνουν γραπτά ή προφορικά μια πληροφορία στην ξένη γλώσσα με ερέθισμα φράση ή σύντομο κείμενο στην ελληνική. ΙΙ. Αναλυτικοί δείκτες επικοινωνιακής επάρκειας Αναλυτικά, η επικοινωνιακή γλωσσική επάρκεια των μαθητών/τριών, κατά επίπεδο γλωσσομάθειας και κατά επικοινωνιακή δραστηριότητα σύμφωνα με την οποία οργανώνονται επιμέρους επικοινωνιακές δράσεις/ενέργειες, ορίζεται από το ΕΠΣ-ΞΓ ως εξής: Επίπεδο Α1 Κατανόηση γραπτού λόγου Οι μαθητές/τριες θα πρέπει να είναι σε θέση: 1. να κατανοούν το βασικό νόημα ενός σύντομου, πολύ απλά δομημένου πληροφοριακού ή περιγραφικού κειμένου αυθεντικού λόγου (π.χ. ανακοίνωσης, πινακίδας, καταλόγου, αφίσας, σημειώματος, ηλεκτρονικού μηνύματος), το οποίο αναφέρεται σε τυπικές καταστάσεις ή ανάγκες της καθημερινής ζωής. 2. να εντοπίζουν συγκεκριμένες πληροφορίες σε καταλόγους ή σύντομα κείμενα με περιορισμένο λεξιλόγιο, απλές γραμματικές δομές και τυποποιημένα προτασιακά σχήματα. 3. να απαντούν στα ελληνικά σε ερωτήσεις που αφορούν συγκεκριμένα νοήματα του ξενόγλωσσου κειμένου. 4. να κατανοούν απλές προτάσεις οδηγιών (π.χ. κατασκευής αντικειμένου) ή κατευθύνσεων (π.χ. μετάβασης από σημείο Χ σε σημείο Υ με τα πόδια ή με μέσο μεταφοράς) και απλά διατυπωμένα σχόλια σχετικά με φωτογραφίες που βρίσκει κανείς σε ιστότοπους μέσων κοινωνικής δικτύωσης (π.χ. Facebook), σε αποθετήρια φωτογραφιών (π.χ. Picasa) κ.τλ. 5. να αναγνωρίζουν οικεία ονόματα (χωρών, πόλεων, γνωστών προσώπων κ.τλ.) και απλούς προσδιορισμούς χρόνου (επιρρήματα όπως «χθες», «σήμερα», «αύριο», 118 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
ημερομηνίες, ώρες), τόπου (τοποθεσίες, διευθύνσεις) και ποσότητας (αριθμούς, τιμές). 6. να κατανοούν τη σημασία κοινών διεθνοποιημένων λέξεων ή φράσεων που σχετίζονται με τις νέες τεχνολογίες (π.χ. email, fax, tv, service κ.τλ.). 7. να αναγνωρίζουν το περιβάλλον χρήσης απλών, τυποποιημένων εκφράσεων (π.χ. ότι την πινακίδα «Μην πατάτε το γρασίδι» τη βρίσκουμε σε κάποιο πάρκο). 8. να κατανοούν τη σημασία μεμονωμένων λέξεων ή φράσεων με βάση τα άμεσα γλωσσικά συμφραζόμενα ή το ευρύτερο επικοινωνιακό περιβάλλον όπου αυτές εμφανίζονται. 9. να έχουν επίγνωση απλών γλωσσικών στοιχείων σύνδεσης των προτάσεων (παρατακτικών συνδέσμων, επιρρημάτων). 10. να συλλέγουν πληροφορίες σχετικά με πρόσωπα, αντικείμενα, τοποθεσίες από ένα ή περισσότερα σύντομα πληροφοριακά κείμενα και να τις ταξινομούν. Παραγωγή γραπτού λόγου και γραπτή διάδραση Οι μαθητές/τριες θα πρέπει να είναι σε θέση: 1. να συντάσσουν απλές προτάσεις δίνοντας πληροφορίες για τον εαυτό τους, την οικογένεια, τους φίλους ή γνωστούς ή το άμεσο περιβάλλον τους (π.χ. πού μένουν, με τι ασχολούνται κ.τλ.) ή να συμπληρώνουν (π.χ. σε έντυπο ξενοδοχείου, σε έντυπο για αγορά κάποιου προϊόντος, σε αίτηση κ.τλ.) προσωπικά τους στοιχεία, όπως όνομα, ηλικία, ημερομηνία γέννησης, εθνικότητα, διεύθυνση. 2. να συντάσσουν σύντομα κείμενα διαπροσωπικής επικοινωνίας (π.χ. φιλική επιστολή, κάρτα, σημείωμα, ηλεκτρονικό μήνυμα), στέλνοντας χαιρετισμούς (π.χ. από διακοπές), δίνοντας ή ζητώντας πληροφορίες. 3. να περιγράφουν καθημερινές τους συνήθειες, οικείους τους ανθρώπους ή και άγνωστα πρόσωπα (υπαρκτά ή φανταστικά), χρησιμοποιώντας περιορισμένο εύρος λέξεων και γραμματικών δομών 4. να διατυπώνουν σύντομα σχόλια σε φωτογραφίες π.χ. σε ιστότοπους μέσων κοινωνικής δικτύωσης. 5. να συμπληρώνουν τις απαντήσεις τους σε ένα ερωτηματολόγιο, κουίζ ή σταυρόλεξο ή να ολοκληρώνουν ένα σύντομο πληροφοριακό κείμενο (π.χ. κείμενο φυλλαδίου οδηγιών), μέρος του οποίου τους δίνεται.
119 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
6. να διατυπώνουν μια στοιχειώδη αφήγηση, συνδέοντας τις φράσεις και προτάσεις με απλούς συνδέσμους ή επιρρήματα (π.χ. «και», «αλλά», «ή», «μετά» κ.τλ.). 7. να συνθέτουν ένα σύντομο κείμενο τυπικής διαπροσωπικής επικοινωνίας (π.χ. επιστολή, κάρτα, σημείωμα, ηλεκτρονικό μήνυμα), αξιοποιώντας πληροφορίες από διαφορετικές πηγές (κείμενα, οπτικό υλικό κ.τλ.). Γραπτή διαμεσολάβηση Οι μαθητές/τριες θα πρέπει να είναι σε θέση: 1. να αποδίδουν σε ένα ξενόγλωσσο κείμενο λέξεις ή φράσεις που ακούν ή διαβάζουν σε ένα ελληνόγλωσσο κείμενο (διαφορετικού τύπου από το ξενόγλωσσο). 2. να απαντούν γραπτά στην ξένη γλώσσα σε ερωτήματα σχετικά με πληροφορίες που περιλαμβάνει γραπτό ή προφορικό ελληνόγλωσσο κείμενο (π.χ. συνέντευξη γνωστού προσώπου). 3. να χρησιμοποιούν στοιχεία από ένα ελληνόγλωσσο κείμενο που ακούν ή διαβάζουν (ανακοίνωση αναχωρήσεων-αφίξεων, πινακίδα, αφίσα, χάρτη κ.τλ.) σε ένα σημείωμα, ηλεκτρονικό μήνυμα κ.τλ. στην ξένη γλώσσα. 4. να απαντούν σε απλά ερωτήματα στην ξένη γλώσσα χρησιμοποιώντας τυποποιημένες εκφράσεις και απλό λεξιλόγιο σχετικά με γραπτές ή προφορικές οδηγίες διατυπωμένες στα ελληνικά. Κατανόηση προφορικού λόγου Οι μαθητές/τριες θα πρέπει να είναι σε θέση: 1. να απαντούν σε απλά ερωτήματα στην ξένη γλώσσα (ή σε πιο σύνθετα ερωτήματα στην ελληνική) σχετικά με το περιεχόμενο σύντομης εκφοράς λόγου (καθαρά ηχογραφημένης), όπως ερωταποκρίσεων, οδηγιών (π.χ. δασκάλου, γυμναστή, γιατρού κ.τλ.), είδησης κ.τλ. 2. να κατανοούν πολύ βασικές, τυποποιημένες εκφράσεις που χρησιμοποιούνται σε καθημερινές συνθήκες διαπροσωπικής επικοινωνίας (π.χ. χαιρετισμούς, συστάσεις κ.τλ.). 3. να κατανοούν συγκεκριμένες πληροφορίες (π.χ. προσωπικά στοιχεία του ομιλητή ή πληροφορίες σχετικές με το άμεσο οικογενειακό περιβάλλον του), διατυπωμένες με απλό λεξιλόγιο και τυποποιημένες προτασιακές δομές. 120 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
4. να ακούν και να τοποθετούν στη σωστή σειρά απλές προτάσεις οδηγιών (π.χ. κατασκευής αντικειμένου) ή κατευθύνσεων (π.χ. μετάβασης από σημείο Χ σε σημείο Υ με τα πόδια ή με μέσο μεταφοράς). 5. να κατανοούν τη σημασία κοινών διεθνοποιημένων λέξεων ή φράσεων που σχετίζονται με τις νέες τεχνολογίες (π.χ. e-mail, fax, tv, service κ.τλ.). 6. να αναγνωρίζουν οικεία ονόματα που ακούν και απλούς προσδιορισμούς χρόνου, τόπου και ποσότητας, όταν συλλαβίζονται, και να γράφουν σωστά ένα μήνυμα που υπαγορεύεται. 7. να ταξινομούν γενικές ή ειδικές πληροφορίες που περιέχονται σε ένα ή περισσότερα απλά κείμενα (π.χ. να κατηγοριοποιούν τα φρούτα και τα ζώα, τα χαρακτηριστικά ενός αγοριού και ενός κοριτσιού κ.τλ.). Παραγωγή προφορικού λόγου και προφορική διάδραση Οι μαθητές/τριες θα πρέπει να είναι σε θέση: 1. να απαντούν και να θέτουν απλές ερωτήσεις που αφορούν σε άμεσες ανάγκες καθημερινής επικοινωνίας (π.χ. να δίνουν ή να ζητούν προσωπικές πληροφορίες ή πληροφορίες σχετικά με το άμεσο περιβάλλον, την οικογένεια κ.τλ.). 2. να διατυπώνουν μια στοιχειώδη αφήγηση, συνδέοντας τις φράσεις και προτάσεις με απλούς συνδέσμους ή επιρρήματα (π.χ. «και», «αλλά», «ή», «μετά» κ.τλ.). 3. να χειρίζονται σωστά την έννοια του χρόνου (χρονικά επιρρήματα, ημερομηνίες, ώρες κ.τλ.), του τόπου και της ποσότητας (αριθμούς, τιμές). 4. να περιγράφουν άτομα, αντικείμενα, τοποθεσίες, χρησιμοποιώντας λεξιλόγιο υψηλής συχνότητας και πολύ απλά προτασιακά σχήματα. 5. να χρησιμοποιούν καθημερινές εκφράσεις ευγενικού χαιρετισμού, συστάσεων και αποχαιρετισμού («γεια σας, πώς είστε, τι κάνετε σήμερα», «παρακαλώ, μπορείς μήπως…», «ευχαριστώ για όλα», «λυπάμαι πολύ» κ.τλ.). 6. να ζητούν βοήθεια ή διευκρινίσεις σε συγκεκριμένες, καθημερινές περιστάσεις επικοινωνίας, χρησιμοποιώντας πολύ απλές προτάσεις. 7. να ικανοποιούν πολύ βασικές ανάγκες καθημερινής επικοινωνίας, με την προϋπόθεση ότι ο συνομιλητήςτους είναι πρόθυμος να επαναλάβει ή να αναδιατυπώσει τις φράσεις του, μιλώντας αργά και καθαρά προκειμένου να βοηθήσει την επικοινωνία. 121 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Προφορική διαμεσολάβηση Οι μαθητές/τριες θα πρέπει να είναι σε θέση: 1. να αποδίδουν σε ένα ξενόγλωσσο κείμενο λέξεις ή φράσεις που ακούν σε διάλογο ή μονόλογο στα ελληνικά. 2. με αφορμή γραπτό ή προφορικό κείμενο στην ελληνική (π.χ. αγγελία, διαφήμιση), να απαντούν στην ξένη γλώσσα σε προφορικό ερώτημα που αφορά στη μορφή του κειμένου, το περιβάλλον στο οποίο θα το συναντούσε κανείς κ.τλ. 3. να χρησιμοποιούν στοιχεία από ένα ελληνόγλωσσο κείμενο που ακούν ή διαβάζουν (ανακοίνωση αναχωρήσεων-αφίξεων, πινακίδα, αφίσα, χάρτη κ.τλ.) σε ένα ξενόγλωσσο μήνυμα. 4. με αφορμή γραπτές ή προφορικές οδηγίες διατυπωμένες στα ελληνικά, να απαντούν σε απλά ερωτήματα στην ξένη γλώσσα χρησιμοποιώντας τυποποιημένες εκφράσεις και απλό λεξιλόγιο. Επίπεδο Α2 Κατανόηση γραπτού λόγου Οι μαθητές/τριες θα πρέπει να είναι σε θέση: 1. να κατανοούν το περιεχόμενο ενός σύντομου κειμένου (π.χ. επιστολής, ανακοίνωσης, αγγελίας, καταλόγου, προσωπικού ιστολογίου κ.τλ.), το οποίο αναφέρεται σε συνθήκες καθημερινής ρουτίνας και μπορεί να συνοδεύεται από εικόνες, πίνακες ή απλά διαγράμματα. 2. να εντοπίζουν σε σύντομο πληροφοριακό κείμενο (π.χ. διαφήμιση, ωρολόγιο πρόγραμμα, πίνακα δρομολογίων, κανονισμό ασφαλείας κ.τλ.) εύκολα προβλέψιμες πληροφορίες (πιθανά σε μορφή λίστας) σχετικές με τον τόπο, τον χρόνο ή την ποσότητα. 3. να αναγνωρίζουν το είδος ενός κειμένου (ότι πρόκειται π.χ. για προσωπική επιστολή, σημείωμα, ωρολόγιο πρόγραμμα, αγγελία, ανακοίνωση σε δημόσιο χώρο κ.τλ.) και στοιχεία του περιβάλλοντος χρήσης του, τον συντάκτη, τον αποδέκτη, τον επικοινωνιακό σκοπό που εξυπηρετεί. 4. να συνάγουν τη στάση του συντάκτη ενός κειμένου ερμηνεύοντας απλά γλωσσικά στοιχεία, π.χ. τη χρήση των επιθέτων. 5. να έχουν βασική επίγνωση του αντωνυμικού συστήματος και του κλιτικού παραδείγματος πολύ συχνών ρημάτων. 122 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
6. να έχουν βασική επίγνωση των μορφολογικών χαρακτηριστικών ουσιαστικών και επιθέτων (γένος, πτώση, αριθμός) και της γραμματικής συμφωνίας σε απλές ονοματικές φράσεις. 7. να κατανοούν τη συνοπτική περιγραφή ενός βίντεο που εμφανίζεται στο διαδίκτυο (π.χ. στο youtube). 8. να κατανοούν το αποτέλεσμα μιας απλής αναζήτησης σε μηχανή αναζήτησης στο διαδίκτυο (π.χ. google). Παραγωγή γραπτού λόγου και γραπτή διάδραση Οι μαθητές/τριες θα πρέπει να είναι σε θέση: 1. να δίνουν ή να ζητούν πληροφορίες σχετικά με οικείο θέμα (π.χ. το περιεχόμενο ενός βιβλίου, μιας ταινίας κ.τλ.) και να διατυπώνουν ή να ζητούν γνώμη (π.χ. είναι ένα ενδιαφέρον βιβλίο/μια πολύ αστεία ταινία), χωρίς ωστόσο αναλυτική εξήγηση ή αιτιολόγηση. 2. να παρουσιάζουν σε ορισμένη επικοινωνιακή περίσταση και σε ορισμένους αποδέκτες ιδέες ή προτάσεις για την επίλυση ενός απλού προβλήματος ή να εκφράζουν παράπονα ή δυσαρέσκεια σχετικά με την ύπαρξη συγκεκριμένου προβλήματος. 3. να γράφουν σύντομα βιογραφικά σημειώματα ή σύντομες βιογραφίες για πραγματικά ή φανταστικά πρόσωπα. 4. να αφηγούνται μια σύντομη ιστορία χρησιμοποιώντας σωστά τους χρόνους των ρημάτων για να δηλώσουν τη χρονική ακολουθία των γεγονότων. 5. να αποδίδουν το γενικό νόημα ενός ή περισσοτέρων σύντομων κειμένων ή να συνοψίζουν τα κύρια σημεία του/τους, αξιοποιώντας γλωσσικά στοιχεία (λεξικά και γραμματικά) που χρησιμοποιούνται σε αυτό/αυτά. Γραπτή διαμεσολάβηση Οι μαθητές/τριες θα πρέπει να είναι σε θέση: 1. να απαντούν στην ξένη γλώσσα σε ερωτήματα που αφορούν στο γενικό ή τα επιμέρους νοήματα ενός απλού γραπτού κειμένου στα ελληνικά. 2. να διαβάζουν ένα απλό κείμενο στα ελληνικά και να απαντούν γραπτά στην ξένη γλώσσα σε ερωτήματα σχετικά με το επικοινωνιακό του περιβάλλον (προέλευση, σκοπό, αποδέκτη κ.τλ.).
123 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
3. να χρησιμοποιούν κείμενα στα ελληνικά (π.χ. κατάλογο εστιατορίου, αφίσα βιβλίου κ.τλ.) που αφορούν σε περιστάσεις της καθημερινής ζωής για να παραγάγουν ένα αντίστοιχο γραπτό κείμενο στην ξένη γλώσσα με ανάλογες πληροφορίες. 4. να δίνουν στην ξένη γλώσσα περιφραστικούς ορισμούς εννοιών που τους δίνονται στα ελληνικά. Κατανόηση προφορικού λόγου Οι μαθητές/τριες θα πρέπει να είναι σε θέση: 1. να κατανοούν το βασικό νόημα σύντομων πληροφοριακών ή περιγραφικών κειμένων (αγγελιών, ανακοινώσεων, καθαρά ηχογραφημένων τηλεφωνικών μηνυμάτων) που αφορούν σε δραστηριότητες καθημερινής ρουτίνας, σε ζητήματα προσωπικά ή οικογενειακά, ή σε πλευρές του άμεσου περιβάλλοντος του ομιλητή (π.χ. τοπική γεωγραφία, αγορές, χόμπι κ.τλ.). 2. να κατανοούν τα βασικά σημεία αποσπασμάτων από τηλεοπτικά ή ραδιοφωνικά προγράμματα σχετικά με θέματα της επικαιρότητας, εφόσον ο λόγος είναι απλός και καθαρός. 3. να απαντούν σε απλά ερωτήματα σχετικά με το μήνυμα που διατυπώνει ένα βίντεο (που παρακολουθούν π.χ. στο διαδίκτυο). 4. να κατανοούν απλές οδηγίες κατασκευής αντικειμένων ή οδηγίες χρήσης οικιακών συσκευών ή οδηγίες κατευθύνσεων (π.χ. πώς να πάει κανείς από το σημείο Χ στο Υ). 5. να συνάγουν τη στάση του ομιλητή βάσει απλών γλωσσικών καθώς και εξωγλωσσικών στοιχείων, όπως του επιτονισμού. 6. να αναγνωρίζουν το είδος ενός κειμένου και επιμέρους στοιχεία του περιβάλλοντος χρήσης του, τον συντάκτη, τον αποδέκτη, τον επικοινωνιακό σκοπό που εξυπηρετεί. Παραγωγή προφορικού λόγου και προφορική διάδραση Οι μαθητές/τριες θα πρέπει να είναι σε θέση: 1. να ανταλλάσσουν πληροφορίες ή απόψεις με τους συνομιλητές τους αναφορικά με δραστηριότητες καθημερινής ρουτίνας (ταξίδια, φαγητό, ψώνια, διασκέδαση, μέσα μεταφοράς, τηλεόραση, σχολείο κ.τλ.) σε σύντομες και προβλέψιμες κοινωνικές συνδιαλλαγές. 124 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
2. να περιγράφουν καθημερινές τους συνήθειες (πού συχνάζουν, τι αγοράζουν στο σούπερ μάρκετ κ.τλ.), οικείους ανθρώπους ή και άγνωστα πρόσωπα (υπαρκτά ή φανταστικά), χρησιμοποιώντας περιορισμένο ρεπερτόριο λέξεων και γραμματικών δομών. 3. να προτείνουν στον/στους συνομιλητή/ές τους λύσεις σχετικά με κάποιο πολύ απλό πρόβλημα, ακόμα και αν δεν έχουν την ευχέρεια να εμπλακούν σε εκτενή συζήτηση σχετικά με αυτές. 4. να αποδίδουν το γενικό νόημα ενός ή περισσοτέρων κειμένων αξιοποιώντας τα λεξικογραμματικά στοιχεία που χρησιμοποιούνται σε αυτό/ αυτά. Προφορική διαμεσολάβηση Οι μαθητές/τριες θα πρέπει να είναι σε θέση: 1. να απαντούν στην ξένη γλώσσα σε ερωτήματα που αφορούν στο γενικό ή τα επιμέρους νοήματα ενός απλού προφορικού κειμένου στα ελληνικά. 2. να ακούν σύντομους διαλόγους ή άλλου τύπου προφορικά κείμενα στην ελληνική και να απαντούν στην ξένη γλώσσα σε ερωτήματα που αφορούν στο επικοινωνιακό τους πλαίσιο (π.χ. ποιος είναι ο ομιλητής και ποιος ο ακροατής, ο τόπος και ο χρόνος της συνομιλίας ή ομιλίας κ.τλ.). 3. να εξηγούν στην ξένη γλώσσα ελληνικές λέξεις ή (εκ)φράσεις όπως αυτές χρησιμοποιούνται σε ελληνόγλωσσο κείμενο. 4. να δίνουν στην ξένη γλώσσα περιφραστικούς ορισμούς εννοιών που τους δίνονται στα ελληνικά.
125 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX III: THE 6th GRADE COURSE BOOK CONTENTS (In red font: Writing tasks)
Table of Contents UNIT 1: Our Multicultural Class Communication, Culture, Interaction, Information, Multiculturalism, Tradition, Similarities Crosscurricular and notions Differences Related subjects Science, Computer Science, Mathematics, Geography, History Project A report about a European project Can read maps and reports about countries; can talk about countries and school subjects; can Self-assessment listen to pupils talking about school projects; can write reports about countries and (Can-do statements) people's everyday activities; can express habits, routines and present situations
LANGUAGE LANGUAGE LESSON SKILLS / STRATEGIES (Functions) (Structures/Lexis) Present Simple Reading: Ss' reports about their country Adverbs of Reading for gist; Reading for specific information Describing habits and frequency Meeting the Speaking: asking and answering about routines; 1 Words related to Newcomers nationalities and habits Giving personal nationalities, Writing: Filling-in a diagram about what pupils do information countries, in schools in Greece and in Great Britain landforms/geography Listening to a conversation at the school lab; Present Continuous Describing present At the school Listening for gist and specific information Words related to 2 situations; lab Speaking: A Game: Charades school subjects, Exchanging ideas Writing: Mr Badluck's day activities, facilities Simple Present Tense Talking /writing about A Geography Reading: a report Vocabulary about 3 a report; Project Writing a report and editing a text countries, Paragraphing nationalities, geography
UNIT 2: Going shopping Crosscurricular Organization, Categories, Decision Making, Reasoning, Information notions Mathematics, Computer Science, Internet, Poetry, Health Education, Consumer Education, Related subjects Citizenship Project An on-line order Self-assessment Can read a supermarket flyer, a canteen menu, an internet site, a receipt; can listen to (Can-do people talking in supermarkets and department stores; can talk and write about shopping statements) goods, prices and online orders 126 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
LANGUAGE LANGUAGE LESSON SKILLS / STRATEGIES (Functions) (Structures/Lexis) Reading: a supermarket flyer, a school canteen menu, an internet site Reading to locate specific information; Countable, uncountable nouns, a/an, Reading for gist some, any, how much, how many At the Listening: A dialogue at the Expressing 1 Words related to containers, units of supermarket supermarket quantity weight, size, shape, shopping goods Speaking: Role play of etc. shopkeepers/assistants and customers Writing: What to buy at the school canteen Listening: a dialogue in a department store; Verbs of senses: it looks, it feels, it Listening for specific information Describing tastes etc. Reading: a Receipt senses a little/little, a few/few
At the mall 2 Speaking: Class-work: The fashion Expressing Order of adjectives show; The school bazaar quantity Words related to colours, material, Writing: a poem describing a size etc. favourite thing using the senses Ordering and Reading: an internet site buying goods
E-shopping Words related to toys, goods etc. 3 Writing: a toy order Filling an online order
UNIT 3: Imaginary creatures Crosscurricular Similarities and Differences, Self-Awareness, Information, Communication, Culture notions Related subjects Mythology, Literature, Theatre Education Project Act out a scene from Midsummer Night's Dream Self-assessment Can read an acrostic poem, a literature extract, reports about creatures and monsters; can (Can-do talk and write about people's appearance and personality; can listen to a ghost story; can use statements) adjectives and adverbs LANGUAGE LANGUAGE LESSON SKILLS / STRATEGIES (Functions) (Structures/Lexis) Reading: An acrostic poem, a literature extract. Comparisons of adjectives Reading about monsters and (comparative, superlative), irregular creatures Describing and adjectives, opposites, opposites with Old and Reading for gist, comparing people and suffixes Modern understanding text cohesion things 1 Words related to fairy tales, heroes,
Creatures and completing gaps Describing people's monsters Speaking: Talking about personality Adjectives describing characteristics, fairy-tale heroes personality and skills What am I like? Talking about people's appearance
127 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
and personality Writing: Filling-in ID cards Writing about the appearance of monsters / creatures and comparing them Listening: a ghost story in play form Comparisons of adjectives (as/as, not Do you Describing and Listening for gist so as) believe in comparing people and 2 Reading: The Monster Quiz Comparison of adverbs
ghosts? things Speaking: A Game: Do it Words describing a place and a house. our Way Reading: a literature extract Shakespeare's play: Adapting, preparing Classroom Midsummer Night's Dream 3 and acting out a scene Words related to theatre performance theatre Project: Perform a Scene from a play from "Midsummer Night's Dream"
UNIT 4: The history of the aeroplane Crosscurricular Time and Place, Information, Interaction, Communication, Culture, Progress, Change notions Science, Mythology, History, Environmental Education, Career Guidance, Poetry, Arts and Related subjects Craft Project Poems, paintings, pictures and information about the fall of Icarus Self-assessment Can read emails and attached files, a poem & biographies of inventors; can talk and write (Can-do about paintings, biographies and poems; can talk about events in the past; can use linking statements) words LANGUAGE LANGUAGE LESSON SKILLS / STRATEGIES (Functions) (Structures/Lexis) Listening: the myth of Daedalus and Icarus Reading: e-mail messages and attached files, museum worksheets Past simple, Regular and Irregular A Day at the Reading for specific information / Talking about verbs (affirmative, interrogative, 1
Museum for gist events in the past negative) Speaking: Role-play: Talking Words related to planes and flights about Icarus and the Wright Brothers Mediation: Από τη Γη στη Σελήνη Listening: a dialogue about an Past Continuous (talking about air-pocket interrupted past states, narrating past An air- Listening for gist, for specific Narrating past events) 2
pocket information events. Linking words: when, as, after that, Reading: Information about while, then, later, first, second, finally types of planes Words related to planes and forces of 128 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Information about Igor Sikorsky flight Speaking: Talking about the missing luggage Writing: a biography Reading: a poem about the fall Describing The Fall of of Icarus 3 paintings and Revision of tenses taught
Icarus Speaking: about a painting pictures Writing: a poem
UNIT 5: Travelling through time Crosscurricular Communication, Culture, Information, Multiculturalism, Internet, Tradition, Similarities and notions Differences Related subjects Music, History, Local History, Road Safety Project A Museum Leaflet Self-assessment Can read a diary, a museum leaflet, lyrics of songs; can talk about the past/habits in the (Can-do past/memories; can ask for/give information or directions; can talk about transportation; can statements) listen to a song, a museum guide; can write an informal letter LANGUAGE LANGUAGE LESSON SKILLS / STRATEGIES (Functions) (Structures/Lexis) Reading: a questionnaire, diaries, lyrics of songs, a museum leaflet, street maps, transportation rules and signs Used to Reading for specific information Expressing Present
Diaries Words related to clothes and hair 1 Speaking: Talking about present and and Past habits styles past habits Listening to the song: "Yesterday" Writing: use a photo to write about the past Listening: a museum-recorded message and a museum guide Listening for specific information Asking for directions Expressions and words related Listening for gist and information; to asking for and giving Speaking: Visiting the museum: Giving directions and information and directions Trans- giving information and street information; 2 Words related to means of portation directions Familiarization with the transport Reading: Recognizing signs and layout of informal Set phrases and expressions for rules on trains & buses letters; letter writing Writing: a list of rules and signs for Paragraphing trains and buses Writing an informal letter The Talking /writing about Reading: a museum leaflet Museum the Transport Museum Words related to museum visits 3 Project: A Museum Leaflet
Leaflet Leaflet
UNIT 6: Me, myself and my future job Crosscurricular Self-Awareness, Personal Development, Information, Communication, Interaction, Change, 129 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
notions Progress, Reasoning Related subjects Career Guidance, Citizenship Project A job profile Can read job profiles, job advertisements, safety rules at work, a job interview questionnaire, Self-assessment can talk about skills/abilities, interests, personal traits, future careers and a job interview; can (Can-do express ability, possibility, permission, advice, predictions, promises, warnings, requests, statements) offers; can listen to professionals at work, can write new year resolutions, safety rules and job profiles LANGUAGE LESSON SKILLS / STRATEGIES LANGUAGE (Functions) (Structures/Lexis) Reading a self esteem quiz, job advertisements, job profiles; Modal verbs: can, may, Reading for specific Talking should information Expressing ability, permission, about jobs Words related to personal 1 Speaking: A telephone possibility & careers traits, skills/abilities, school dialogue: Asking for and subjects giving job information; Talking about pupils' interests, skills/abilities, future jobs Listening: A dialogue: What do they do? Guessing people's jobs; Listening for specific Giving advice, expressing Future tense: will, going to What do they information prediction, warning, promise, Words related to 2 do? Speaking: Talking about offer, decision on the spot, skills/abilities, school pupils' interests, skills/abilities, intention subjects, safety rules goals Talking about safety rules Reading: Safety rules at work Reading: a job questionnaire What the Speaking: Talking about Words related to jobs, skills, 3 future holds Expressing prediction future jobs abilities etc.
for you Project: A job profile
UNIT 7: Share your experiences Crosscurricular Sports, Olympic Spirit, Information, Communication, Progress, Team Spirit, Differences & notions Similarities Related subjects Physical Education, Citizenship, Environmental Education, Theatre Education Project A poster about your personal record Can read a questionnaire, newspaper extracts and a poster; can talk about swimming styles, Self-assessment theatre shows, world and Olympic record and past experience connected to the present; can (Can-do listen to a radio programme; can write a report about a Paralympics Champion, a page of the statements) class book of records and about personal records LANGUAGE SKILLS / STRATEGIES LANGUAGE (Functions) LESSON (Structures/Lexis)
130 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Reading: A questionnaire: Share your Present Perfect Simple experiences Describing past Present Perfect vs. Past Newspaper reports: "Famous record holders" experiences; Simple Famous Reading for specific information Comparing general Words related to sport 1 Record Speaking: Talking about swimming styles; experiences and events events Holders The hot air balloon competition: Talk about that happened at a Words related to what you have done in your life so far; Let's specific time performances and play: Have you ever…? theatre Listening: A radio programme: "Top stories" Listening for gist / Listening for details Speaking: Interview with a famous Paralympics champion Present Perfect Top Act out a dialogue: What have you been Continuous 2 Stories on doing? Expressing duration The use of for and since
the Radio Writing a page for the class book of records; Words related to world Writing a report about a champion to appear records in the local newspaper Mediation: a newspaper extract about K. Fykas Reading: a poster: a great opportunity for students Words related to Going for Expressing experience 3 Speaking: Talking about accomplishments personal bests and the Gold and achievement and personal bests achievements Project: A poster about your personal record
UNIT 8: Blow your own trumpet Crosscurricular Information, Communication, Culture, Personal Safety, Stereotypes, Conflict notions Related subjects Music, Consumer Education , Mathematics, Citizenship Project An advice letter Can read a music festival leaflet, a magazine article about pocket money; can talk about musical instruments, festivals, money, personal safety, how to express something likely to Self-assessment happen now or in the future, how to express something impossible or unlikely to happen now (Can-do or in future, how to give advice; can listen to different musical instruments, a song about statements) money, people talking about what they would spend their money on; can write an e-mail about a museum of musical instruments and a letter to a magazine advice page LANGUAGE LANGUAGE LESSON SKILLS / STRATEGIES (Functions) (Structures/Lexis) Reading a leaflet about Music Education Series; Reading a leaflet about festival activities; Talking about events Harmony, Reading for gist / for that depend on a Type1 Conditional sentences 1 Melody and specific information condition; Words related to music, concerts,
Rhythm Speaking: Talking about Expressing possibility/ festivals, events the story of the Little Red probability Riding Hood; Persuading a friend to choose a festival 131 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Writing: an email: the museum of folk instruments Listening: A song: A rich man's world Listening to a dialogue on how you would spend your money; Listening for specific information Feel the Reading: A magazine Expressing imaginary Type 2 conditional sentences 2 Rhythm article about pocket money situations Words related to money and pester power Speaking: Talking about what you would spend your money on Writing: A class survey: how Ss spend their pocket money Reading: a letter from a problem page magazine Asking for and giving Words and set phrases related to letter The Problem 3 Speaking: talking about advice writing: greeting, opening and closing Page children's problems Paragraphing paragraphs, singing off Project: An advice letter
UNIT 9: Earth Day everyday Crosscurricular Information, Communication, Culture, Time and Place notions Related subjects Environmental Education, Science, Literature, Art, Geography, Biology Project Acting: The Awful 5 Can read a questionnaire, an earth day story and a play about pollutants; can talk about Self-assessment pollution, endangered species and protection of the environment; can understand activities (Can-do that happened before another action in the past; can listen to a presentation about statements) endangered species; can write e-mails about environmental problems and a poster; can express the result of an action or a situation LANGUAGE LANGUAGE LESSON SKILLS / STRATEGIES (Functions) (Structures/Lexis) Reading: A story: An Earth Day Story Reading for gist/ reading for specific information; making inferences Past Perfect Simple An Earth Day Speaking: Asking about events; Sequencing past 1 Words related to Story Giving advice about the protection of the actions environment environment Writing: write an e-mail about a day trip to the beach Listening: a presentation at an Save the Expressing result Clauses of Reason environmental centre 2 Endangered and deduction; Clauses of Result Listening for gist / for Specific Information.
Species Expressing reason Words related to animals Speaking: Information gap: Talking about 132 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
endangered animals Writing: e-mails about an Environmental centre and about endangered animals Making a poster about the environment Reading: A part of a play: "The Awful Words related to pollution
3 The Awful 5 Five" Improvising Words related to setting up Project: Acting: The Awful Five part of a play
UNIT 10: Time for fun Crosscurricular Culture, Communication, Self-Awareness, Information, Organisation notions Related subjects Art and Literature Project A Film Review Can read a questionnaire, an article about James Bond, signs and notices, film reviews; can Self-assessment talk about films and books; can listen to dialogues about films and books; can write an e-mail (Can-do about a book, a poster, signs and notices and a film review; can express suggestions and can statements) emphasize the action rather than the doer LANGUAGE LESSON SKILLS / STRATEGIES LANGUAGE (Functions) (Structures/Lexis) Reading: A questionnaire; An article about James Bond; Reading signs and notices; The Reading for gist; Reading for specific Simple Present Passive Different 1 information Emphasizing actions Words related to films and Faces of a Speaking about films and books books
Super Spy Writing an e-mail about a book Making a poster Writing signs and notices Listening: Listening to a dialogue Expressions of preference about going to the cinema Describing films / books; ..ing/ed Adjectives Listening for specific information The Film Talking about one's feelings; adjectives to describe films 2 Speaking: Making /responding to
Festival Expressing suggestions; and books suggestions about going to the cinema responding to suggestions adjectives to describe Mediation: an e-mail: information feelings about a book A Film Reading: an outline of a film review Words related to writing a 3 Describing a film
Review Project: A Film Review film review
Appendix I It's your choice!
Appendix II Resource materials
Appendix III Grammar
Appendix IV Irregular verbs
Appendix V Vocabulary list
Appendix VI Maps
133 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX IV: LETTER TO THE PARENTS (Greek version)
Αγαπητοί γονείς, Καλή και δημιουργική σχολική χρονιά σε όλους!!!!! Με την παρούσα επιστολή ζητώ την συγκατάθεση σας για την συμμετοχή του παιδιού σας στο πρόγραμμα παρέμβασης διαφοροποιημένης διδασκαλίας της γραπτής έκφρασης στο μάθημα των Αγγλικών που θα πραγματοποιηθεί τους επόμενους τρεις μήνες στα πλαίσια της εκπόνησης της Διπλωματικής μου εργασίας στο Ελληνικό Ανοικτό Πανεπιστήμιο και το Μεταπτυχιακό Πρόγραμμα «Μεταπτυχιακή Ειδίκευση Καθηγητών Αγγλικής Γλώσσας». Τα παιδιά θα δουλέψουν με τη μέθοδο project με τη βοήθεια της εκπαιδευτικής τεχνολογίας με στόχο να βελτιώσουν τις ικανότητές τους κυρίως στο γραπτό λόγο, και να αποκτήσουν καλύτερη αντίληψη των δυνατών τους σημείων, αλλά και των αδυναμιών τους ώστε αυτές να βελτιωθούν, αναπτύσοντας στρατηγικές και δεξιότητες απαραίτητες για την παραγωγή ολοκληρωμένων κειμένων. Τα εργαλεία τεχνολογίας που θα χρησιμοποιηθούν (Google Docs ανδ blogs) θα κάνουν την εκπαιδευτική διαδικασία αποδοτικότερη καθώς τα παιδιά θα δουλέψουν σε ένα ευχάριστο και οικείο σε αυτά περιβάλλον, μια και η τεχνολογία είναι πλέον στις ζωές όλων μας, αποκτώντας παράλληλα πρόσβαση σε νέες πηγές γνώσης και αναπτύσσοντας συνεργατικότητα και καλές διαπροσωπικές σχέσεις. Τα προσωπικά δεδομένα των παιδιών θα είναι απόλυτα ασφαλή καθώς ΔΕ θα χρησιμοποιηθούν πουθενά πρόσωπα, ονόματα, διευθύνσεις, τηλέφωνα κλπ. Τα μαθήματα θα διαμορφωθούν με βάση το αναλυτικό πρόγραμμα του Υπουργείου Παιδείας για τη διδασκαλία των ξένων γλωσσών, σχετικός σύνδεσμος υπάρχει παρακάτω, τα θέματα του βιβλίου των Αγγλικών για τη Στ΄τάξη και φυσικά τα ενδιαφέροντα και τις ανάγκες των συγκεκριμένων μαθητών. Για το λόγο αυτό, θα προηγηθούν σύντομες συνεντεύξεις με τα παιδιά οι ερωτήσεις των οποίων βρίσκονται
134 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
στις επόμενες σελίδες. Οι απαντήσεις θα καταγραφούν ανώνυμα και μόνο για τις ανάγκες διαμόρφωσης των μαθημάτων!! Θα τους ζητηθεί επίσης να συμπληρώσουν κάποια τεστ, πριν και μετά την παρέμβαση, των οποίων οι απαντήσεις θα κωδικοποιηθούν ανώνυμα ώστε να μην είναι δυνατόν να συνδεθούν με την ταυτότητα των μαθητών/τριών. Σας ευχαριστώ εκ των προτέρων για τη συνδρομή σας σε αυτή την προσπάθεια. Είμαι πάντα στη διάθεσή σας για κάθε διευκρίνιση ή παροχή πληροφοριών. Σας παρακαλώ θερμά, αφού διαβάσετε το έντυπο, να υπογράψετε την παρακάτω δήλωση συναίνεσης: Διάβασα το έντυπο και επιτρέπω τη συμμετοχή του παιδιού μου, ______, μαθητή/τριας της Στ΄τάξης, στην εκπαιδευτική διαδικασία – παρέμβαση που θα ακολουθηθεί στο μάθημα των Αγγλικών όπως περιγράφεται παραπάνω. Υπογραφή γονέα ______
Με εκτίμηση, Η εκπαιδευτικός Αγγλικών του σχολείου, Ειρήνη Μανιδάκη
Ολόκληρο το ΕΠΣ – ΞΓ μπορείτε να το βρείτε στο παρακάτω link: https://www.minedu.gov.gr/publications/docs2016/%CE%A6%CE%95%CE%9A_% CE%92_2871_%CE%95%CE%A0%CE%A3_%CE%9E%CE%95%CE%9D%CE% A9%CE%9D_%CE%93%CE%9B%CE%A9%CE%A3%CE%A3%CE%A9%CE%9 D_%CE%94%CE%97%CE%9C_%CE%93%CE%A5%CE%9C%CE%9D_2016.pdf
135 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX V: LETTER TO THE PARENTS (English version)
Dear parents, Have a nice and creative school year!!!!! I am writing this letter to ask for your consent on your child’s participation in the differentiated instruction intervention regarding the teaching of the writing skill which will take place over the next three months in the context of my dissertation research for the Postgraduate programme: “The Teaching of English as a foreign/international language” (Hellenic Open University). The students will work in a Project – based learning environment integrated with ICT and Web 2.0 tools in order to improve their writing skills and gain a better understanding of their strengths and their weaknesses developing, thus, strategies and skills which are essential in the production of written speech. The Web 2.0 tools which will be used (Google Docs and blogs) will render the educational process more efficient as the students will work in a pleasant and familiar environment, since new technology is part of our lives, accessing new resources of knowledge and developing collaboration skills and interpersonal relationships. The students’ personal data will be completely secure as no names, addresses, and telephone numbers will be reported. The lessons of the intervention will be based on the Unified Curriculum for the foreign languages (EPS – XG), the course book and, of course, the needs and interests of the specific students. For this reason, semi – structured interviews with the students will be conducted. You will find the interview questions below as well as the link for the Unified Curriculum for the foreign languages (EPS – XG). Their answers will be recorded anonymously only for the needs of this research.
136 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
They will also be asked to take two tests, one before the differentiated instruction intervention and one after it, the answers to which will be coded anonymously so that they cannot be linked to the students’ identities. Thank you in advance for your support in this endeavour. I am always at your disposal for any clarification or information you might ask for. Please, sign the following consent form after reading it carefully: Consent form I have read this consent form and allow the participation of my child ______, 6th grade student of the primary school, in the learning procedure – intervention which will be followed during English classes as described above. ______Parent’s signature
Yours sincerely, Irene Manidaki English teacher
You can find the Unified Curriculum here: https://www.minedu.gov.gr/publications/docs2016/%CE%A6%CE%95%CE%9A_% CE%92_2871_%CE%95%CE%A0%CE%A3_%CE%9E%CE%95%CE%9D%CE% A9%CE%9D_%CE%93%CE%9B%CE%A9%CE%A3%CE%A3%CE%A9%CE%9 D_%CE%94%CE%97%CE%9C_%CE%93%CE%A5%CE%9C%CE%9D_2016.pdf
137 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX VI: PRE- SEMI – STRUCTURED INTERVIEW QUESTIONS (Greek version) Ερωτήσεις ημιδομημένης συνέντευξης με τους μαθητές πριν από τη διαφοροποιημένη παρέμβαση για τη βελτίωση των ικανοτήτων γραπτού λόγου και νέων εγγραμματισμών των μαθητών:
Φύλο: ______Ηλικία: ______Εθνικότητα: ______Γλώσσα που μιλούν στο ______σπίτι:
Άξονας 1: Απόψεις τών μαθητών σχετικά με το σχολείο και το γνωστικό τους επίπεδο στην ξένη γλώσσα. 1. Ποια είναι η σχέση σου με το σχολείο; 2. Ποιό μάθημα είναι το αγαπημένο σου; 3. Γιατί είναι το αγαπημένο σου; 4. Ποιό μάθημα δε σου αρέσει καθόλου; 5. Γιατί δε σου αρέσει αυτό το μάθημα; 6. Πώς νοιώθεις για το μάθημα των Αγγλικών στο σχολείο; 7. Τι σου αρέσει περισσότερο σχετικά με αυτό; 8. Τι δε θα ήθελες να γίνεται κατά τη διάρκειά του; 9. Ποια νομίζεις ότι είναι τα δυνατά σου σημεία σχετικά με τα Αγγλικά; 10. Προτιμάς να μιλάς ή να γράφεις; 11. Τι σε δυσκολεύει περισσότερο από τα δύο;
Άξονας 2: Ανάγκες και δυσκολίες των μαθητών σχετικά με το γραπτό λόγο. 1. Πώς νοιώθεις όταν χρειάζεται να γράψεις ένα κείμενο στα Αγγλικά; 2. Ποιες δυσκολίες συναντάς στο γραπτό λόγο κατά τη διάρκεια του μαθήματος; 138 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
3. Συναντάς δυσκολίες σχετικά με: Λεξιλόγιο Σύνταξη των προτάσεων. Να βρεις ιδέες. Να εκφράσεις τις ιδέες σου. Άλλο______Απόψεις των μαθητών για τις συνθετικές εργασίες και την τεχνολογία σε σχέση με το γραπτό λόγο 4. Έχεις ακούσει τον όρο project; 5. Ξέρεις τι εννοούμε όταν λέμε μέθοδος project; 6. Έχεις δουλέψει με αυτή τη μέθοδο στο μάθημα των Αγγλικών στο σχολείο τα προηγούμενα χρόνια; 7. Σου άρεσε; 8. Αν ναι, γιατί; 9. Λόγω της ομαδικής δουλειάς 10. Των ενδιαφερόντων θεμάτων 11. Λόγω της μη χρησιμοποίησης του βιβλίου 12. Λόγω της ευκαιρίας που δίνεται για χρήση Ίντερνετ και τεχνολογίας; 13. Αν όχι, γιατί; 14. Θα ήθελες φέτος να γίνεται το μάθημα με τη μέθοδο αυτή; 15. Αν ναι, γιατί; 16. Αν όχι, γιατί; 17. Αν ναι, με ποια θέματα θα σου άρεσε να ασχοληθείς; 18. Αν όχι, γιατί; 19. Ποια ειναι η σχεση σου με την τεχνολογία και τους υπολογιστές; 20. Έχεις υπολογιστή που θα μπορούσες να χρησιμοποιήσεις στο σπίτι; 21. Αν ναι, τι κάνεις με αυτόν; 22. Έχεις laptop που θα μπορούσες να χρησιμοποιήσεις στο σπίτι; 23. Αν ναι, τι κάνεις με αυτό; 24. Έχεις tablet που θα μπορούσες να χρησιμοποιήσεις στο σπίτι; 25. Αν ναι, τι κάνεις με αυτό;
139 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
26. Επικοινωνείς με τους φίλους σου χρησιμοποιώντας νέες τεχνολογίες; 27. Όταν επικοινωνείς με γραπτά μηνύματα ποια γλώσσα χρησιμοποιείς; 28. Πώς θα ένοιωθες αν σου έλεγα ότι μπορούμε να βελτιώσουμε τις ικανότητές μας στο γραπτό λόγο στα Αγγλικά χρησιμοποιώντας υπολογιστές και τεχνολογία; 29. Μπορείς να σκεφτείς τρόπους που θα μπορούσε να γίνει αυτό; 30. Γνωρίζεις τι είναι ιστολόγιο (blog); 31. Έχεις ποτέ διαβάσει κάποιο άρθρο ή κάτι άλλο σε blog; 32. Αν ναι, έχεις γράψει σχόλιο; 33. Γνωρίζεις τι είναι Έγγραφα Google; 34. Έχεις ποτέ χρησιμοποιήσει Έγγραφα Google; 35. Τι θα έλεγες να χρησιμοποιήσουμε τη μέθοδο project και με τη βοήθεια αυτών των εργαλείων να βελτιώσουμε τις τεχνικές μας στο γραπτό λόγο; 36. Έχεις να προτείνεις ιδέες σχετικά; 37. Ποια νομίζεις ότι είναι τα ταλέντα σου που μπορούν να χρησιμοποιηθούν στην τάξη στο μάθημα των Αγγλικών;
Άξονας 3: Στρατηγικές που ενεργοποιούν οι μαθητές κατά τη διάρκεια της διδασκαλίας γραπτού λόγου. 1. Ζητάς διευκρινήσεις όποτε τις χρειάζεσαι; Από ποιον; 2. Όταν συναντάς δυσκολίες με το λεξιλόγιο που χρειάζεσαι σε μια άσκηση γραπτού λόγου σε ποιον απευθύνεσαι; 3. Όταν συναντάς δυσκολίες με την έκφραση των ιδεών σου σε ποιον απευθύνεσαι; 4. Όταν συναντάς δυσκολίες με τη σύνταξη σε μια άσκηση γραπτού λόγου σε ποιον απευθύνεσαι; 5. Ζητάς από κάποιο συμμαθητή/τρια διευκρινήσεις σε περίπτωση ομαδικών εργασιών; 6. Τι γνώμη έχεις για τις γραπτές ασκήσεις του σχολικού βιβλίου που αφορούν το γραπτό λόγο; 7. Τι θα σου έδινε κίνητρο – τι θα σε βοηθούσε να γράψεις; 140 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Κάτι που σε ενδιαφέρει Ασκήσεις του βιβλίου Θέματα που επιλέγεις εσύ Θέματα που επιλέγει η δασκάλα 8. Μπορείς να περιγράψεις τις ιδανικές, κατά τη γνώμη σου, συνθήκες που θα σε βοηθούσαν κατά τη διάρκεια δραστηριοτήτων γραπτού λόγου στην τάξη; Πώς θα ήθελες να γίνεται το μάθημα; 9. Τι είδους κείμενα θα προτιμούσες να γράφεις; Για τον εαυτό σου Για τους φίλους σου Για θέματα της ηλικίας σου Για το περιβάλλον Να στέλνεις emails Να κάνεις σχόλια σε Facebook and Instagram etc Άλλο:______10. Προτιμάς να δουλεύεις ατομικά ή σε ομάδες; 11. Γιατί; 12. Προτιμάς να γράφεις παραδοσιακά ή πληκτρολογώντας στον υπολογιστή; 13. Γιατί; Γράφεις πιο γρήγορα Αυτόματος διορθωτής Είναι πιο διασκεδαστικό Κάνεις πιο ωραία γράμματα 14. Τι σε βοηθάει όταν πρέπει να γράψεις ένα κείμενο; 15. Κρατάς σημειώσεις πριν ξεκινήσεις να γράφεις ένα κείμενο; 16. Ξαναδιαβάζεις το κείμενό σου πριν το δώσεις για έλεχγο στη δασκάλα σου; 17. Έχεις να μου πεις κατι σχετικό με το γραπτό λογο που θα σε βοηθούσε στο να γίνεις καλύτερος/η;
Σε ευχαριστώ πολύ για τη συμμετοχή σου!!!!!!! 141 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX VII: PRE- SEMI – STRUCTURED INTERVIEW QUESTIONS (English version)
Gender: ______Age: ______Nationality: ______Language spoken at the ______learner’s home:
1st axis: Learners’ attitudes towards school and their cognitive level in the foreign language 1. What is your relationship with school? 2. What’s your favourite subject? 3. Why is it your favourite? 4. What is the subject you like the least? 5. Why? 6. How do you feel about English class in school? 7. What do you like the most regarding the English class? 8. Is there anything you wouldn’t like to take place in it? 9. What are your strengths regarding the English language? 10. Which is your favourite: writing in English or speak in English? 11. Which one of the above is more difficult for you?
2nd axis: Learners’ needs and difficulties regarding the writing speech. 1. How do you feel when you have to write a text in English? 2. What are your difficulties regarding the writing speech during the English class? 3. Do you have any difficulties regarding: i. Vocabulary? ii. Sentence structure? iii. Generate ideas? 142 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
iv. Express your ideas in written? v. Other difficulties: ______
Learners’ attitudes towards PBL and Web 2.0 tools in conjunction with the writing speech 1. Have you heard the word “project”? 2. Do you know what it means? 3. Have you worked with projects in English class so far? 4. Did you like it? 5. If yes, why? i. Due to the collaborative work? ii. Due to the topics? iii. Due to the fact that you didn’t have to use the course book? iv. Due to the chance you hat to use the Internet and new technology? 6. If not, why not? 7. Would you like to work with projects in English class this year? 8. If yes, why? 9. If no, why not? 10. If yes, what are the topics you would like to deal with? 11. What is your relationship with computers and new technology? 12. Have you got a computer? 13. If yes, how do you use it? 14. Have you got a laptop? 15. If yes, how do you use it? 16. Have you got a tablet? 17. If yes, how do you use it? 18. Do you communicate with your friends using new technologies? 19. What language do you use when you communicate using written text messages? 20. How would you feel if I told you that we could improve our writing skills in English using computers and technology? 21. Can you think of ways to do that? 22. Are you aware of what a blog is?
143 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
23. Have you read an article on a blog post? 24. If yes, have you commented on it? 25. Are you aware of what Google Docs is? 26. Have you ever used Google Docs? 27. Would you like to use project – based approach integrated with these two tools in order to improve our writing skills? 28. Do you have any suggestions regarding this idea? 29. Which of your talents could be used during English class? 3rd Axis: Strategies learners activate throughout the teaching/learning process of the writing speech. 1. Do you ask for clarification when you need one? 2. If yes, who do you ask for? 3. Who do you ask for help when you face vocabulary difficulties? 4. Who do you ask for help when you face difficulties with the expression of your ideas? 5. Who do you ask for help when you face difficulties with the construction of a sentence? 6. In cases of group work tasks do you ask your teammates for clarification? 7. What is your opinion of the course book writing tasks? 8. What would motivate you to write a text? Things you find interesting? The course book tasks? Topics you have chosen? Topics your teacher has chosen? 9. Could you describe the ideal class atmosphere which would help to write you during writing tasks? 10. What kind of texts would you like to write? Texts about yourself? Texts about your friends? Texts about topics related to your age? Texts about the environment? Emails?
144 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Facebook or Instagram comments? Other:______18. Would you like to work individually or in groups? 19. Why??Why not? 20. Do you prefer traditional or digital writing? 21. Why? Do you write faster this way? Due to the Auto correction? Because it is fun? You do not have to worry about your handwriting? 22. What do you think helps you to write? 23. Do you take notes before starting writing a text? 24. Do you revise your text before handing it in? 25. Is there anything else that could help you improve your writing skills?
Thank you very much your participation!!!!!!!!!!
145 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX VIII: KPG PRE- AND POST- TEST LEVEL A (A1 & A2) – MODULE 2 (WRITING) MAY 2017 https://rcel2.enl.uoa.gr/kpg/gr_A_Level.htm
146 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
147 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
148 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
149 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
150 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX IX: LESSON PLANS
Lesson plan 1
“Rule” the Internet Creating a poster
Familiarize students with project work Familiarize students with Google Documents and blogs Create posters Sensitize students about the Internet dangers and safety rules Develop students’ digital writing Use computer – based applications in the EFL classroom Teaching aims and objectives Improve students’ new literacy skills Promote process writing Render students autonomous learners Encourage group work and peer feedback Promote active learning in a collaborative environment Stimulate learners’ different talents and intelligences Integrate all skills
Skills Writing (Focus on writing skills but with an integration of the other three skills: listening, speaking, reading)
Students’ level A1 to A2 – 6th grade class of primary school
Computer – based Personal computers (school computer lab), tools/applications – Materials used Internet connection, class overhead projector, YouTube, Gmail accounts, Google Documents, Quizlet, Blogger
Time available 3 teaching hours
151 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
STAGES
Planning stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 • Familiarize students (Ss) The teacher (T) introduces the idea with PBL of project – based learning (PBL) • Prepare Ss for the topic of and presents the topic of the lesson the lesson asking questions about the Internet: • Stimulate Ss’ interest in the What is a net? topic What is the Internet? • Give Ss the chance to use What can we do with it? the foreign language to talk Do you surf the Internet regularly? about the dangers of the How many hours a day do you spend Internet and safe surfing surfing? • Promote contextualization What do you usually search for? • Encourage T – Ss ------5' Do you think that it is safe for a 12 – communication year-old child to surf the Internet? • Create expectations about What are the dangers of surfing the the topic of the lesson to Net? confirm or disconfirm Then she explains why the lesson is • Generate ideas being taught in the computer lab • Brainstorm key vocabulary instead of the classroom. • Integrate speaking and listening skills • Stimulate linguistic and intrapersonal intelligences
Task 2 • Familiarize Ss with Google a. The T explains that the lesson’s Documents and blogs aim is to teach students about safe • Give Ss the chance to Internet surfing using Google Docs explore Google Docs and the web. The question Ss have • Lessen Ss’ fear about web Internet, to answer is: “How can we stay applications and use of Gmail safe online?” computers in the FL accounts, The T also explains what blogs are classroom Google 10' and introduces the class blog. • Motivate Ss using Docs, Class Lastly, she explains that they are technology blog, going to work in groups and also • Give Ss initiative that a Gmail address and account has • Stimulate Ss interest in the already been created for each group topic by the teacher. • Promote collaboration She urges and helps them to form • Encourage them to make
152 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” groups of three (she gives students decisions and acquire roles cards with numbers and invites students with the same card number to form groups) and assign roles (leader/reader, typist, art director). b. Each group is given a Gmail account and its password. The T writes the groups email addresses on the board. She also writes her email address.
Task 3 a. The T uploads the first Google Document and invites the groups as • Explain to Ss in detail what collaborators. the PBL final product will be Ss look at some pictures and write • Urge Ss to make an action down the social media names they plan can see. Each group has to write • Give Ss the chance to only one. become aware of the prerequisites a successful b. Then she explains that the final project should have Internet, product of the project will be a • Develop critical thinking Gmail poster and invites them to take a skills accounts, 10΄ look at two examples downloaded • Activate content and formal Google from the Internet. schemata9 Docs Lastly, she explains the features that • Integrate reading, listening, each poster should have: speaking skills They have to include at least 5 • Stimulate linguistic, Internet safety rules and at least 1 interpersonal, visual and picture. spatial intelligences
The posters are going to be posted on the class blog.
9 As Hyland (2004) states, schemata are sets of expectations which are based on the learners’ experiences. 153 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Implementation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1
nd a. The T invites Ss to a 2 Google • Motivate Ss using authentic Document and encourages them to YouTube material follow some links and watch short • Watch a video YouTube videos which concern meaningfully Internet safety • Provide inspiration for the https://www.youtube.com/wa tasks to follow tch?v=HxySrSbSY7o • Increase low proficiency https://www.youtube.com/wa Ss’ self – confidence) Internet, tch?v=X9Htg8V3eik Google • Encourage group work and 15΄ https://www.youtube.com/wa communication among Ss Docs, tch?v=yrln8nyVBLU • Activate content and formal YouTube https://www.youtube.com/wa schemata tch?v=G9R_OoQAi2I • Encourage collaboration If needed, they watch them again • Promote critical thinking (subtitles are provided). • Create a context for active viewing
154 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 2 a. Each group has to write down five Internet safety rules in a notebook b. They exchange notebooks with the group on their left and make suggestions about content and structure using parentheses and a pencil. They are not allowed to • Practice typing skills remove anything!!!! • Practice short – term c. They take their notebooks back memory and make changes if needed. • Activate prior knowledge d. They give the notebooks to the • Practice process writing teacher and ask for her final • Encourage peer scaffolding, comments. group work, communication e. They make the final changes. and collaboration f. Lastly, they complete their group’s • Make connections with column in a table created and their own lives uploaded on the 2nd Google • Encourage oral and written Document by the T who shows Ss communication that using an online processor is as • Compare new knowledge Internet, easy as using an offline one with the already existing one Gmail (Microsoft Word, for example). • Blend traditional practices accounts, They have to try not to repeat the with new technology ones 20' Google other groups’ rules. • Encourage Ss to feel Docs, They are free to use material from comfortable using paper and Quizlet the videos or suggest their own pencil first • Encourage creativity rules. • Encourage reflection on Each group uses a different font online resources colour according to the one their • Facilitate Ss providing group’s name has been written. useful phrases/suggestions
• Use new technology tools They can find useful vocabulary • Integrate skills (speaking, following this link: listening, reading and writing https://quizlet.com/433198283/flash- skills) cards/ • Stimulate linguistic, The T reassures Ss that she will be interpersonal, visual and available for them to help in any spatial intelligences kind of problems they might face during the creation of their products.
155 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
• Develop critical thinking skills
• Encourage Ss to express Internet,
their own opinions and make Gmail Task 3 decisions accounts, The groups are invited to create new • Give them initiative Google Google Documents and create their • Familiarize Ss with online Docs posters about Internet safety rules. 20΄ search They also have to include at least 4 • Encourage opinion sharing rules and at least 1 picture. • Encourage reflection on They can choose from all the online resources groups’ rules. • Develop reading strategies They can use any fond style and size • Integrate all skills (reading, they like. listening, speaking, writing)
• Stimulate linguistic, visual,
spatial, interpersonal and
logical intelligences
156 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Evaluation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used • Reflect on newly acquired knowledge • Develop metacognitive strategies (self - reflection and evaluation) • Share constructive feedback • Promote critical and reflective thinking Task 1 • Develop high order a. Students present their projects thinking skills through after inviting other groups as reflection and evaluation of collaborators to their Google their posters Documents. • Foster self and group Overhead They discuss about the end product evaluation projector, and the process needed for a poster • Encourage use knowledge Internet, to be created. They check whether for future projects Gmail they fulfil the prerequisites asked in • Increase Ss’ self confidence accounts, 10΄ the planning stage and give feedback and sense of achievement Google to their peers. • Promote real life Docs, Class b. The teacher uploads the posters communication blog on the class blog. • Connect lesson with real life The T invites Ss to follow their • Integrate all skills own rules to stay safe online!!!! (listening, reading, speaking, writing)
157 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson plan 2
How well do you know your friends? Writing Autobiographies
Familiarize students with autobiography writing. Practice using Google Documents and Blogger. Create a blog post. Encourage students to get to know their classmates better and develop friendly relations. Develop students’ digital writing. Use computer – based applications in the EFL classroom. Teaching aims and objectives Improve students’ new literacy skills Promote process writing. Render students autonomous learners. Encourage group work and peer feedback. Promote active learning in a collaborative environment. Encourage students’ critical thinking. Stimulate learners’ different talents and intelligences. Integrate all skills.
Skills Writing (Focus on writing skills but with an integration of the other three skills: listening, speaking, reading).
Students’ level A1 to A2 – 6th grade class of primary school.
Computer – based Personal computers (school computer lab), tools/applications – Materials used Internet connection, class overhead projector, YouTube, Google, Gmail accounts, Google Documents, Blogger.
Time available 4 teaching hours.
158 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
STAGES Planning stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 The teacher (T) invites students (Ss) to watch a video song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= vx2u5uUu3DE
The T asks questions: • Prepare Ss for the topic of What’s the title of the song? the lesson. What is the second project about? • Stimulate Ss’ interest in the topic. Then she invites Ss to watch a video • Give Ss the chance to use extract from a Greek film. the foreign language to talk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= about themselves and their relations with their friends. Yg8DlOs6cu8 • Encourage students to think Then the T asks Ss questions: about friendship. Have you seen that film? • Promote contextualization. Internet, Why does the girl want her brother 20' • Encourage T – Ss YouTube and his wife to leave the house? communication. What does “to know us better” • Create expectations about mean? the topic of the lesson to confirm or disconfirm. How many best friends have you • Generate ideas. got? • Brainstorm key vocabulary. Do you know everything about • Integrate speaking and them? listening skills. Have you got any secrets that • Stimulate linguistic, nobody knows about? interpersonal and Is there anything you would like to intrapersonal intelligences. know about your friends? Is there anything you would like to talk to your friends about?
159 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 2 Familiarize students with autobiography writing. a. The T explains that the lesson’s aim is to teach students how to write Encourage Ss to connect their autobiography. real life with the FL She shares a Google Document with classroom. the groups and invites them to open Give Ss the chance to use it and look at the picture on it. the foreign language to talk Ss are invited to read the definition about themselves and their of autobiography. needs. The T also reads and explains the definition in both the mother tongue • Stimulate Ss interest in the and the foreign language. topic. b. The T asks questions about the • Explain to Ss in detail what Ss’ age: the PBL final product will be How old are you? • Give Ss the chance to Are you teenagers? become aware of the What is a teenager? prerequisites of what a The T explains what a teenager is successful project should and tells Ss they are “pre – teens”. have. Then she asks questions about the • Familiarize Ss with the Internet, important things in pre – teens’ lives stages of process writing. Gmail and invites Ss to complete a table • Urge Ss to construct an accounts, uploaded on the Google Document. action plan. 25' Google Then she explains that they are • Give Ss the chance to use Docs going to work individually first and Google Docs. then in groups. • Practice digital writing. • Lessen Ss’ fear about web The driving question of the project applications and the use of is: “How well do you know your computers in the FL friends?” classroom. • Motivate Ss using She explains that Ss have to write technology. their autobiography in their • Give Ss initiative. notebooks following the steps given • Promote collaboration. in the Google Document. She • Encourage them to make explains the steps and guides Ss decisions. through them, presenting some • Develop critical thinking useful phrases they can use. skills. Giving personal examples, the T • Integrate reading, listening, invites them to write in first person. speaking skills. Then she explains the stages of • Stimulate linguistic, process writing (drafting, revising, interpersonal, visual and editing and publishing). spatial intelligences.
160 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” c. She explains that the final product of the project will be a blog post. Each group will upload only one autobiography accompanied by a relevant picture and a YouTube video. She explains the criteria their products will be evaluated by.
Implementation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 • Give Ss the chance to use a. The T invites Ss to open Blogger Blogger application. application and to find the T’s post • Motivate Ss using the class on the class blog. blog. b. Ss are invited to read the model • Provide inspiration for the text and write their autobiography tasks to follow. in their notebooks following the • Lessen low proficiency Ss’ steps given in the Google Document anxiety providing a model (individual work). text. c. Ss are encouraged to use the given • Practice process writing. phrases in cases in which they need • Encourage peer scaffolding, help regarding language structures. group work, communication Internet, d. Ss exchange their notebooks and and collaboration. Gmail revise each other’s first drafts. The • Blend traditional practices accounts, T facilitates the procedure inviting with new technology ones. Google 45΄ them to use pencils and parentheses • Encourage Ss to feel Docs, and to make suggestions (they are comfortable using paper and YouTube, not allowed to remove anything) and pencil first. Blogger to make sure all texts are revised • Encourage creativity. • Facilitate Ss providing according to the criteria given. e. Ss take back their texts and make useful phrases/suggestions. • Use new technology tools. changes if needed. • Promote critical thinking. f. The T gives a detailed explanation • Integrate reading, speaking and then Ss exchange second drafts and listening skills. again and revise language used • Stimulate linguistic, according to a given language code. interpersonal, visual and g. Ss give their drafts to the T who spatial intelligences. makes the final revising. Ss make changes to the final drafts.
161 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 2 • Practice typing skills. • Familiarize Ss with the use a. Ss work in groups: they read all of Google Documents. group members autobiographies, • Encourage group work, and discuss and decide whose will be collaboration. uploaded on the class blog. • Promote real life communication. b. Groups create new Google • Develop critical thinking Documents and type the skills. autobiography of their choice. The T • Encourage Ss to express facilitates the procedure encouraging their own opinions and make Internet, all students to practice digital decisions. Gmail writing. • Give them initiative. accounts, 35' • Encourage opinion sharing. Google • Develop reading strategies. Docs • Blend traditional practices with new technology ones. • Use new technology tools. • Integrate skills (speaking, listening, reading and writing skills). • Stimulate linguistic, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences.
Task 3 • Practice using Blogger application. a. The T gives Ss instructions about • Motivate Ss using the class how they can post their products on blog. the class blog. • Develop critical thinking
skills. b. Ss open Blogger application and • Encourage Ss to express Internet, post their products using any fond their own opinions and make Gmail style and size they like. decisions. accounts, 35΄ • Give them initiative. Google c. Ss are invited to search in Google • Familiarize Ss with online Docs, and YouTube in order to find a search. Google, relevant picture and a video to • Encourage opinion sharing. YouTube, enrich their post. • Encourage reflection on Blogger
The T reassures Ss that she will be online resources. available to help them in any kind • Integrate skills (reading, of problems they might face listening, speaking and during the creation and posting of writing). their products. • Stimulate linguistic, visual, spatial, interpersonal and logical intelligences.
162 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Evaluation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 • Reflect on newly acquired knowledge. a. Students reflect on all groups’ • Practice commenting in posts, discuss and check whether Blogger application. they fulfil the prerequisites asked in • Develop metacognitive the planning stage and give strategies (self - reflection feedback to their peers making and evaluation). comments on the posts they like. • Share constructive The T invites them to be polite feedback. during the commenting process. • Promote critical and reflective thinking. b. The T praises all groups for the • Develop high order good work and invites Ss to go back thinking skills through to the collaborative Google reflection and evaluation of Document and answer some their posts. Overhead reflective questions regarding the • Foster self and group projector, PBL process. evaluation. Internet, • Encourage the use of Gmail knowledge for future accounts, 20΄ projects. Google • Increase Ss’ self confidence Docs, and sense of achievement. Blogger • Promote real life communication. • Connect lesson with real life. • Integrate all skills (listening, reading, speaking and writing).
163 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson plan 3
What if?? Creating country reports
Familiarize students with project work Practice using Google Documents and blogs. Create country reports. Sensitize Ss with traditional aspects of Greece. Familiarize Ss with online searching. Develop students’ digital writing. Use computer – based applications in the EFL classroom. Teaching aims and objectives Improve students’ new literacy skills. Promote process writing. Render students autonomous learners. Encourage group work and peer feedback. Promote active learning in a collaborative environment. Stimulate learners’ different talents and intelligences. Integrate all skills.
Skills Writing (Focus on writing skills but with an integration of the other three skills: listening, speaking, reading).
Students’ level A1 to A2 – 6th grade class of primary school.
Computer – based Personal computers (school computer lab), tools/applications – Materials used Internet connection, class overhead projector, YouTube, Gmail accounts, Google Documents Google, Blogger.
Time available 3 teaching hours.
164 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
STAGES Planning stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 • Prepare Ss for the topic of The teacher (T) informs Ss that they the lesson. are going to work in the same • Stimulate Ss’ interest in the groups they did in the previous topic. lessons. • Promote contextualization. She invites Ss to be collaborators in • Encourage T – Ss a Google Document which will be communication. Internet, used in the specific lesson. • Create expectations about Gmail Ss open the Document and read the the topic of the lesson to accounts, 5' title. They are invited to think of confirm or disconfirm. Google what “What if?” means and to voice • Generate ideas. Docs. their opinion in class. • Practice using Gmail
accounts and Google Docs.
• Integrate speaking and
listening skills.
• Stimulate linguistic and
intrapersonal intelligences.
Task 2 • Practice using Google The T asks Ss to follow a link Docs. http://www.visitgreece.gr/#&slider1 • Lessen Ss’ fear about web =2 and explore the country applications and use of (Greece). computers in the FL They have to discuss in groups and: classroom. choose a place to visit • Motivate Ss using Internet, “taste” local food technology and authentic Gmail listen to traditional music online material. accounts, • Give Ss the chance to use “do” sports Google 15' the foreign language to talk learn about the history and Docs, Class about real life topics such as civilization of Greece blog. food, music, sports and watch a video The T explains that there are English holidays. subtitles in the videos they have to • Watch a video watch for their convenience. meaningfully. • Brainstorm key vocabulary. • Give Ss initiative. • Stimulate Ss interest in the topic. 165 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
• Promote collaboration and decision making. • Integrate reading, listening, speaking skills.
Task 3 a. The T invites Ss to choose a representative who will draw a piece of paper from a box. She/he • Practice using Google Docs has to write the name of her/his and digital writing. group on the specific piece of paper. • Lessen Ss’ fear on web She/he has to remember the colour applications and use of of the paper and give it back to the computers in the FL T. classroom. b. The student returns to her/his • . Provide inspiration for the group and calls out the colour to tasks to follow. Internet, his/her group mates. • Give Ss initiative. Google, c. The T invites the groups to find • Promote collaboration. Gmail the colour assigned to them and 15΄ • Encourage them to make accounts, answer the relevant questions they decisions. Google can find on the Google Document. • Develop critical thinking Docs. She explains that they are free to skills. search information online using • Integrate reading, listening, Google search engine. speaking skills. Each group has to find a picture to • Stimulate linguistic, accompany the answers. interpersonal, visual and All questions form a short report of spatial intelligences. Greece. e. Each group chooses a group reporter to present the answers in class.
Task 4 • Explain to Ss in detail what a. The T asks the driving question the PBL final product will be. of the project: What if you could • Familiarize Ss with the create your own country?? stages of process writing. Internet, She explains that the final product • Urge Ss to make an action Google, of the project will be a country plan. Gmail 15΄ report: they have to create their own • Give Ss the chance to accounts, country and post it on the class become aware of the Google blog. prerequisites their product Docs. Lastly, she explains the features that should have. each report should have giving them • Encourage online a list of 12 prerequisites. The reports searching. 166 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” should include at least 10. • Promote collaboration. They are encouraged to work in • Give Ss initiative. groups and use Google maps to find • Integrate reading and a location for their country and also listening skills. surf the Net to find any information • Stimulate linguistic, they need, pictures etc. Ss are interpersonal, visual and allowed to add anything they like. spatial intelligences. b. Then she explains the stages of process writing and that Ss have to write their first drafts in their notebooks.
Implementation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 • Blend traditional practices with new technology ones. a. The T gives Ss a photocopy of the • Encourage Ss to feel project requirements and invites comfortable using paper and them to collaborate, make plans and pencil first. read the model text about Greece • Motivate Ss using authentic the T has posted on the class blog. online material. She explains that the specific • Lessen Ss’ fear about web country report consists of their applications and use of answers in the previous task. They computers in the FL are allowed to follow the link classroom. Internet, https://www.google.com/earth/ and • Familiarize Ss with online Gmail surf the Net to find information and search. accounts pictures for their post. Also, they are • Encourage reflection on Google 45΄ given the link of an online dictionary online resources. Docs, in case they need it • Practice process writing. Google. https://www.wordreference.com/ • Activate prior knowledge. • . Give Ss initiative and b. Each group writes down their render them autonomous country report in their notebook learners. b. They are invited to revise it • Encourage group work and according to the requirements given communication among Ss to them. and peer scaffolding. • Promote collaboration. c. They make changes if needed. • Encourage them to make decisions. • Develop critical thinking 167 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” d. They give the second drafts to the skills. teacher who makes the final • Improve writing skills and suggestions. promote process writing. e. Ss make the final changes. • Integrate reading, listening, speaking skills. • Stimulate linguistic, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences. • Increase low proficiency Ss’ self – confidence giving them a model text.
Task 2 a. Ss open Blogger application and post their reports on the class blog. • Encourage opinion sharing The T reassures Ss that she will be • Give them initiative. available for them to help in any • Encourage Ss to express kind of problems they might face their own opinions and make during the creation of their decisions. products (save and insert pictures, • Encourage creativity. change the fond colours etc) • Promote collaboration. Internet, • Improve digital writing Gmail b. Groups discuss and decide who skills. accounts, 25' the presenters would be. • Use new technology tools. Google • Integrate skills (speaking, Docs. listening, reading and writing skills). • Stimulate linguistic, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences.
168 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Evaluation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used • Familiarize Ss with the practice of commenting on blog posts. • Blend traditional practices with new technology ones. • Reflect on newly acquired knowledge. • Develop metacognitive Task 1 strategies (self - reflection and evaluation). a. Ss present the reports and show • Share constructive feedback. the pictures in class. • Promote critical and reflective thinking. They discuss about the end product • Develop high order and the process needed for a thinking skills through Overhead country report to be created. They reflection and evaluation of projector, check whether they fulfil the their reports. Internet, prerequisites in the planning stage • Foster self and group Gmail and give feedback to their peers. evaluation. accounts, 15΄
• Encourage Ss to express Google b. They discuss with their their own opinions and make Docs, Class teammates and choose one of the decisions. blog. presented countries they would like • Encourage the use to live in and make a nice comment knowledge for future on the post. They have to justify projects. their choices giving at least two • Increase Ss’ self confidence reasons. and sense of achievement. • Promote real life communication. • Connect lesson with real life. • Integrate all skills (listening, reading, speaking and writing).
169 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson plan 4
Good food – Good life Creating menus
Familiarize students with project work. Practice using Google Documents and blogs. Create daily menus. Sensitize Ss with healthy food. Familiarize Ss with online searching. Develop students’ digital writing. Use computer – based applications in the EFL classroom. Teaching aims and objectives Improve students’ new literacy skills. Promote process writing. Render students autonomous learners. Encourage group work and peer feedback. Promote active learning in a collaborative environment. Stimulate learners’ different talents and intelligences. Integrate all skills.
Skills Writing (Focus on writing skills but with an integration of the other three skills: listening, speaking, reading).
Students’ level A1 to A2 – 6th grade class of primary school.
Computer – based Personal computers (school computer lab), tools/applications – Materials used Internet connection, class overhead projector, YouTube, Gmail accounts, Google Documents Google, Blogger, Quizlet.
Time available 3 teaching hours.
170 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
STAGES
Planning stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used
Task 1 The teacher (T) informs Ss that they are going to work in the same groups they did in the previous lessons. She asks questions about Ss’ eating habits: Do you have breakfast every • Prepare Ss for the topic of morning? the lesson. Do you think that breakfast is an • Stimulate Ss’ interest in the important meal of the day? topic. What do you usually have for snack • Give Ss the chance to use in school? the foreign language to talk What’s your favourite kind of food? about their personal habits, What are you going to eat for lunch likes and dislikes. today? • Promote contextualization. When you go to a restaurant for • Encourage T – Ss ------5' lunch or dinner what do you eat? communication. Do you remember last year’s school • Create expectations about lunches? the topic of the lesson to Which food was your favourite? confirm or disconfirm. If you could decide about the menu, • Generate ideas. would you like our school to have • Brainstorm vocabulary. lunches this year? • Integrate speaking and Do you know any healthy and listening skills. unhealthy kinds of food? • Stimulate linguistic and What do we mean when we say intrapersonal intelligences. “healthy diet”?
171 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 2 a. Ss are invited to watch a video on
You Tube and memorise the kinds of food which are mentioned in it: • Motivate Ss using https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= technology and authentic kKuYfLM0yDc YouTube material. Then she asks questions about it: • Give Ss the chance to use Do you remember some of the food the foreign language to talk the video character used to eat? about real life topics such as What did “Maggy” give him food and healthy eating instead? habits. • Watch videos b. Then Ss watch a second YouTube meaningfully. Internet, video and memorise the categories • Create a context for active YouTube, in the Food Pyramid: viewing. Overhead 15' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= • Increase low proficiency projector. 0KbA8pFW3tg Ss’ self – confidence The T asks comprehensive • Brainstorm key vocabulary questions: • Stimulate Ss interest in the Have you heard about the Food topic. Pyramid before? • Provide inspiration for the How are different kinds of food tasks to follow. arranged in the pyramid? • Promote critical thinking. • Integrate reading, listening, Subtitles are available in both speaking skills. videos to facilitate watching.
172 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 3 a. She invites Ss to open their groups’ email accounts and become collaborators in a Google Document • Practice using Google which will be used in the specific Docs. lesson. • Practice “copy – paste”. Ss open the Document and read the • Practice typing skills. title: Good food – Good life. • Lessen Ss’ fear on web applications and use of b. Groups complete a table computers in the FL collaboratively (each group is classroom. responsible for a different column- • .Provide inspiration for the kind of food) using given time tasks to follow. expressions. Each time expression • Give Ss initiative. should be used only once. • Promote collaboration. The T explains that they can type or • Activate prior knowledge. Internet, use “copy – paste”. The T facilitates • Make connections with Google, the procedure in cases of problems. their own lives. Gmail 20΄ • Encourage oral and written accounts, c. Groups choose presenters, communication. Google present their answers orally, share • Encourage them to make Docs. personal habits and make corrections decisions. if needed. • Develop critical thinking skills. Task 3 • Blend traditional practices a. The T asks Ss to complete a with new technology ones. second table collaboratively • Integrate reading, listening, writing some of the traditional Greek speaking skills. food (each group works in its • Stimulate linguistic, assigned column). intrapersonal, interpersonal, b. Groups choose presenters, they visual and spatial present their answers orally. intelligences.
Task 4 • Explain to Ss, in detail, a. The T asks the driving question what the PBL final product of the project: Delicious and will be. Internet, healthy meals: is it possible?? • Encourage Ss to make an Google, She explains that the final product action plan. Gmail 20΄ of the project will be a collaborative • Give Ss the chance to accounts, weekly menu for the “School become aware of the Google lunches program”: each group has prerequisites their product Docs. to create their own menu for one should have. day of the week and post it on the • Develop critical thinking
173 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” class blog. skills. • Activate content and formal b. She explains the features that schemata. each menu should have: • Promote collaboration. three different kinds of food • Encourage online search. for a complete breakfast. • Give Ss initiative. three different kinds of food • Blend traditional practices for a complete lunch with new technology ones. three different kinds of • Familiarize Ss with the snacks stages of process writing. • Improve Ss’ writing skills. • Integrate reading and listening and speaking skills. and the criteria according which it • Stimulate linguistic, will be evaluated: interpersonal, visual and All foods should be healthy spatial intelligences. Each kind of food in each meal should belong to a different step of the FOOD PYRAMID They have to justify their choice of foods in each meal using two - three sentences. They have to enrich their post with relative pictures.
c. They are encouraged to work in groups and are informed that they can use the T’s blog post regarding Sunday’s menu to have an idea about what exactly they have to create and the useful phrases they can find on the Google Document. d. Then she explains the stages of process writing and that Ss have to write their first drafts in their notebooks.
174 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Implementation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 • Blend traditional practices a. Ss work in groups. They first open with new technology ones. Blogger application to read the T’s • Encourage Ss to feel blog post regarding Sunday’s comfortable using paper and menu. pencil first. b. Then, Ss use the Good food – • Increase low proficiency Good life Google Document to read Ss’ self – confidence giving the product requirements and the them a model text. useful phrases given in order to • Motivate Ss using authentic make plans. online material. c. Then they are free to watch the • Lessen Ss’ fear on web second video used in the planning applications and use of stage to get information about the computers in the FL food pyramid: classroom. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= • Familiarize Ss with online Internet, 0KbA8pFW3tg search. Gmail d. They are also allowed to use • Encourage reflection on accounts Google search engine online resources. Google https://www.google.com/ to find • Practice process writing. Docs, information and pictures they are • Activate prior knowledge. Google, 40΄ going to use for their post, • . Give Ss initiative. YouTube, https://quizlet.com/_7htnln?x=1jqt& • Render students Blogger, i=1ckdz5 application and an online autonomous learners. class blog,
Dictionary: • Encourage group work and Quizlet. https://www.wordreference.com in communication among Ss case they need vocabulary. and peer scaffolding. e. Each group writes down their • Promote collaboration. menu in their notebooks. They are • Encourage them to make invited to exchange notebooks with decisions. the group on their right and revise • Develop critical thinking their peers’ texts according to the skills. requirements given to them. • Improve writing skills and g. They take their texts back and promote process writing. make changes if needed. • Integrate reading, listening, h. After editing, Ss give the second speaking skills. draft to the teacher who makes the • Stimulate linguistic, final suggestions. interpersonal, visual and i. Ss make the final changes. spatial intelligences.
175 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 2 • Give them initiative. • Encourage Ss to express a. Ss open Blogger application and their own opinions and make post their menus on the class blog. decisions. The T reassures Ss that she will be • Encourage creativity. available for them to help in any • Promote collaboration. kind of problems they might face • Improve digital writing during the creation of their skills. Internet, products (save and insert pictures, • Use new technology tools. Gmail change the fond colours, etc). • Integrate skills (speaking, accounts, listening, reading and writing Google b. Groups discuss and decide who skills). 20' Docs, the presenters would be. • Allow Ss to have fun in the Blogger, FL classroom. class blog, c. The groups which finish earlier • Encourage them to practice Quizlet. are allowed to play vocabulary vocabulary using online games on Quizlet application. applications. • Stimulate linguistic, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences.
176 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Evaluation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used • Familiarize Ss with commenting on blog posts. • Reflect on newly acquired knowledge. • Develop metacognitive strategies (self - reflection and evaluation). Task 1 • Share constructive a. Ss present their posts – menus, feedback. show the pictures in class and • Promote critical and support their justifications. reflective thinking.
They discuss with the T about the • Develop high order thinking skills through end product and the process reflection and evaluation of needed for a school lunch menu to Overhead be created. They check whether their posts. • Foster self and group projector, their peers’ products fulfil the Internet, prerequisites asked for in the evaluation. Gmail planning stage and give feedback to • Encourage Ss to express accounts, their peers. their own opinions and make Google 15΄ decisions. Docs, b. They discuss with their • Encourage the use of Blogger, teammates, choose one of the knowledge for future Class blog, presented menus and make a nice projects. Quizlet. comment on the post. • Increase Ss’ self confidence
and sense of achievement. c. Lastly, if there is some time left, • Promote real life communication. the T gives them two choices: either make comments to more than one • Allow Ss to have fun in the post or play vocabulary games on FL classroom.
Quizlet application. • Encourage them to practice vocabulary using online applications. • Integrate all skills (listening, reading, speaking and writing).
177 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson plan 5
What’s the story behind the stories? Creating stories
Familiarize students with project work. Practice using Google Documents and blogs. Create stories. Familiarize Ss with online searching. Develop students’ digital writing. Use computer – based applications in the EFL classroom. Teaching aims and objectives Improve students’ new literacy skills. Promote process writing. Render students autonomous learners. Encourage group work and peer feedback. Promote active learning in a collaborative environment. Stimulate learners’ different talents and intelligences. Integrate all skills.
Skills Writing (Focus on writing skills but with an integration of the other three skills: listening, speaking, reading).
Students’ level A1 to A2 – 6th grade class of primary school.
Computer – based Personal computers (school computer lab), tools/applications – Materials used Internet connection, class overhead projector, YouTube, Gmail accounts, Google Documents Google, Blogger.
Time available 4 teaching hours.
178 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
STAGES
Planning stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used
• Prepare Ss for the topic of Task 1 the lesson. The teacher (T) informs Ss that they • Stimulate Ss’ interest in the are going to work in the same topic. groups they did in the previous • Give Ss the chance to use lessons. the foreign language to talk She asks questions about Ss’ about their likes and dislikes. likes/dislikes regarding reading • Promote contextualization. habits: • Encourage T – Ss Do you like stories? communication. ------10' Do you like fairytales? • Create expectations about Do you prefer reading stories to the topic of the lesson to watching them on a video? confirm or disconfirm. Why do you like stories? • Generate ideas. What’s your favourite story or book? • Brainstorm vocabulary. What kind of stories do you like? • Integrate speaking and Would you like to write your own listening skills. story/book some day? • Stimulate linguistic and
intrapersonal intelligences.
Task 2 • Motivate Ss using a. Ss are invited to watch a video on technology and authentic You Tube (Subtitles are available to YouTube material. facilitate watching) and concentrate • Watch videos on the story and the main characters: meaningfully. • Create a context for active https://learnenglishkids.britishcounci viewing. l.org/short-stories/romeo-and-juliet • Increase low proficiency Internet, Ss’ self – confidence. YouTube, 15΄ Then she asks questions about it: • Brainstorm key vocabulary. Overhead What was the story about? • Stimulate Ss interest in the projector. What kind of a story was it? topic.
What happened in the end? • Check comprehension. What kind of an ending was it? • Provide inspiration for the Did you like the story? tasks to follow. • Promote critical thinking. • Integrate reading, listening, speaking skills.
179 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 3 • Practice using Google Docs a. She invites Ss to open their groups • Practice “copy – paste”, email accounts and become underlining and highlighting. collaborators in a Google Document • Practice typing skills. which will be used in the specific • Lessen Ss’ fear about web lesson. Each group will work on applications and use of their own Google Document during computers in the FL this lesson. classroom. Groups open their Documents and • Provide inspiration for the read the title: What’s the story tasks to follow. behind the stories? • Check comprehension. Internet, • Encourage oral Google, b. Ss read the story of Romeo and communication among Gmail 25΄ Juliet they have just watched on students. accounts, YouTube video and complete a table • Encourage them to make Google finding information from the text. decisions. Docs, The T advices Ss to underline or • Develop critical thinking highlight information in the text in skills. order to make the procedure easier • Improve writing skills. for them. • Integrate reading, listening, c. Then some of the Ss present the speaking skills. answers and make corrections if • Stimulate linguistic, needed. intrapersonal, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences.
Task 3 a. The T invites Ss to look at some pictures of people (the same for all • Practice using Google groups), discuss in groups and Docs. choose only one of them. They have • Give Ss the chance to to delete all the others. become aware of the b. Groups discuss and give their prerequisites of a story. character a name and then write 5 • Provide inspiration for the Internet, adjectives which describe her/his tasks to follow. Google, appearance and 5 adjectives which • Brainstorm key vocabulary. Gmail describe her/his character. • Activate prior knowledge. accounts, 20΄ Then they have to decide about 3 • Encourage Ss to use their Google activities she/he likes doing. imagination in the FL Docs, Lastly, they have to decide who s/he classroom. photocopies lives with. • Develop critical thinking The T invites Ss to finish the task in skills. 15 minutes. • Activate content and formal schemata. b. Then the T assigns homework: • Promote collaboration. each student takes a photocopy of a • Give Ss initiative. story map and creates a short story • Help Ss manage their time. 180 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” about the character his/her group has • Blend traditional practices chosen. This is an individual task. with new technology ones. The story has to include (besides the • Improve Ss’ writing skills. main character) other main • Integrate reading and characters, when and where it listening and speaking skills. happened, what the problem was and • Stimulate linguistic, its solution. intrapersonal, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences. Task 4 a. The T asks the driving question of the project: What’s the story behind the stories?
She explains that in this lesson Ss • Explain to Ss in detail what have two choices regarding the final the PBL final product will be. product of the project: • Familiarize Ss with the
stages of process writing. 1) it will be a video made of the • Improve writing skills. group stories Ss will create: each • Urge Ss to make an action group has to create their own plan. story about the chosen character • Give Ss the chance to and paints at least 4 pictures to become aware of the enrich their story prerequisites their product 2) it will be a post on the class blog: Internet, should have. each group has to create their own Google, • Promote collaboration. story about the chosen character Gmail • Encourage them to make which will include at least 2 accounts, decisions. 20΄ pictures to enrich their story Google • Give Ss initiative. Docs, • Help Ss manage their time. b. She explains the procedure Ss photocopies • Encourage Ss to use their have to follow (the stages of , notebooks. imagination in the FL process writing and that Ss have to classroom. write their first drafts in their • Blend traditional practices notebooks) and the features that with new technology ones. each final product should have: • Integrate reading and They are urged to work in groups listening skills. and: • Stimulate linguistic, read all the stories the group interpersonal, visual and members have prepared spatial intelligences. discuss and decide which
characters and features they will use for the group story. choose at least 2 of the characters. choose one or more of each story’s characteristics and
181 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
“build” the group story based on the given plan given by the T. give it to the T for revising it. take it back and make changes if necessary. Each part should be accompanied by a picture painted in A4 paper in case of the video or 2 pictures downloaded in case of a blog post. All stories should have a title. Lastly, the T gives Ss the story plan and explains the steps thoroughly. She answers all questions Ss might ask. The T invites Ss to have finished this task by the end of the specific class.
182 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Implementation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives application– Time Material used Task 1 • Blend traditional practices a. Ss work in groups. They first with new technology ones. discuss and decide what their final • Encourage Ss to feel product will be and then they open comfortable using paper and Google Documents to read the pencil first. model story of Romeo and Juliet. • Increase low proficiency b. Ss read all the stories the group Ss’ self – confidence giving members have prepared, discuss and them a model text. decide which characters and features • Motivate Ss using authentic they will use for the group story. online material. c. Then, Ss use the story plan • Lessen Ss’ fear about web provided by the T and make a plan applications and use of of their story. computers in the FL d. They are also allowed to use classroom. Google search engine • Encourage online search https://www.google.com/ to find and reflection on online pictures they are going to use for resources. Internet, their post and an online Dictionary: • Activate prior knowledge. Gmail https://www.wordreference.com in • Give Ss initiative. accounts case they need vocabulary. • Render students Google e. Each group writes down their autonomous learners. Docs, 45΄ stories in their notebooks. They • Encourage Ss to use their Google, give their notebooks to the T who imagination in the FL notebooks revises their texts and makes sure Ss classroom. have followed the plan. • Encourage group work and f. Ss take their notebooks back and communication among Ss make changes. and peer scaffolding. g. They give notebooks to the T • Promote collaboration. again to revise language and • Encourage them to make structure mistakes. decisions. h. Ss take their notebooks back and • Encourage real life make the final changes. communication. i. Ss paint pictures if needed. • Develop critical thinking The T explains that final products skills. will be evaluated according to the • Improve writing skills and features Ss’ stories will have. promote process writing. There will be some extra criteria • Integrate reading, listening, for the evaluation stage which will speaking skills. be presented after the completion of • Stimulate linguistic, the final products. interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences.
183 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 2
• Give them initiative. a. Ss open Blogger application and • Encourage Ss to express post their stories on the class blog. their own opinions and make The T reassures Ss that she will be decisions. available for them to help in any • Encourage creativity. kind of problems they might face • Promote collaboration. during the creation of their • Encourage real life products (save and insert pictures, Internet, communication. change the fond colours etc) Gmail • Improve digital writing The T invites all students to practice accounts, skills. typing. Google 25' • Use new technology tools. Docs, • Integrate skills (speaking, b. Groups discuss and decide how Blogger, listening, reading and writing they are going to present their story: class blog. skills). read their post, describe their • Allow Ss to have fun in the pictures etc) FL classroom.
• Stimulate linguistic,
interpersonal, visual and
spatial intelligences.
184 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Evaluation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 • Reflect on newly acquired knowledge. a. Groups discuss and decide who is • Develop metacognitive going to present their stories. strategies (self - reflection b. Ss present their stories and show and evaluation). the pictures in class. • Share constructive feedback The T helps them to remember the with their peers. criteria and evaluate their peers’ • Promote critical and final products checking whether reflective thinking. they fulfil the prerequisites asked • Develop high order in the planning stage and give thinking skills through feedback to their peers. reflection and evaluation of their posts. c. Then they take a photocopy with • Foster self and group Overhead the criteria used in the previous task evaluation. projector, (1b) and evaluate not only their own • Encourage Ss to express Internet, final product but the whole their own opinions and make Gmail accounts, procedure of creating it (group work, decisions. 20΄ collaboration and decision making). • Increase Ss’ self confidence Google and sense of achievement. Docs, d. Lastly, if there is some time left, • Promote real life Blogger, they discuss with their teammates, communication. and Class choose one of the posts and make a • Practice commenting on blog. nice comment on it. blog posts. • Integrate all skills (listening, reading, speaking and writing).
185 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson plan 6
A life lesson Making suggestions and creating a podcast
Familiarize students with project work. Practice using Google Documents and blogs. Practice making suggestions. Create a podcast. Familiarize Ss with online searching. Develop students’ digital writing. Use computer – based applications in the EFL classroom. Sensitize students about Nature and environmental problems. Teaching aims and objectives Improve students’ new literacy skills. Promote process writing. Render students autonomous learners. Encourage group work and peer feedback. Promote active learning in a collaborative environment. Stimulate learners’ different talents and intelligences. Integrate all skills.
Skills Writing (Focus on writing skills but with an integration of the other three skills: listening, speaking, reading).
Students’ level A1 to A2 – 6th grade class of primary school.
Computer – based Personal computers (school computer lab), tools/applications – Materials used Internet connection, class overhead projector, YouTube, Gmail accounts, Google Documents Google, Blogger, Voki, Quizlet.
Time available 4 teaching hours.
186 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
STAGES
Planning stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used • Prepare Ss for the topic of Task 1 the lesson. a. The teacher (T) informs Ss that • Stimulate Ss’ interest in the they are going to work in the same topic. groups they did in the previous • Promote contextualization. lessons. • Encourage T – Ss b. Ss are invited to get into their communication. Internet, group email accounts and open the • Create expectations about Gmail Google Document the T has shared the topic of the lesson to accounts, 10' with each group separately. Then the confirm or disconfirm. Google T asks them to read the title and try • Generate ideas. Docs. to guess the topic of the specific • Brainstorm vocabulary. lesson. • Practice using Google Docs. • Integrate speaking and listening skills. • Stimulate linguistic and intrapersonal intelligences. Task 2 • Brainstorm key vocabulary. a. Ss are invited to work in groups • Stimulate Ss interest in the and make a list of the things they topic. consider important in their lives. • Provide inspiration for the tasks to follow. b. Ss discuss and decide who is • Create expectations about going to present their list in class. the topic of the lesson to Internet, confirm or disconfirm. Gmail c. Ss present their lists which are • Generate ideas. accounts, 15΄ shown on the overhead projector. A • Encourage them to make Google short discussion follows each decisions. Docs, presentation. They find the things • Give Ss the chance to use overhead group have in common. the foreign language to write projector. and talk about real life topics such as their personal needs. • Practice using Google Docs • Integrate reading, listening, speaking skills.
187 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 3 a. Ss are invited to watch some videos on You Tube (Subtitles are available to facilitate watching) and find out the things they cannot live without: https://www.conservation.org/nature -is-speaking/Pages/Julia-Roberts-Is- Mother-Nature.aspx • https://www.conservation.org/natur • Motivate Ss using e-is-speaking/Pages/Harrison-Ford- technology and authentic Is-the-Ocean.aspx YouTube material. • https://www.conservation.org/natur • Watch videos e-is-speaking/Pages/Shailene- meaningfully. Woodley-Is-Forest.aspx • Create a context for active • https://www.conservation.org/natur Internet, viewing. e-is-speaking/Pages/Joan-Chen-is- Google, • Increase low proficiency Sky.aspx Gmail Ss’ self – confidence. • https://www.conservation.org/natur accounts, • Brainstorm key vocabulary. 20΄ e-is-speaking/Penelope-Cruz-Is- Google • Stimulate Ss interest in the Water?ytVideoId=fwV9OYeGN88 Docs, topic. • https://www.conservation.org/natur Overhead • Check comprehension. e-is-speaking/Edward-Norton-Is- projector. • Provide inspiration for the the- tasks to follow. Soil?ytVideoId=Dor4XvjA8Wo • Promote critical thinking. • https://www.conservation.org/natur • Integrate reading, listening, e-is-speaking/Ian-Somerhalder-Is- speaking skills. Coral-
Reef?ytVideoId=lVMV3StvLCs • https://www.conservation.org/natur e-is-speaking/reese-witherspoon-is- home?ytVideoId=mkjwxmcdb0E After watching each video the T asks comprehension questions. Then she asks Ss if they saw some things they cannot live without in the videos. If yes, they should write them in their lists.
188 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 4 a. The T invites Ss to discuss in groups and complete a second list • Practice using Google with the things Nature gives to Docs. people. • Encourage active viewing. b. Ss discuss in groups and • Check comprehension. complete a third list with the • Provide inspiration for the environmental problems they can tasks to follow. think of. • Brainstorm key vocabulary. The T invites them to use the • Activate prior knowledge vocabulary on • Develop critical thinking https://quizlet.com/_7mv2ft?x=1jqt skills &i=1ckdz5. She also gives them a • Activate content and formal Internet, photocopy with the new vocabulary. schemata. Google, • Encourage peer scaffolding, Gmail b. Then the T assigns homework: Ss group work, communication, accounts, 20΄ have to learn the new vocabulary. collaboration and decision Google making. Docs, • Make connections with photocopies their own lives. • Give Ss initiative. • Practice new vocabulary. • Have fun in the foreign language classroom. • Improve Ss’ writing skills. • Integrate reading and listening and speaking skills. • Stimulate linguistic, intrapersonal, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences. Task 5 • Explain to Ss in detail what a. The T asks a student to read the the PBL final product will be. driving question of the project: • Give Ss the chance to What can we do to reverse become aware of the environmental problems? prerequisites their product Internet, She explains the word “reverse” in should have. Google, case Ss are not familiar with it. • Familiarize Ss with the Gmail The Ss are informed that they have stages of process writing. accounts, 15΄ to find solutions to some of the • Improve writing skills. Google biggest environmental problems and • Urge Ss to make an action Docs, post them on the class blog. plan. photocopies • Motivate Ss presenting , notebooks. She also explains that they are them with a real life going to participate in European audience. School Radio’s competition: ‘We • Promote collaboration. send an SOS signal. We hug the • Encourage them to make
189 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Earth” with a short podcast and a decisions. slogan which will be inspired by • Give Ss initiative. this project’s final products. • Help Ss manage their time. • Encourage Ss to use their b. She explains the procedure Ss imagination in the FL have to follow (the stages of classroom. process writing and that Ss have to • Blend traditional practices write their first drafts in their with new technology ones. notebooks) and the features that • Integrate reading, speaking each final product should have: and listening skills. They are encouraged to work in • Stimulate linguistic, groups and: interpersonal, visual and Write a paragraph (60 – 80 spatial intelligences. words) describing 5 solutions to the environmental problem they will choose (each group should choose a different one). They have to find a slogan and use it as a title. Each part should be accompanied by 2 pictures The T invites Ss to have finished this task in half an hour.
190 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Implementation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 • Blend traditional practices a. Ss work in groups. Ss open with new technology ones. Blogger application, find the class • Motivate Ss using authentic blog and listen to what Polly and online material. Sharkie (Voki avatars created by the • Lessen Ss’ fear about web T for the needs of the lesson) have applications and use of to say: http://tinyurl.com/u7mmbpy, computers in the FL http://tinyurl.com/sd96t7q classroom. Then the T asks comprehensive and • Encourage online search other questions: and reflection on online Do you know that the Earth is in resources. danger? • Activate prior knowledge.
Can you do anything to save the • .Give Ss initiative. Internet, Earth? • Render students Gmail What kinds of environmental autonomous learners. accounts problems did Sharkie mention? • Encourage Ss to use their Google Can we reverse them? imagination in the FL Docs, 15΄ Then they have a class discussion classroom. Google, and decide which group will deal • Encourage group work and Voki, with each of the problems. communication among Ss notebooks and peer scaffolding.
• Promote collaboration. • Encourage them to make decisions. • Encourage real life communication. • Develop critical thinking skills. • Integrate reading, listening, speaking skills. • Stimulate linguistic, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences.
191 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 2 a. Ss follow some links given by the T in order to find information for the problem they chose to find a solution for. • https://www.nationalgeographic. com/environment/oceans/take- action/10-things-you-can-do-to- save-the-ocean/ • http://www.worldanimalfoundat ion.org/articles/article/8949999/ 181267.htm • Give them initiative. • https://inspiyr.com/easy-ways- • Encourage Ss to express to-help-save-the-earth/ their own opinions and make • http://www.endangered.org/10- decisions. easy-things-you-can-do-to-save- • Blend traditional practices endangered-species/ with new technology ones. • https://www.ucsusa.org/resource • Encourage Ss to feel s/ten-personal-solutions-global- comfortable using paper and Internet, warming pencil first. Gmail • Encourage creativity. accounts, They are free to surf the Internet • Promote collaboration. Google 45' using Google engine to find • Encourage real life Docs, information they need. communication. Google, b. The T presents some useful • Use new technology tools. Blogger, phrases available for them to use. • Improve writing skills and class blog. promote process writing. c. Groups write their first drafts in • Integrate skills (speaking, their notebooks. listening and reading skills). Then they revise each other’s • Stimulate linguistic, writings according to the interpersonal, visual and requirements given to them. spatial intelligences. Ss take their notebooks back and make changes. They give notebooks to the T again to revise language and structure mistakes. Ss take their notebooks back and make the final changes. The T reassures Ss that she will be available for them to help in any kind of problems they might face during the creation of their products.
192 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 3 a. Ss open Blogger application and post their stories on the class blog. • Give them initiative. They are free to surf the Internet • Encourage Ss to express using Google engine to find pictures. their own opinions and make decisions. The T reassures Ss that she will be • Encourage creativity. available for them to help in any • Promote collaboration. kind of problems they might face • Encourage real life Internet, during the creation of their communication. Gmail products (save and insert pictures, • Improve digital writing accounts, change the fond colours etc) Google skills. 20' The T invites all students to practice • Use new technology tools. Docs, typing. • Integrate skills (speaking, Google, listening, reading and writing Blogger, b. Groups discuss and decide how skills). class blog. they are going to present their story: • Allow Ss to have fun in the read their post, describe their FL classroom using the Internet. pictures etc) • Stimulate linguistic, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences.
193 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Evaluation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 • Reflect on newly acquired knowledge. a. Groups discuss and decide who is • Develop metacognitive going to present the problems and strategies (self - reflection suggestions. and evaluation). • Share constructive feedback b. Ss present the environmental with their peers. problems, their suggestions and the • Promote critical and slogans and show the pictures in reflective thinking. class. • Develop high order The T helps them to remember the thinking skills through criteria and evaluate their peers’ reflection and evaluation of final products checking whether their posts. they fulfil the prerequisites asked • Foster self and group Overhead in the planning stage and give evaluation. projector, feedback to their peers. • Encourage Ss to express Internet, their own opinions and make Gmail accounts, decisions. 20΄ c. Lastly, if there is some time left, • Increase Ss’ self confidence Google they discuss with their teammates, and sense of achievement. Docs, choose one of the posts and make a • Promote real life Blogger, nice comment on it. communication. and class • Practice commenting on blog. blog posts. • Integrate all skills (listening, reading, speaking and writing).
194 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson plan 7
Ready for holidays? Creating an informal email
Familiarize students with project work. Practice using Google Documents and blogs. Create blog posts. Write an informal email/postcard. Familiarize Ss with online searching. Develop students’ digital writing. Use computer – based applications in the EFL classroom. Teaching aims and objectives Improve students’ new literacy skills. Promote process writing. Render students autonomous learners. Encourage group work and peer feedback. Promote active learning in a collaborative environment. Stimulate learners’ different talents and intelligences. Integrate all skills.
Skills Writing (Focus on writing skills but with an integration of the other three skills: listening, speaking, reading).
Students’ level A1 to A2 – 6th grade class of primary school.
Computer – based Personal computers (school computer lab), tools/applications – Materials used Internet connection, class overhead projector, YouTube, Gmail accounts, Google Documents Google, Blogger, Quizlet.
Time available 3 teaching hours.
195 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
STAGES
Planning stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used • Prepare Ss for the topic of Task 1 the lesson. a. Ss are invited to get into their • Stimulate Ss’ interest in the group email accounts and open the topic. Google Document named “Ready • Activate prior knowledge. for holidays?” which the T has • Promote contextualization. shared with all groups. • Encourage T – Ss Internet, Then the T asks them to read the communication. Gmail title and answer the question: • Create expectations about accounts, 10' “What types of holidays can you the topic of the lesson to Google think of” orally. confirm or disconfirm. Docs. Ss take turns and answer. Each one • Generate ideas. types his/her answer in a table on • Brainstorm vocabulary. the specific Google document. • Practice using Google Docs • Integrate speaking and listening skills. • Stimulate linguistic and intrapersonal intelligences. • Brainstorm key vocabulary. Task 2 • Stimulate Ss interest in the a. Ss are invited to look at some topic. pictures on the overhead projector • Provide inspiration for the screen. They write the type of tasks to follow. holidays under each picture. • Create expectations about the topic of the lesson to b. Ss are invited to think and say confirm or disconfirm. Internet, what kind of equipment they need • Generate ideas. Gmail for each of the holidays separately. • Encourage them to make accounts, 20΄ decisions. Google • Activate prior knowledge. Docs, • Give Ss the chance to use overhead the FL to write and talk about projector. real life topics such as holidays. • Practice using Google Docs and digital writing. • Integrate reading, listening, speaking skills.
196 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 3 a. The T presents the driving question of the project: What type of holidays would you • Explain to Ss in detail what recommend? She explains that the the PBL final product will be final product will be a blog post about. which will include an email - • Give Ss the chance to postcard and a recommendation of become aware of the a specific place for holidays: prerequisites their product Groups have to discuss and should have. choose one of the holiday • Familiarize Ss with the types and imagine that they stages of process writing. are on holidays there. • Improve their writing skills. They are invited to write an • Urge Ss to construct an email - postcard to their action plan. family or the T telling them • Motivate Ss using authentic Internet, all about their holidays. online material. Google, They are also urged to • Increase low proficiency Gmail recommend a place of their Ss’ self – confidence. accounts, • Stimulate Ss interest in the Google choice for their holidays and 20΄ accompany their topic. Docs, recommendation with at least • Activate prior knowledge. Google, one picture. • Make connections with Overhead There are useful questions Ss have their own lives. projector, to answer at their convenience. • Give Ss initiative. Quizlet. • Encourage Ss to use their c. The T urges them to look at the imagination in the FL Notes she has uploaded on the classroom. Google Document which concern • Practice using Google process writing, new vocabulary Docs. (Quizlet) and links they have to • Promote critical thinking. follow to locate information. • Integrate reading, listening, speaking skills. d. The T invites them to collaborate • Stimulate linguistic, and make plans and then she interpersonal, visual and explains the stages of process spatial intelligences. writing and that Ss have to write their first drafts in their notebooks.
197 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Implementation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 • Blend traditional practices a. Ss work in groups. They get into with new technology ones. their Gmail accounts, open the • Encourage Ss to feel relevant Google Document and read comfortable using paper and the project’s requirements. They pencil first. also are provided with five links • Increase low proficiency with holiday destinations: Ss’ self – confidence giving 1.https://www.mykidstime.com/trav them a model text. el/the-best-10-spots-for-family- • Motivate Ss using authentic camping-in-europe/ online material. 2.https://www.theguardian.com/trav • Lessen Ss’ fear about web el/2018/mar/24/20-best-campsites- applications and use of europe-camping-greece-france-spain computers in the FL 3.https://www.cntraveller.com/galler classroom. y/best-holiday-destinations-2020 • Encourage online search Internet, 4. https://www.10adventures.com/hi and reflection on online Gmail king-in-greece/ resources. accounts 5.https://www.wanderlust.co.uk/cont • Activate prior knowledge. Google ent/the-best-african-safari/ • .Give Ss initiative. Docs, b. They discuss in groups and • Render students Google, 40΄ choose one of them to recommend autonomous learners. notebooks, as the perfect holiday destination. • Encourage Ss to use their Quizlet, Also, Ss are free to use Google imagination in the FL photocopies maps to find a location for their classroom. holidays and also surf the Net to • Encourage group work and find any information they need, real - life communication pictures etc. among Ss and peer c. The T invites them to use the scaffolding. vocabulary set on Quizlet • Promote collaboration. application.https://quizlet.com/_7sl • Encourage them to make vtd?x=1jqt&i=1ckdz5 decisions. She also gives them a photocopy • Develop critical thinking with the vocabulary. skills. d. Groups write their first drafts in • Improve writing skills and their notebooks. promote process writing. e. Then they revise each other’s • Integrate reading, listening, writings according to the speaking skills. requirements given to them. • Stimulate linguistic, f. They take back and edit their texts interpersonal, intrapersonal, g. They give the second drafts to the visual and spatial
198 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES” teacher who makes the final intelligences. suggestions and, lastly, Ss make the final changes.
Task 2 a. Ss open Blogger application and post their writings on the class blog. • Give them initiative. • Encourage Ss to express b. Ss surf the Internet using the their own opinions and make Google engine to find pictures to decisions. enrich their blog post. • Encourage creativity. The T reassures Ss that she will be • Promote collaboration. Internet, available for them to help in any • Encourage real life Gmail kind of problems they might face communication. accounts, during the creation of their • Improve digital writing Google products (save and insert pictures, skills. 25' Docs, change the fond colours etc) • Use new technology tools Blogger, The T invites all students to practice and online exploration. class blog, typing. • Integrate skills (speaking, Google listening, reading and writing c. Groups discuss and decide who is skills). going to present their products • Stimulate linguistic, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences.
199 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Evaluation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 • Reflect on newly acquired knowledge. a. Ss present their emails – • Develop metacognitive postcards and their strategies (self - reflection recommendations for holiday and evaluation). destinations and show the pictures in • Share constructive feedback class. with their peers. The T facilitates the procedure • Promote critical and asking questions to help them to reflective thinking. remember the criteria and evaluate • Develop high order their peers’ final products checking thinking skills through whether they fulfil the reflection and evaluation of prerequisites asked in the planning their posts. stage and giving feedback to their • Foster self and group peers. evaluation. Overhead The T praises all the groups’ work. • Encourage Ss to express projector, their own opinions and make Internet, b. Ss discuss with their teammates, decisions. Gmail choose one of the posts and make a • Increase Ss’ self - accounts, 20΄ nice comment on it. If there is time, confidence and sense of Google they make comments on more than achievement. Docs, one blog posts. • Promote real life Blogger, communication. class blog, • Practice commenting on blog posts. • Integrate all skills (listening, reading, speaking and writing).
200 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson plan 8
Guess what? Creating short stories
Familiarize students with project work. Practice using Google Documents and blogs. Create short stories. Familiarize Ss with online searching. Develop students’ digital writing. Use computer – based applications in the EFL classroom. Teaching aims and objectives Improve students’ new literacy skills. Promote process writing. Render students autonomous learners. Encourage group work and peer feedback. Promote active learning in a collaborative environment. Stimulate learners’ different talents and intelligences. Integrate all skills.
Skills Writing (Focus on writing skills but with an integration of the other three skills: listening, speaking, reading).
Students’ level A1 to A2 – 6th grade class of primary school.
Computer – based Personal computers (school computer lab), tools/applications – Materials used Internet connection, class overhead projector, YouTube, Gmail accounts, Google Documents Google, Quizlet, Blogger.
Time available 3 teaching hours.
201 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
STAGES
Planning stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Google Document 1 Task 1 • Prepare Ss for the topic of The teacher (T) invites Ss to enter the lesson. into their Gmail accounts, open the • Stimulate Ss’ interest in the Google Document they have been topic. invited to open, and guess the topic • Encourage T – Ss of the specific project. communication. She uploads a table and encourages Internet, • Create expectations about each group to write three possible Gmail the topic of the lesson to topics in their own column accounts, confirm or disconfirm. according to the preferences which Google 10' • Generate ideas. they expressed during their pre – Docs, • Brainstorm vocabulary. semi – structured interviews. overhead • Encourage Ss to use the She asks the Ss: Which one of these projector. foreign language to talk guesses would you like to be the about their preferences. topic? • Integrate speaking and
listening skills. After listening to all Ss’ opinions, • Stimulate linguistic and the T announces the topic: Sports intrapersonal intelligences.
Google Document 2 • Motivate Ss using Task 1 technology. Ss are invited to a second • Practice using Google Docs collaborative Google Document and completing spider grams. and complete a spider gram with • Brainstorm key vocabulary. Internet, the kinds of sports they can think of. • Stimulate Ss interest in the Gmail topic. accounts, 10΄ Task 2 • Check comprehension. Google Then they discuss in groups and • Provide inspiration for the Docs, decide which one of the sports is tasks to follow. overhead “the king of all sports”. The groups • Promote critical thinking. projector write their opinions in a table. • Integrate reading, listening, speaking skills.
202 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 3 The T asks questions: Do you like football? • Provide inspiration for the What’s your favourite Greek team? tasks to follow. What’s your favourite foreign team? • Encourage T – Ss Who is your favourite Greek football communication. player? • Encourage them to use the Who is your favourite foreign foreign language to talk football player? about real life topics. ------10΄ Do you know the rules of a football • Promote contextualization. game? • Integrate listening and Do you play in a football team? speaking skills. What equipment do you need to play • Stimulate linguistic and football? intrapersonal intelligences. Do you know if football is an Olympic sport? Do you know any other football championships?
Task 4 a. Ss are invited to watch a video song • Motivate Ss using https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= technology and authentic 7-7knsP2n5w YouTube material. and Ss write down as many • Encourage Ss to become countries which participated in active viewers. Mundial 2014 as they can remember • Practice using Google Internet, (based on the flags shown in the Docs. Google, video) in their notebooks in 3 • Provide inspiration for the Gmail minutes. tasks to follow. accounts, Then the T uploads a picture with • Brainstorm key vocabulary. Google 15΄ the flags/countries and invites them • Activate prior knowledge. Docs, to complete their lists. • Promote collaboration. Overhead b. Then groups discuss and choose • Help Ss manage their time. projector, one of these countries and find one • Blend traditional practices notebooks, of its most famous teams or football with new technology ones. photocopies players searching the Internet. They • Improve Ss’ writing skills. write their answers in a box. • Integrate listening and speaking skills. • Stimulate linguistic, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences.
203 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 4 a. The T asks the driving question of the project: Who’s the right coach for the school football team? • Explain to Ss, in detail, Ss have to find a famous football what the PBL final product player, who belongs to a team of the will be. country they have chosen, and use • Familiarize Ss with the him as one of the characters in a stages of process writing. short story about themselves (the • Urge Ss to make an action members of your group) inviting plan. him to become a football coach for • Give Ss the chance to our school team since the present become aware of the coach has decided to quit. prerequisites their product She also says that the final product should have. of the project will be a blog post: Internet, • Promote collaboration. Ss have to post their story on the Google, • Encourage them to make class blog and enrich it with at least Gmail decisions. one picture of the recommended accounts, • Give Ss initiative. 15΄ person. Google • Help Ss manage their time. All stories should have a title. Docs, • Encourage Ss to use their Blogger, imagination in the FL b. She explains the procedure Ss notebooks classroom. have to follow, the stages of process • Blend traditional practices writing and that Ss have to write with new technology ones. their first drafts in their notebooks. • Improve collaborative c. The T uploads a table which will writing skills. be used as a story board and • Integrate reading and discusses with her Ss on how it can listening skills. be used. • Stimulate linguistic, d. The T invites Ss to open Blogger interpersonal, visual and application and read the relevant spatial intelligences. post (model text) she has uploaded.
Ss discuss the story structure with the T.
204 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Implementation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives application– Time Material used Task 1 • Blend traditional practices a. Ss are encouraged to work in with new technology ones. groups. • Encourage Ss to feel They use the table/story board comfortable using paper and provided by the T and make a plan pencil first. of their story. • Increase low proficiency They also use the story plan/useful Ss’ self – confidence giving questions they can find on their them a model text. Google Docs. • Motivate Ss using authentic The T facilitates the procedure and online material. answers all questions Ss might ask. • Lessen Ss’ fear on web b. Ss open Blogger application and applications and use of read the relevant post (model text) computers in the FL the T has uploaded classroom. c. The T invites Ss to follow a link • Encourage online search for Quizlet application to find useful and reflection on online vocabulary: resources. Internet, https://quizlet.com/297994825/flash- • Give Ss initiative. Gmail cards/There is also a link they can • Render students accounts use to find the most famous football autonomous learners. Google players’ names and pictures: • Encourage Ss to use their Docs, 40΄ https://www.theguardian.com/global imagination in the FL Google, /ng-interactive/2019/dec/17/the-100- classroom. Quizlet, best-male-footballers-in-the-world- • Increase low proficiency notebooks 2019 Ss’ self – confidence giving them a model text. d. Groups write their first drafts in • Encourage group work and their notebooks. real life communication Then they revise each other’s among Ss and peer writings according to the scaffolding. requirements given to them. • Promote collaboration. Ss take their notebooks back and • Encourage them to make make changes. decisions. They give notebooks to the T again • Develop critical thinking to revise language and structure skills. mistakes. • Improve writing skills and Ss take their notebooks back and practice process writing. make the final changes. • Integrate reading, listening, speaking skills. • Stimulate linguistic, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences. 205 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 2 a. Ss open Blogger application and • Give them initiative. post their stories on the class blog. • Encourage Ss to express The T reassures Ss that she will be their own opinions and make available for them to help in any decisions. kind of problems they might face • Encourage creativity. during the creation of their • Promote collaboration. Internet, products (save and insert pictures, • Encourage real life Gmail change the fond colours etc) communication. accounts, The T invites all students to practice • Improve digital writing Google 20' typing. skills. Docs, • Use new technology tools. Blogger, • Integrate skills (speaking, and class listening, reading and writing blog. skills). • Stimulate linguistic, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences.
206 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Evaluation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 • Reflect on newly acquired knowledge. a. Groups discuss and decide on who • Develop metacognitive is going to present their stories. strategies (self - reflection b. Ss present their stories and show and evaluation). the pictures in class. • Share constructive feedback The T helps them to remember the with their peers. criteria and evaluate their peers’ • Promote critical and final products checking whether reflective thinking. they fulfil the prerequisites asked • Develop high order in the planning stage and give thinking skills through feedback to their peers. reflection and evaluation of their posts. c. Then they discuss the structure of • Foster self and group Overhead the stories and answer to evaluation. projector, comprehension questions. • Encourage Ss to express Internet, their own opinions and make Gmail d. They discuss with their group decisions. accounts, 15΄ mates, choose one of the posts and • Increase Ss’ self - Google make a nice comment on it. confidence and sense of Docs, achievement. Blogger, e. Lastly, if there is some time left, • Promote real life and class they discuss the theme as a whole communication. blog. class and decide which of the five • Practice commenting on recommended coaches would be the blog posts. perfect coach for the football team. • Integrate all skills (listening, reading, speaking and writing).
207 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson plan 9
Who’s the right guy? Creating letters of advice and a class poster
Familiarize students with project work. Practice using Google Documents and blogs. Create blog posts. Write a letter of advice. Make a poster. Familiarize Ss with online searching. Develop students’ digital writing. Use computer – based applications in the EFL classroom. Teaching aims and objectives Improve students’ new literacy skills. Promote process writing. Render students autonomous learners. Encourage group work and peer feedback. Promote active learning in a collaborative environment. Stimulate learners’ different talents and intelligences. Integrate all skills.
Skills Writing (Focus on writing skills but with an integration of the other three skills: listening, speaking, reading).
Students’ level A1 to A2 – 6th grade class of primary school.
Computer – based Personal computers (school computer lab), tools/applications – Materials used Internet connection, class overhead projector, YouTube, Gmail accounts, Google Documents Google, Blogger, canson paper, photocopies.
Time available 3 teaching hours.
208 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
STAGES
Planning stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used
• Prepare Ss for the topic of Task 1 the lesson a. Ss are invited to log into their • Stimulate Ss’ interest in the group email accounts. Each group topic. has been invited as collaborator to a • Promote contextualization. separate Google Document named • Encourage T – Ss “Who’s the right guy?” communication. Internet, Then the T asks them to read the • Create expectations about Gmail title. the topic of the lesson to accounts, 10' b. They are invited to construct a confirm or disconfirm. Google word putting some letters in a • Generate ideas. Docs. correct order. • Promote collaboration. Each group types the answer in a • Practice using Google Docs table. • Integrate speaking and Ss take turns and call out their listening skills. answer. • Stimulate linguistic and
intrapersonal intelligences. • Stimulate Ss’ interest in the Task 2 topic. a. Ss follow a link to watch a video • Provide inspiration for the song on YouTube: tasks to follow. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l • Encourage Ss to become
9pGE7HsTIQ active viewers. Internet, • Create expectations about Gmail b. Then they are invited to guess the topic of the lesson to accounts, what the topic of this project is. confirm or disconfirm. Google 10΄ Ss discuss in groups and write their • Generate ideas. Docs, answers on the Google Document. • Encourage them to make YouTube, decisions. Overhead • Activate prior knowledge. projector. • Practice using Google Docs. • Integrate writing, reading, listening and speaking skills.
209 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
• Motivate Ss using Task 3 technology. a. The T uploads a table on all • Practice using “Copy – groups’ Google Documents. She Paste” and completing tables. invites Ss to use “copy – paste” in • Brainstorm key vocabulary. Internet, order to match the given adjectives • Stimulate Ss interest in the Gmail with the correct definitions. The topic. accounts, 20΄ Greek translation is also provided • Provide inspiration for the Google for their convenience. tasks to follow. Docs b. Ss present the answers and make • Promote critical thinking. corrections in case of mistakes. • Integrate reading, listening, speaking skills.
Task 4 • Stimulate Ss interest in the Ss work individually: They choose topic. a canson paper heart from the • Provide inspiration for the teacher’s box and write down 4 - 5 tasks to follow. adjectives to describe themselves • Generate ideas. and give examples. They are • Promote critical thinking Internet, allowed to use only positive words and self – evaluation skills. Gmail from the previous table or any other • Help Ss to manage their accounts, adjective they know. They are given time. Google 10΄ 10 minutes for this task. • Blend traditional practices Docs, Then Ss present “themselves” in with new technology ones. Canson class. • Improve Ss’ writing skills. paper. • Stimulate linguistic and intrapersonal intelligences.
Task 5 • Explain to Ss in detail what a. Ss are urged to open Blogger the PBL final product will be. application and find the class blog. • Give Ss the chance to The T has uploaded a post for them. become aware of the Internet, They describe the boy in the picture prerequisites their product Google, and discuss his feelings. should have. Gmail Then they read the post: a letter • Familiarize Ss with the accounts, that a student (Nick) has sent to stages of process writing. 20΄ Google them because he’s been having a • Improve writing skills. Docs, serious problem. • Urge Ss to construct an Overhead action plan. projector. b. The T asks questions: • Encourage them to make What’s the boy’s problem? decisions. Why doesn’t he have any friends? • Brainstorm key vocabulary. What do his classmates think of him? • Stimulate Ss interest in the 210 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Does he like to be part of a group? topic. • Activate prior knowledge. c. The T explains that they have to • Make connections with give him some good advice their own lives. answering the driving question of • Give Ss initiative. the project: What does it take to • Encourage Ss to use their be a good friend? imagination in the FL Ss have some choices regarding the classroom. final product: • Help Ss manage their time. They can write a letter (60 – • Practice using Google Docs 80 words) to Nick or • Promote critical thinking. They can give their advice • Integrate reading, listening, with a comment (40 – 60 speaking skills. words) on the post or • Stimulate linguistic, they can construct a poster interpersonal, visual and with their advice spatial intelligences. They are invited to discuss with their teammates and decide which of the above will be theirs. All products will be posted on the class blog and all the advice will also be used for the class poster for the International Friendship Day. The poster will be posted on the blog as well. Final product requirements: Ss have to • give at least three pieces of advice and give examples. • use different phrases to start each one of them. • find quotes from the following link or pictures with quotes on to accompany their post. d. The T invites them to collaborate and make plans and then she explains the stages of process writing and that Ss have to write their first drafts in their notebooks. They have 20 minutes to finish their first drafts.
211 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Implementation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives application– Time Material used Task 1 • Blend traditional practices with new technology ones. a. Ss work in groups. They discuss • Encourage Ss to feel and decide what their final product comfortable using paper and will be. They use the vocabulary pencil first. introduced in the previous stage and • Increase low proficiency the useful phrases provided by the Ss’ self – confidence T on their Google Docs and make a providing them with useful plan for their writing. phrases. • Motivate Ss using authentic They also follow a link to find online material. information and quotes about the • Lessen Ss’ fear on web International Friendship Day: applications and the use of computers in the FL https://www.betterhelp.com/advice/f classroom. riendship/what-is-friendship-day- • Encourage online search how-is-it-celebrated/ and reflection on online Internet, Students are allowed to search the resources. Gmail Internet to find pictures and quotes • Activate prior knowledge. accounts about friendship to enrich their • .Give Ss initiative. Google posts. • Render students Docs, 35΄ b. Groups write their first drafts in autonomous learners. Google, their notebooks. • Encourage Ss to use their notebooks c. Then they revise each other’s imagination in the FL writings according to the classroom. requirements given to them. • Encourage group work and d. Ss make changes in their real life communication group’s writing if needed among Ss and peer e. They give the second drafts to the scaffolding. teacher who makes the final • Promote collaboration. suggestions and, lastly, Ss make the • Encourage them to make final changes. decisions. • Develop critical thinking skills. • Improve writing skills and promote process writing. • Integrate reading, listening, speaking skills. • Stimulate linguistic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, visual and spatial intelligences. 212 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 2 a. Ss open Blogger application and • Give them initiative. post their writings on the class blog. • Encourage Ss to express
their own opinions and make b. Ss surf the Internet using the decisions. Google search engine to find • Encourage online search pictures and quotes about friendship and reflection on online to enrich their blog post. resources. The T reassures Ss that she will be Internet, • Encourage creativity. available for them to help in any Gmail • Promote collaboration. kind of problems they might face accounts, • Encourage real life during the creation of their Google communication. 25' products (save and insert pictures, Docs, • Improve digital writing change the fond colours etc) Blogger, skills. The T invites all students to practice class blog, • Use new technology tools. typing. Google. • Integrate skills (speaking,
listening, reading and writing c. Groups discuss and decide who is skills). going to present their final products. • Stimulate linguistic,
interpersonal, visual and
spatial intelligences.
213 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Evaluation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 • Reflect on newly acquired knowledge. a. Ss present their final products in • Develop metacognitive class. strategies (self - reflection The T facilitates the procedure by and evaluation). asking questions to help them to • Share constructive feedback remember the criteria and evaluate with their peers. their peers’ final products checking • Promote critical and whether they fulfil the reflective thinking. prerequisites which were asked for • Develop high order in the planning stage and give thinking skills through feedback to their peers. reflection and evaluation of The T praises all the groups’ work. their posts. • Foster self and group b. Ss discuss with their classmates, evaluation. Overhead choose one of the posts and make a • Encourage Ss to express projector, nice comment on it. If there is time their own opinions and make Internet, they make comments on more than decisions. Gmail one blog posts. • Increase Ss’ self confidence accounts, 15΄ and sense of achievement. Google • Promote real life Docs, communication. Blogger, • Practice commenting on and Class blog posts. blog. • Integrate all skills (listening, reading, speaking and writing). • Stimulate linguistic, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences.
214 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson plan 10
Speak up now!! Creating short stories/dialogues/comic strips and a class video
Practice project work. Practice using Google Documents and blogs. Create a short story/dialogue/comic strip. Create a class video. Practice online searching. Develop students’ digital writing. Use computer – based applications in the EFL classroom. Sensitize students about bullying. Teaching aims and objectives Improve students’ New Literacy skills. Promote process writing. Render students autonomous learners. Encourage group work and peer feedback. Promote active learning in a collaborative environment. Stimulate learners’ different talents and intelligences. Integrate all skills.
Skills Writing (Focus on writing skills but with an integration of the other three skills: listening, speaking, reading).
Students’ level A1 to A2 – 6th grade class of primary school.
Computer – based Personal computers (school computer lab), tools/applications – Materials used Internet connection, class overhead projector, YouTube, Gmail accounts, Google Documents Google, Blogger, photocopies.
Time available 3 teaching hours.
215 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
STAGES
Planning stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used
Task 1 a. The T invites Ss to open a new Google document she has shared with them, follow the link https://milatora.gr/schools/ of “The Smile of the Child” and introduces the website and the action against • Prepare Ss for the topic of bullying they organize which is the lesson. called “Speak up now”. • Provide inspiration for the b. Ss are invited to watch a video tasks to be followed. that the students of a 6th grade class • Stimulate Ss’ interest in the of the specific school created for the topic. same action 2 years ago: • Promote contextualization. https://milatora.gr/schools/draseis- • Encourage T – Ss 2018/to-4%ce%bf- communication. Internet, %ce%b4%ce%b7%ce%bc%ce%bf% • Encourage them to make Gmail cf%84%ce%b9%ce%ba%cf%8c- decisions. accounts, 15' %cf%83%cf%87%ce%bf%ce%bb% • Create expectations on the Google ce%b5%ce%af%ce%bf- topic of the lesson to confirm Docs. %ce%b7%cf%81%ce%b1%ce%ba% or disconfirm. ce%bb%ce%b5%ce%af%ce%bf%cf • Generate ideas. %85- • Brainstorm vocabulary. %ce%ba%cf%81%ce%ae%cf%84% • Practice using Google ce%b7%cf%82/ Docs. c. Then they log into their group • Integrate speaking and email accounts and read the email listening skills. the specific organization has sent to • Stimulate linguistic and their school. intrapersonal intelligences. The Ss discuss and decide on their participation in the action. d. The T invites Ss to discuss and decide what their participation/ final product of this project will be: a poster or a class video.
216 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 2 a. The T asks Ss questions: • Brainstorm key vocabulary. What is bullying? • Stimulate Ss interest in the Can we stop it? topic. • Provide inspiration for the b. Ss are invited to follow some tasks to be followed. links and find definitions of • Create expectations about bullying and write them down in the topic of the lesson to the collaborative table on a Google confirm or disconfirm. Document. • Generate ideas. • Encourage them to make https://www.kzoo.edu/psych/stop decisions. Internet, _bullying/for_kids/what_is_a_bul • Give Ss the chance to use Gmail ly.html the foreign language to write accounts, 20΄ https://bullyingnoway.gov.au/For and talk about real life topics Google Kids/Pages/What-is-bullying.aspx such as bullying and personal Docs, https://www.childline.org.uk/info relationships. Websites. -advice/bullying-abuse- • Promote critical thinking. safety/types-bullying/bullying- • Promote collaborative cyberbullying/ writing. • Practice using Google c. Ss present their definitions in Docs. class. • Practice “copy – paste”. d. Ss are invited to find out what all • Integrate reading, listening, their definitions of bullying have in speaking skills. common.
Task 3 • Brainstorm key vocabulary. Ss look at some pictures which have • Stimulate Ss interest in the been uploaded by the T, discuss topic. with their group mates and write • Provide inspiration for the down the types of bullying. tasks to follow. A short discussion follows • Generate ideas. concerning the types of bullying. • Check comprehension. Internet, • Give Ss the chance to use Gmail accounts, the FL to speak talk about 5΄ real life topics such as Google bullying and personal Docs. relationships. • Practice using Google Docs. • Integrate all skills.
217 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 4 a. Ss are invited to complete a • Motivate Ss using spider gram with the people who technology. are involved in a “bullying case” • Practice using Google Docs (during the incident and after that) and completing spider grams. Internet,
• Brainstorm key vocabulary. Google, The T also uses the overhead • Stimulate Ss interest in the Gmail projector to facilitate the procedure. topic. accounts, 10΄ • Sensitize Ss on bullying. Google
• Provide inspiration for the Docs,
tasks to follow. Overhead
• Promote critical thinking. projector.
• Integrate reading, listening, speaking skills.
Task 4 a. The T invites Ss to discuss in • Blend traditional practices groups and decide whether some with new technology ones. statements are right or wrong. • Practice using Google Each group is assigned different Docs. sentences. • Check comprehension. They are provided with useful • Provide inspiration for the vocabulary (photocopies). tasks to follow. They present their answers in class. • Sensitize Ss on bullying. • Activate prior knowledge. • Make connections with Internet, their own lives. Google, • Develop critical thinking Gmail skills. accounts, 5΄ • Encourage peer scaffolding, Google group work, communication, Docs, collaboration and decision photocopies making. • Make connections with their own lives. • Integrate reading and speaking skills. • Stimulate linguistic, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences.
218 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 5 a. The T introduces the driving question of the project: Can we stop bullying?? And the final product of the project: Ss have to choose between a short video and a poster. Both should include paintings (not pictures downloaded from the • Explain to Ss, in detail, Internet) and a dialogue among what the PBL final product students involved in a case of will be. bullying. • Give Ss the chance to The Ss are informed that they have become aware of the to continue a story given to them prerequisites their product and then paint a picture and should have. construct a dialogue based on it. • Familiarize Ss with the Ss discuss and decide to participate stages of process writing. in the action of “The Smile of the • Improve writing skills. Child” with a class video/whole • Urge Ss to construct an class final product. action plan. Internet, • Motivate Ss by presenting b. She explains the procedure Ss Google, them to a real audience. have to follow (the stages of Gmail • Promote collaboration. process writing and that Ss have to accounts, 15΄ • Encourage them to make write their first drafts in their Google decisions. notebooks) and the features that Docs, • Give Ss initiative. each group’s final product should photocopies • Help Ss manage their time. have: • Encourage Ss to use their Groups are urged to: imagination in the FL Continue a given story classroom. about bullying which will • Blend traditional practices contain 3 pieces of advice to with new technology ones. the people involved or • Integrate reading, speaking construct a dialogue between and listening skills. the parts involved. • Stimulate linguistic, Paint 2 to 4 pictures interpersonal, visual and showing the problem and the spatial intelligences. solutions they suggest.
Include the following message in one of the pictures: “Speak up now”. Suggest a song as background music for the class video. All the stories and the dialogues will be posted on the class blog along with the class video.
219 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Implementation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 • Blend traditional practices a. Ss work in groups. Ss follow with new technology ones. some links to find ideas for their • Encourage Ss to feel stories comfortable using paper and • https://bullyingnoway.gov.au/ForK pencil first. ids/WhatCanIDo/ImBeingBullied • Motivate Ss using authentic • https://bullyingnoway.gov.au/ForK online material. ids/WhatCanIDo/SomeoneIKnowIs • Lessen Ss’ fear on web BeingBullied applications and use of computers in the FL classroom. b. Groups write their first drafts in • Encourage online search their notebooks. and reflection on online Then they revise each other’s resources. writings according to the • Give Ss initiative. Internet, requirements given to them. • Render students Gmail Ss take their notebooks back and autonomous learners. accounts make changes. • Encourage Ss to use their Google They give notebooks to the T again imagination in the FL Docs, 30΄ to revise language and structure classroom. Google, mistakes. • Encourage group work and Notebooks. Ss take their notebooks back and communication among Ss make the final changes. and peer scaffolding. • Promote collaboration. c. Ss are also free to surf the • Encourage them to make Internet using a Google search decisions. engine to find the information they • Encourage real life need. communication. • Develop critical thinking As homework students have to paint skills. pictures for the class video. • Improve writing skills and promote process writing. • Integrate reading, listening, speaking skills. • Stimulate linguistic, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences.
220 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Task 2 a. Ss open Blogger application and post their stories and dialogues on • Give Ss initiative. the class blog. • Encourage Ss to express their own opinions and make b. They switched on YouTube and decisions. search for the song they would like • Encourage creativity. to use as background music for the • Promote collaboration. class video. • Encourage real life Internet, The T is available for them to help communication. Gmail in any kind of problems they • Improve digital writing accounts, might face during the creation of skills. Google 20' their products (save and insert • Use new technology tools. Docs, pictures and video songs, change the • Integrate all skills YouTube, fond colours etc) (speaking, listening, reading Blogger, The T invites all students to practice and writing). class blog. typing. • Allow Ss to have fun in the FL classroom. • Stimulate linguistic, interpersonal, visual and spatial intelligences.
221 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Evaluation stage Computer – based tool/ Procedure Aims - Objectives Time application – Material used Task 1 • Reflect on newly acquired knowledge. a. Groups discuss and decide how • Develop metacognitive they are going to present their story: strategies (self - reflection read their post, role – playing, and evaluation). describe their pictures etc. • Share constructive feedback b. The T helps them to remember the with their peers. criteria and evaluate their peers’ • Promote critical and final products checking whether reflective thinking. they fulfil the prerequisites asked • Develop high order in the planning stage and give thinking skills through feedback to their peers. reflection and evaluation of their posts. c. Then all the songs are presented • Foster self and group Overhead and Ss discuss and decide which evaluation. projector, one will be used for the class video • Encourage Ss to express Internet, their own opinions and make Gmail accounts, decisions. 15΄ d. Lastly, if there is some time left, • Increase Ss’ self confidence Google they discuss with their teammates, and sense of achievement. Docs, choose one of the posts and make a • Promote real life YouTube, nice comment on it. communication. Blogger, • Practice commenting on Class blog. blog posts. • Integrate all skills (listening, reading, speaking and writing).
222 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX X: STUDENTS’ WORKSHEETS – GOOGLE DOCS (The students’ answers in italics)
Lesson 1 1st Google Document (all groups) “RULE” THE INTERNET
Dear students, Welcome to the 1st Google Document!!!!!!!
Can you name the following social media???? Each group can write at least one word!!!!!
Facebook Google plus Instagram
Messenger Pinterest Viber
YouTube
Let’s ask ourselves: “How can we stay safe online?”
PRODUCT TO BE CREATED: a poster about INTERNET SAFETY RULES 223 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
TIP: Check out the following posters to get some ideas:
Each poster has to:
1. have a title 2. include at least 4 rules 3. include at least 1 picture.
The posters are going to be posted on the class blog.
Ready?
Go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
224 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
2nd Google Document (all groups) Task 1
Follow the links to watch some YouTube videos about Internet safety: 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxySrSbSY7o 2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9Htg8V3eik 3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrln8nyVBLU 4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9R_OoQAi2I
Task 2 1. Each group has to write down 5 Internet safety rules in a notebook 2. Exchange notebooks with the group on your left and make suggestions about content and structure using parentheses and a pencil. You are not allowed to remove anything!!!! 3. Take your notebooks back and make changes if needed. 4. Give the notebook to the teacher and ask for her final comments. 5. Make the final changes. 6. Complete your group’s column in the table below
TIP 1: You can find useful vocabulary here: https://quizlet.com/433198283/flash-cards/ https://quizlet.com/_75wxxn
225 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
TIP 2: The teacher is always available for you to help in any kind of problems you might face during the creation of your products. Don’t hesitate to ask her for help!!!!!
INTERNET SAFETY RULES
Group 1 Sharks Group 2 Panthers Group 3 Hawks
Protect your social Don’t give out personal Don't give out personal media :] information info online
Don’t be in the computer Never send pictures to Tell an adult right away for more than one hour strangers if you came across :] something that makes you uncomfortable
Do not respond to Don’t post your photos if Keep passwords private messages that are mean you are 7 years old ;] or make you feel uncomfortable
Talk to a parent before Don’t speak to strangers Don’t download anything posting a picture or a ;} without permission video
Talk to your parents If there’s something Tell an adult if you about setting up rules wrong tell your parents receive a mean or for going online and ;] strange message using your mobile phone
226 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Group 4 Flames Group 5 Bears
Dοn’t give out personal Don’t give out personal information information
Never send pictures to Never send pictures to strangers strangers
Keep password private except Keep password private except from parents from parents
Don’t download anything without Be polite to people. permission
Don’t speak to strangers Tell an adult if you meet a mean or strange message
Task 3 Now create a new Google Document and then choose at least 4 rules to make your poster. You can use any group’s rules.
Give a title to your poster!!
Feel free to use various fond colours and sizes.
Remember to include at least 1 picture downloaded from the Internet.
Good luck!!!!
227 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson 2 (all groups) How well do you know your friends????
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vx2u5uUu3DE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yg8DlOs6cu8
Important things in preteens’ life
1. school
2. hobbies
3. afternoon activities
4. sports
5. surf the Net
6. music
7. HomeWork
8. learning stuff
228 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
9. talenτs
10. friends
11. family
12. clothes
13. dreams
14. parties
Let’s get to know us better!!!!!!!!
YOUR TASK: Follow the steps to write your own autobiography:
STEP 1: CHOOSE ONE OF THE IMPORTANT THINGS ABOVE: a. What event? b.What happened? c. Who was there? d. Why was it important? e. How did you feel? f. What does it say about you?
STEP 2: WRITE IN YOUR NOTEBOOK: Write in the first person a. Introduce yourself b. Provide details c. Use descriptive language d. Express thoughts and feelings e. Choose an image f. Think of a title
229 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Some useful phrases you might need: My name is…… I was born in We are a family of four: my parents, me and ……... or I have ……………………………. I am in ………………………………………...of primary school …………….…. my favourite subjects are……………………………….. ….
Three years ago me and my friends……………. We……………………….. It was ……………… I was so …………………………………. I realized that ………………………….
Now I am …………………………………. I would like to take up ………………….classes and become a …………………….. I want to work hard and ………………
STEP 3: ASK A FRIEND TO EDIT YOUR TEXT ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA AND LANGUAGE CODE: Use a pencil and parentheses, do not remove anything!!!
A: Criteria for editing your Autobiography:
1. Does the autobiography have a title?
2. Does it have a beginning, middle and end?
a. Does the first paragraph introduce the author of the autobiography?
b. Did the author include background information to set the time and place of the autobiography?
230 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
c. Did you learn anything about the author’s life in the paragraphs that followed? d. Did the author express her/his thoughts, feelings or opinions? e. Are there enough details to make the autobiography interesting? f. Is the text about 60 - 80 words?
B: Now check the language according to this code:
LANGUAGE MISTAKES CODE
WW = Wrong word
S = Spelling mistake
V = Wrong verb form or verb missing
WO = Wrong word order (λάθος σειρά των λέξεων
G = Grammatical error
? = I don’t understand what you are trying to say
STEP 4:. TAKE YOUR AUTOBIOGRAPHY BACK AND MAKE CHANGES IF NEEDED.
STEP 5: THEN GIVE IT TO YOUR TEACHER TO CHECK IT OUT
STEP 6: WRITE YOUR AUTOBIOGRAPHY ON A NEW GOOGLE DOCUMENT!! 231 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Are you ready to post it on the class blog?? You are?? Great!!!!
STEP 7: DISCUSS WITH YOUR TEAMMATES AND DECIDE WHOSE AUTOBIOGRAPHY WILL BE POSTED ON THE CLASS BLOG.
● Copy and paste it from the Google Document to a new Post on the class blog
The other two or three members of the team will make the following decisions: 1. A YouTube video which will be also posted. 2. A picture which must be relevant to the autobiography theme.
There is a post on the blog which might give you some ideas.
STEP 8: Make a comment on the other group’s posts. Decide with your teammates the content of the comment. Remember: Be polite!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The end!! Congratulations for the good work!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now answer some questions regarding the project work (work in groups, make decisions and type your answers below): 1. What was the most difficult aspect of today’s project? - two of the other groups didn’t like our comments - The project is easy 232 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
- nothing everything was good for us - there wasn’t sound 2. How did you manage to overcome the difficulties? - yes - yes 3. During your research did you face any problems? - yes,was only one
4. How easy was it to cooperate with the other members of your group? - All it’s ok. - a little bit difficult - it was so easy because we help each other - it was a little one 5. Did you have any problems using the class blog? - a little problem but we learned it - No - No we are ok - yes we had one problem 6. Did you have any problems using Google documents? - no Ι did not - No we haven’t problem. - No we haven’t - no
233 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson 3 1st Google Document (all groups) WHAT IF ????????????
Are you ready for online holidays???????? You are?????
Then click Visit Greece and explore our country.
Find a nice place to go, “taste” local food, listen to traditional music, “do” sports, learn about the history and the civilization of Greece!!!! You can even take online tickets for museums and archaeological sites. Did you have fun???? Come back in class now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-Discuss with your group mates and choose one of you to draw a piece of paper from the teacher’s box, write the name of your group on it and give it to your teacher. -Then answer the appropriate questions/tasks according to the colour you drew. Try to use full sentences:
DO NOT INTERFERE WITH OTHER GROUPS’ WORK 234 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
1. What is the name of our country? The name of our country is Greece. 2. Is it a beautiful country? It’s a very beautiful country. 3. What is the capital? The capital of Greece is Athens 4. Describe our flag A white cross with blue and white lines 5. Surf the Internet, find a picture of our flag and insert it here:
1. Which continent is it located in? IT IS LOCATED IN EUROPE 2. Which country does our country share borders with? (Surf the Net to find a map in case you do not know) SHARE BORDERS WITH ALBANIA,NORTH MACEDONIA,BULGARIA AND TURKEY 3. Surf the Internet, find a picture of our country and insert it here:
235 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
1. What about the landform? Are there islands, mountains, lakes, rivers, plains, big cities? Name some of them. Use a map. It has so many high mountains like Olympus , beautiful islands like Crete, Rhodes, Santorini, Mikonos, Kerkira Lesvos, big rivers, so big plains. 2. Write a few things about the history of the country (ancient civilization, wars, etc) Have a great history but it’s so big history etc. 3. Surf the Internet, find a map of our country and insert it here:
1. What is the weather in our country during winter and summer? (Temperature, phenomena) Use at least 3 - 4 sentences In Greece the temperature in winter is low and cold but in summer the temperature is high and hot . 2. Name some of the famous people who come from our country and their accomplishments
236 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Some of famous singers in Greece are Eleni Foureira, Sakis Rouvas , Elena Paparizou and Panos Mouzourakis 3. Surf the Internet, find an appropriate picture and insert it here:
237 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
1. Write a few things about the people in our country: their character, hobbies, problems etc. They are friendly, happy and helpful. 2. What language do they speak? They speak Greek. 3. What about the traditional food in our country? Write some of the food habits of a family. We have many traditional dishes like ntolmadakia, pastitsio and Cretan salad. 4. Surf the Internet, find an appropriate picture and insert it here:
NOW CHOOSE THE GROUP REPORTER and PRESENT YOUR ANSWERS IN CLASS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
238 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
CREATE A NEW DOCUMENT
YOUR TASK is to work with your group mates, create your own country and present it in class.
Use https://www.google.com/earth/ to “locate” your country and surf the Net to find any information you need.
1. Give it a name. 2. Find a location for it on the Earth. 3. Write which countries it borders with. 4. Write about the landform 5. Talk about the weather 6. Write about the people and their problems and hobbies 7. Write about the famous people you would like to live in your country 8. Write about the traditional food people in your country eat and the food habits 9. Write a few things about the history of your country. 10. Create a flag for your country 11. Find two pictures from the Web to enrich your report or draw some. 12. Add anything you like 13. Give a title to your report 14. REMEMBER: Your report should have at least 10 of the above
NOTE 1: First use your notebook and a pencil to write your ideas. Write full sentences. NOTE 2: In case you need new vocabulary click Online Dictionary
239 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
2nd Google Document (all groups)
COUNTRY REPORT
1. Have you created your own country?? 2. Check it according to the checking list. 3. Give your report to the teacher to check it. 4. Look at the teacher’s suggestions very carefully!!! 5. Edit your text.
Now you are ready to post it on the blog!!!!!!!!!!!
All members of the group should practice typing!!!!
Before that take a look at the class post!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Peer evaluation - Feedback:
❏ Read the other groups’ reports. ❏ Discuss with your teammates and choose one country to go on holidays. ❏ Give at least 2 reasons for choosing the specific country!!!!!!!
240 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson 4
GOOD FOOD = GOOD LIFE
What do we mean when we say healthy diet?
1. Watch the following videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKuYfLM0yDc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KbA8pFW3tg
2.How often should we eat……….?
Complete this table with the following phrases in the appropriate column: Use COPY - PASTE every day 5 times a day daily rarely - almost never 1 to 3 times a day
FATS AND PROTEINS DAIRY FRUITS AND CARBOHYDR SWEETS VEGETABLES ATES rarely- every day 1 to 3 5 times every almost times a a day day never day
241 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
3. Can you think of some traditional Greek dishes?? Write them in your group’s column:
BEARS FLAMES HAWKS PANTHERS SHARKS mousakas meat,beef, dolmadakia gyros meat dolmadakia, dolmadakia psito dolmadakia snails pastitsio pastitsio, pastitsio salad kritiko pilafi fish mousakas, kalamarakia fish mousakas cretan salad psito, traditional mousakas sfakiani pita salad kalamaraki, pilafi gyros village salad snails, koulouri mousakas kokinisto thesalonikis and green salad
242 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Can you guess the names of the following traditional Greek dishes?
1. Made with meat cooked on a vertical rotisserie, and served in a pita, with tomato, onion, tzatziki, lettuce and french fries. gyros 2. A layered dish made of sautéed eggplant, minced meat, and is topped with a Béchamel sauce.mousakas 3. Grilled pieces of meat on a skewer (sometimes layered with vegetables). This is usually served with pita bread and lemon wedges.souvlaki 4. This Easter dish is a tradition across the country, although it varies in different regions. Mostly consumed as a soup, it is consumed immediately after the midnight Divine Liturgy in the Greek Orthodox Church. It is made from lamb offal and seasoned with onions, dill, butter, rice and avgolemono. magiritsa 5. This dish is also consumed at Greek Orthodox Easter, but not exclusively. This rotisserie dish is made of lamb or goat intestines, heart liver and other organ meat wrapped in caul fat and then by yards of cleaned intestines.kokoretsi 6. Made from white beans, olive oil, and vegetables, this dish is eaten year round throughout Greece.fasolada.
Your Task: Choose a day of the week and write it down in the following table. Make sure that no other group has chosen the same day.
BEARS FLAMES HAWKS PANTHERS SHARKS Wednesday Thursday Tuesday Friday Monday
243 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
● The final product of this project will be a new post on the class blog suggesting and describing the school meals of one day of the week.
You have to suggest:
1. three different kinds of food for a complete breakfast. 2. three different kinds of food for a complete lunch 3. three different kinds of snacks
Criteria
1. All foods should be healthy 2. Each kind of food in each meal should belong to a different step of the FOOD PYRAMID 3. You have to justify your foods in each meal using two - three sentences. Information and useful vocabulary can be found in the videos you watched earlier, on the Internet, on Quizlet application
Online Dictionary: https://www.wordreference.com
Phrases you might need:
This dish is made from………….. It contains……………. (περιέχει)
4. Use pictures to make your post interesting 244 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
SOS: Before post, invite the group on your right to revise your work. Revise theirs.
REMEMBER: Do not remove anything. Use parentheses or underline.
Then make changes and invite the teacher to check it out.
GOOD LUCK!!!!
245 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson 5
What’s the story behind the stories? (Group: Hawks)
● Follow the link and watch the video: https://learnenglishkids.britishcouncil.org/short-stories/romeo-and- juliet
● Now read the following story and complete the following table: Romeo and Juliet
By William Shakespeare
Many years ago in Verona, Italy, there were two families. These families were always fighting. The Montagues had a son, Romeo. The Capulets had a daughter, Juliet. One night the Capulets had a party and Romeo went. He met Juliet and they fell in love. Juliet’s cousin, Tybalt, saw Romeo and he was very angry. But Romeo and Juliet talked and decided to get married. They knew that their families would be very angry so they went to Friar Lawrence and got married secretly. The next day, Tybalt saw Romeo as he was going for a walk. He was still angry with Romeo and wanted to fight him. Romeo didn’t want to fight but his best friend, Mercutio, did. Mercutio fought Tybalt. Unfortunately Tybalt killed Mercutio! Romeo was very upset so he fought Tybalt and killed him too! The Prince of Verona was very angry and sent Romeo away. Juliet went to Friar Lawrence for help. He gave her a special drink to sleep for two days. She told her that her family would think she was dead but she would wake up. And finally she and Romeo could be free together. Juliet followed his plan, drank it and fell asleep.
246 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Friar Lawrence sent Romeo a letter to tell him the plan. But Romeo didn’t get the message. He heard that Juliet was dead! Romeo was very sad so he bought some poison and went to see Juliet. “Now I will stay with you forever”, he said, drank the poison and died. Juliet woke up and saw what happened. “Oh no! You didn’t leave any poison for me but here is your knife”, she said and stabbed herself to death. Romeo and Juliet were both dead. Friar Lawrence told the Capulets and Montagues what happened. They were so sad they agreed not to fight any more.
MAIN OTHER WHEN WHERE THE WHAT CHARACTERS CHARACTERS PROBLEM HAPPENED OF THE STORY OF THE IN THE END STORY
Romeo,Juliet Tybalt,Mercuti many years Italy,Vero their they both o,Friar ago na families died and Lawrence fighting their ,they both families fell in love were so sad but they so they couldn’t agree to not live fight any together more
● Look at the following pictures carefully:
247 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
● Do the following activities:
Activity 1: Choose one of the pictures above and delete all the others
Activity 2: Give the person a name: Jason Activity 3: Write 5 adjectives to describe the person’s appearance
Tall, pretty, thin, popular, cool
Activity 4: Write 5 adjectives to describe the person’s character
Clever, beautiful, kind, hard working, bad guy
Activity 5: Write three things that the person likes doing.
1. singing
2. reading
3. dancing Activity 6: Write who he/she lives with With his girlfriend
Activity 7(Homework): Take the story map photocopy and complete it. This is NOT a group activity.
248 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
2nd class
Final product: Create group stories - Class final product suggested by the teacher: a digital story video
DEADLINE: TODAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Or
Discuss with your group mates and suggest another way to present your story.
Each student has a story map.
1. Read them all (group work)
2. Choose at least 2 of the characters.
3. Then choose one or more of each story’s characteristics and “build” your group story based on the following plan given by your teacher. Give it to your teacher for editing, then take it back and make changes if necessary.
4. Each part should be accompanied by a picture in A4 (You have to bring it back next Wednesday).
5. Decide how your group is going to present your story.
249 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
GROUP STORY PLAN
1. Opening: Write about your characters and the setting. Set the mood.
2. Build up: Write about some events that happened and what the characters are going to do to lead up to a problem.
3. Dilemma – Problem: Something goes wrong. It could be a mystery, a fight or something else. Is it terrible? Is it a problem?
4. Solution: The problem is sorted out in some way. Everything is made right.
5. Ending: Write about the characters’ feelings and thoughts about what happened.
Discuss with your peers and decide to use one of the settings in the following pictures or choose your own setting.
250 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Criteria for evaluating the 5th project – SHORT STORY
1. Title
2. Paragraphs:
a. Opening: 2 characters and the setting : when, where.
b. Dilemma –Problem: Something goes wrong.
c. Solution: The problem is sorted out in some way.
d. Ending: feelings and thoughts
3. The character’s picture and at least one picture related to the story.
4. Did you work well in your group/make decisions peacefully?
5. Did you use all members’ story maps for the final story?
6. Did you all type part of the story?
End of the story!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
251 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson 6 ?
Hello, Flames!!!!!!!!!!!
Today’s class will be a “life lesson”. Have you got any idea why? What is it going to be about?
A. Make a list of all the things you consider important in your life, things you cannot live without (you shouldn’t mention people): 1. internet 2. sports 3. sea 4. music 5. ice cream 6. fruit 7. trees 8. OFI 9. water 10. adventure 11. animals 12. escape house
B. Present your group’s list in class. C. Highlight the things you have in common with other groups. D. Now watch some videos and then complete your list if needed.
252 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
1. https://www.conservation.org/nature-is-speaking/Pages/Julia- Roberts-Is-Mother-Nature.aspx 2. https://www.conservation.org/nature-is-speaking/Pages/Harrison- Ford-Is-the-Ocean.aspx 3. https://www.conservation.org/nature-is-speaking/Pages/Shailene- Woodley-Is-Forest.aspx 4. https://www.conservation.org/nature-is-speaking/Pages/Joan- Chen-is-Sky.aspx 5. https://www.conservation.org/nature-is-speaking/Penelope-Cruz- Is-Water?ytVideoId=fwV9OYeGN88 6. https://www.conservation.org/nature-is-speaking/Edward-Norton- Is-the-Soil?ytVideoId=Dor4XvjA8Wo 7. https://www.conservation.org/nature-is-speaking/Ian- Somerhalder-Is-Coral-Reef?ytVideoId=lVMV3StvLCs 8. https://www.conservation.org/nature-is-speaking/reese- witherspoon-is-home?ytVideoId=mkjwxmcdb0E
E. Now make a list of the things nature offers to people: oxygen
paper
fruit and vegetables
meat
milk
juice
clothes
water
sand
soil
wood
rock
253 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
F: Now make a list of the environmental problems you can think of: USEFUL VOCABULARY: https://quizlet.com/_7mv2ft?x=1jqt&i=1ckdz5 chemicals fumes garbage flood tornado acid rain pollution tsunami drought global warming natural disaster petrol
YOUR TASK!!!!!!!!!!!!
You have to find solutions to some environmental problems answering the following question:
What can we do to reverse environmental problems????
Your suggestions will be used for our podcast - participation in the European School Radio Competition: “Κάν’ το ν’ ακουστεί 2020”.
READY!!!!!!!!!!!
254 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
1. Go to our class blog and listen to Polly and Sharkie. They will help you.
2. Read about 5 of the most important environmental problems
3. Then come back here and get ready for action!!!!!
Are you back?????????? Time for action!!!!!
1. Choose one of the problems. 2. Find at least 5 solutions to reverse it. Write a paragraph (60 - 80 words) 3. Find a slogan and use it as a title. 4. Add 2 pictures. One should show the problem you are dealing with and the other should show the solution. 5. Check out some of the following links to get some ideas
● https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/oceans/tak e-action/10-things-you-can-do-to-save-the-ocean/ ● http://www.worldanimalfoundation.org/articles/article/894999 9/181267.htm ● https://inspiyr.com/easy-ways-to-help-save-the-earth/ ● http://www.endangered.org/10-easy-things-you-can-do-to- save-endangered-species/ ● https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/ten-personal-solutions- global-warming
255 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Useful phrases
People can…………..
We must…………………
We should ……………………
Another thing we can do is ……………………..
A Solution could be ………………………………
If we stopped……………………, we could …………………………..
6. When you finish, give your notebook to the group next to you. Take theirs and make corrections if needed. Use a pencil, underline, use parentheses.
- Check if there are 5 solutions and a slogan. - Make sure they have written about 60 - 80 words. - Make sure that they have used a slogan. - Check if they have used some of the above phrases.
7. Get your notebook back, make changes if needed and then give it to the teacher for the final revision.
Present your text in class and post it on the class blog!!!!!
256 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson 7 Ready for holidays??? Grab your gear and let’s go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
a. What types of holidays can you think of?
1. Safari
2. beach
3. sightseeing 4. mountain
5. cruise 6. climbing 7. skiing 8. Surfing 9. ice skating 10. hiking
b. Look at the following pictures. What types of holidays can you see? Write the suitable words under the pictures:
257 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
C. YOUR TASK: Create a blog post Which type of holidays would you recommend? Discuss with your group mates and choose one of them. Imagine that you and your group mates are having this kind of holidays today!!! Write a postcard (80-100) to your family or to your teacher telling them all about your holidays. The following questions will help you: Answer all of them: 258 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
1. What kind of equipment do you need? 2. How long are you staying there? 3. Where are you at the moment? 4. Who are you with? 5. Where are you staying? 6. What type of holidays are you having? 7. What kind of activities do you do every day? (name at least 3) 8. What kind of equipment do you need? 9. How long are you staying there? 10. What are your feelings about your holidays?
NOTES - STEPS ● Use your notebook. ● You can find useful vocabulary on Quizlet application https://quizlet.com/_7slvtd?x=1jqt&i=1ckdz5 ● When you finish, give it to the group on your right to revise it. ● Revise the postcard of the group on your left. ● Check if all questions have been answered. ● Give it back to the writers. ● Take back yours and make changes if needed (work individually for this one). ● Now give it to your teacher for the final corrections. ● Take it back and do the final editing. ● Post it on the class blog!!!! ● Recommend a place (look for the ideal one using the 5 links below). Use the suggested by the website picture 259 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
to accompany your post and write one or two sentences to describe the place. ● Give your post a title!!!!!!
1. Holidays destinations 1 https://www.mykidstime.com/travel/the-best-10-spots- for-family-camping-in-europe/ 2. Holidays destinations 2 https://www.theguardian.com/travel/2018/mar/24/20- best-campsites-europe-camping-greece-france-spain 3. Holidays destinations 3 https://www.cntraveller.com/gallery/best-holiday- destinations-2020 4. Holidays destinations 4 https://www.10adventures.com/hiking-in-greece/ 5. Holidays destinations 5 https://www.wanderlust.co.uk/content/the-best-african- safari/ Tip:
Your post will be evaluated by all groups and the teacher. Be sure it includes four things:
Don’t forget the title!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1. the postcard text, 2. the recommended place 3. a short description of the place and 4. the appropriate picture.
260 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson 8
1st Google Document
Guess what?
Discuss with your teammates and try to guess today’s topic, according to the preferences you talked about during your interviews in the beginning of the school year. Each group can suggest three topics. Write them down in the following table:
Sharks Panthers Hawks Flames Bears computer gymnastics music technology sports games ofi school countries sports music sports recycling trips science- ofi 4 fiction
261 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
2nd Google Document
1) How many different kinds of sports can you think?
Team sports Summer Individual sports sports
Extreme Winter sports sports Sports
Beach Water sports sports Olympic sports
2) Which is the king of all sports? Guess one as a group!!!
Sharks football Panthers football Hawks football Flames football Bears football
262 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
3) Answer your teacher’s questions. Try to speak in English.
4) a. Follow the link and watch a video song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-7knsP2n5w
b. Try to find as many countries mentioned in the song as you can in 3 minutes!!! Write them down in your notebook. Then look at the picture below and complete your lists.
c. Choose one of the countries and search the Internet to find one of its most famous football players. Write the name of the country and the football player in the box:
4. YOUR TASK/FINAL PRODUCT: Find a coach for your school football team/ a blog post - short story
263 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
The question is: Who is the right coach for the school football team?
You have to find a famous football player, who belongs to the team you have chosen, and use him as one of the characters in a short story about you (the members of your group) inviting him to become a football coach for our school team since the present coach decided to quit. Post your story on the class blog. Present a picture of him or her.
MAIN OTHER WHEN WHERE THE WHAT CHARACTERS CHARACTERS PROBLEM HAPPENED OF THE STORY OF THE (in a IN THE END (you) STORY specific What the football time in the happened player) past) in school that made the coach quit)
STORY PLAN - Useful questions
1. Opening: Write about your characters and the setting. Set the mood. When did the story happen? What are the names of your group members? Where were you? How were you feeling?
2. Build up: Write about some events that happened and what the characters are going to do to lead up to a problem. What were you doing? 264 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Did something happen that caused a problem? Describe the events.
3. Dilemma – Problem: Something goes wrong. Is it terrible? Is it a problem? What happened next? What was the problem?
4. Solution: The problem is sorted out in some way. Everything is made right. What did you do to solve the problem? Was everything ok in the end?
5. Ending: Write about the characters’ feelings and thoughts about what happened. How are you feeling about the way things turned out?
Find the names of the 100 best football players here: https://www.theguardian.com/global/ng- interactive/2019/dec/17/the-100-best-male-footballers-in-the-world- 2019 CHECK your teacher’s post on the class bog before you start writing your story.
You can find useful vocabulary here: https://quizlet.com/297994825/flash-cards/ Or here: https://quizlet.com/_4xf2a1?x=1jqt&i=1ckdz5
Process writing
1. When you finish your first drafts, give your notebook to the group next to you. Take theirs and make corrections if needed. Use a pencil, underline, use parentheses. 2. Get your notebook back, make changes if needed and then give it to the teacher for the final revision.
As a class, discuss and decide the new coach of the school football team.
265 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson 9 Who’s the right guy?????
Task 1: Put the following letters in the correct order to make a word and write it in the box:
D I F R E N S
FRIENDS
Task 2: Now follow the link to watch a video song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9pGE7HsTIQ
What do you think the topic of today’s project will be?
…………………...
Task 3: Use “Copy - Paste = Αντιγραφή - Επικόλληση” to complete the table with the correct descriptions of the given adjectives Adjective Description Greek translation
1 Hardworking She/He works hard εργατικός
2 Trustworthy You can trust him/her to be honest and άξιος εμπιστοσύνης sincere.
3 Loyal She/He will always be on your side πιστός
4 Energetic She/He has a lot of energy. δραστήριος
5 Adventurous She/He likes doing new and different περιπετειώδης things.
6 Good - hearted She/he is kind and generous καλόκαρδος
266 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
7 Brave He/She is fearless γενναίος
8 Friendly He/She is behaving in a pleasant, kind φιλικός way
9 Sociable He/She likes to meet and spend time with κοινωνικός other people
10 Organised She/He knows how to organise things well οργανωτικός
11 Dynamic She/He has a lot of energy and can think δυναμικός creatively.
12 Patient She/He can accept difficult situations υπομονετικός without getting angry.
13 Kind He/She cares about others and likes to ευγενικός help them, often emotionally.
14 Helpful He/She likes helping βοηθητικός
15 Generous He/She likes giving things to people. γενναιόδωρος
16 Polite He/She’s good at saying “please,” “thank ευγενικός you,” etc
17 Charming He/She has a “magic” effect that makes γοητευτικός people like him. ● He/She has a “magic” effect that makes people like him. ● He/She’s good at saying “please,” “thank you,” etc. ● He/She likes giving things to people. ● He/She likes helping. ● He/She cares about others and likes to help them, often emotionally. ● She/He can accept difficult situations without getting angry. ● She/He has a lot of energy and can think creatively. ● She/He knows how to organise things well. ● She/He works hard ● You can trust him/her to be honest and sincere. ● She/He has a lot of energy. ● She/He likes doing new and different things. ● She/he is kind and generous ● He/She is fearless ● He/She is behaving in a pleasant, kind way ● He/She likes to meet and spend time with other people 267 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Take a canson paper heart from the teacher’s box and write 4 - 5 adjectives that can describe you on it!!!! Give examples!!!! Use ONLY positive ones from the previous table or any other adjective you know. You have 10 minutes for this task.
Present them in class!!!!
Task 4/Final product:
Be a good friend: Go to the class blog and read the letter a student (Nick) has sent to you because he’s been having a serious problem. Read it carefully and give him some good advice.
You have some choices regarding the final product this time: ● You can write a letter (60 - 80 words) to Nick or ● you can give your advice with a comment (40 - 60 words) on the post/Nick’s letter or ● you can make a poster with your advice Discuss with your teammates and decide which of the above will be yours
All products will be posted on the class blog!
PROCESS WRITING: Work in groups!! Write your text in your notebook first and then give it to the group next to you to check it out. Then take it back, make changes, if needed, and give it to the teacher to check it out. Make the final changes and post it on the class blog. You have 20 minutes to finish your first draft.
Useful phrases to start your advice:
1. You should start your advice using some of the following phrases: ● If I were you, I would ……..... ● I don’t think you should ……... ● You should ……..….. ● It might be a good idea to …..……. ● My advice would be to ……………….
2. Give at least three pieces of advice and give examples.
268 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
3. Use different phrases to start each one of them.
4. Find quotes from the following link or pictures with quotes on to accompany your post.
All advice will be used for the class poster which will be created to celebrate INTERNATIONAL FRIENDSHIP DAY which is celebrated every year on July 30th. Find information for the World Friendship Day in the following link: https://www.betterhelp.com/advice/friendship/what-is-friendship-day-how-is-it- celebrated/
TIP: You can use adjectives from the above table or any other adjective you know. Use only positive ones.
269 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Lesson 10
WELCOME TO THE 10th PROJECT!!!!! Speak up now!!
Activity 1: Let’s follow this link to watch a video and then explore the specific website: https://milatora.gr/schools/draseis-2018/#more-563
Activity 2: Check your email accounts. Have you received an email?? Read it and discuss it in groups.
The final product of today’s project will be a video for “MILA TORA”!!!
The question is: Can we stop bullying?? Let’s find out!
STEP 1: Follow the links below and find out definitions of bullying. Each group should write in the appropriate space in the following table:
● Stop School Bullying--For Kids: What is a Bully? ● https://bullyingnoway.gov.au/ForKids/Pages/What-is- bullying.aspx ● https://www.childline.org.uk/info-advice/bullying-abuse- safety/types-bullying/bullying-cyberbullying/
Groups What is bullying?? Sharks When someone is
● being called names, teased or humiliated
270 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
● posting, commenting on or liking nasty photos, videos or posts about you online ● being pushed, hit or hurt ● having money and other stuff stolen
Panthers bullying is when someone
● keeps picking on you again and again and tries to make you
feel bad
● keeps hurting you such as hitting or punching you and fun of
you a lot
or when someone is
● being called names, teased or humiliated ● being pushed, hit or hurt
Hawks Bullying is when someone:
● keeps picking on you again and again and tries to make
you feel bad
Flames BULLYING IS WHEN SOMEONE TRIES TO HURT YOU AND MAKE YOU FEEL BAD. Bears Bullies think that they will win or get what they want.
When someone keeps picking on you again and again and tries to
make you feel bad
271 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
STEP 2: Look at the pictures, discuss with your teammates and write down the types of bullying:
TYPES OF BULLYING
physical BULLYING
CYBER BULLYING
social bullying
verbal bullying
272 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
STEP 3: Discuss with your group mates and write down the persons you think are involved in a “bullying case” (during bullying and after).
victim bystander bully
BULLYING passive bully defender
passive supporter
STEP 4: Each group should discuss and decide whether the following statements are RIGHT or WRONG.
Sharks 1. It’s okay to post negative comments about people who have annoyed you if you are sure that they won’t read them. WRONG 2. If I post something online anonymously, no‐one will ever find out it was me. WRONG
Panthers 1. Bullying can happen in person or online. RIGHT
273 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
2. Bullying is not okay. You have the right to feel safe. RIGHT Hawks 1. If someone's trying to make you feel bad, that's okay. WRONG 2. It is okay to post negative comments about people or groups because you have the right to speak freely. WRONG
Flames 1. You don’t have to cope with bullying alone. Talking to an adult you trust can help you to find ways to stop the bullying. RIGHT 2. Most parents and teachers don’t bother with social media sites so they won’t see our posts. WRONG
Bears 1. You can report and block people who bully you online. RIGHT 2. Bullying can include being called names, teased or humiliated. RIGHT
FINAL PRODUCT: A CLASS VIDEO FOR milatora.gr AND THE CLASS BLOG
Follow the links below to find some ideas and:
1. Continue the short story about the person in the picture assigned so your group or make a dialogue between the involved parts. You have to explain the victim what bullying is and include at least 3 pieces of advice for the person who is being bullied (70 - 90 words)
274 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
2. Your text will be written on the paintings your group will make for the class video to spread the message: SPEAK UP NOW!!!!!!. 3. Suggest a song to be used as background music for our video.
Process writing: REVISE FIRST DRAFTS, EDIT AND GIVE IT TO THE TEACHER FOR THE FINAL REVISION. WRITE YOUR TEXT ON THE PAINTINGS.
https://bullyingnoway.gov.au/ForKids/WhatCanIDo/ImBeingB ullied
https://bullyingnoway.gov.au/ForKids/WhatCanIDo/Someone IKnowIsBeingBullied
Sharks and Flames: Mary had an argument with her best friend Sofia and she became very upset and angry when her. During the argument, another student in their class video-recorded Mary upset and angry and then posted it online.
Panthers and Hawks: A new student, Thomas, started at your school this week, and he is having trouble fitting in. Some of your friends have been laughing behind his back.
275 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Bears: Nick’s classmate Liam keeps hitting and kicking him when nobody is looking and tells him that if he tells the teacher or anyone else he will just hurt him more.
All groups: 1. “Design” photographs for milatora.gr. 2. Paint 2 pictures (one showing the problem and one showing the solution) to accompany your stories/dialogue. The pictures will be used for the class video for milatora.gr. All pictures should include the message: Speak up now!!
SOS: You have to hand in your pictures by Wednesday, February 27th!!!!!!
276 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX XI: THE TEACHER’S DIARY (Extracts)
Lesson 1 After morning prayers in the schoolyard, the learners entered the computer lab being restless and noisy as it would be a field trip day. That is why they did not have their notebooks with them. The T invited them to sit wherever they wanted and then she explained (using the foreign language) what project – based learning is and the reason why they were in the computer lab. Some of the learners looked worried so she invited them (using the mother tongue as well) to ask for explanation whenever they felt like asking. They eagerly asked questions about the Internet and how they use it with a sense of humour. L11 said: “We can get a virus, that’s one thing we can do about it”. Ls faced some difficulties as some computers didn’t have speakers so they couldn’t watch the videos properly. They used the subtitles instead. Ls spent a lot of time to log in the Gmail accounts which were created by the T for each one of the five groups. Some of the Ls didn’t appreciate the way the T divided them in groups so she promised to rethink it. The boys were more eager to use Google Docs than the girls who were a little unwilling until they open the first Google Document. Then they couldn’t wait to participate and do the tasks. It was difficult for them to realize that it was a collaborative document and that all learners could write on it at the same time: L2: “Ms, somebody is writing here. We didn’t press any keys!!” They familiarized with Google Docs after a while and they worked nicely on the second document enjoying the procedure. They assigned roles to the group members and collaborated nicely using mostly the mother tongue, though. They used the foreign language to answer to the T’s questions. The T encouraged them to take turns in typing. They seemed enthusiastic and willing to explore Google Docs without the T’s help trying to become autonomous learner. L4: “Ms go away! You are distracting us!” The T presented the class blog. They liked it and they suggested ideas regarding its theme, colours, pictures etc. The T uploaded their posters and they were willing to evaluate and find the positive aspects of each one of them. During the evaluation stage the T encouraged Ls to think critically and express their opinions freely. The T reminded them the criteria they had to use in order to evaluate the final products since they focused on spelling mistakes at first.
Lesson 2 Ls were excited while they were watching the video song despite the fact that most of them were around the T’s computer since we had “sound issues” again. They were a little disappointed when the T asked them to work individually at first. They felt a little nervous about writing individually especially the novice learners. The T facilitated the procedure encouraging them and answering questions which concerned clarifications about the content of an autobiography, vocabulary they needed and sentence construction.
277 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
L4 asked to join another group as she felt uncomfortable cooperating with boys. The T allowed her to do it and invited the Ls to do the same in case they felt more comfortable. No one was willing to change group, though, so they didn’t. They collaborated more easily and less noisily than they did during the first lesson. They seemed motivated and happy throughout the lesson. They used mostly the mother tongue while they were talking to each other during process writing although the boys tried harder to use the FL than the girls. They needed help during revising their peers’ first draft. They asked each other and the T a lot of questions regarding vocabulary and spelling mistakes. They needed help to create a new Google Document and they took turns in typing the autobiography they chose on it. They asked for more time to finish typing as they were still slow but more effective than the first lesson. They made their first blog post, being too noisy during the procedure as they asked a lot of questions about fonts, uploading pictures and editing their posts. They were more eager to read the other groups’ comments on their own posts than writing comments on other posts themselves.
Lesson 3 Ls seemed more familiarized with the Google Docs in this lesson, they spend less time to manage to log in the Gmail accounts and they needed less help by the T. They eagerly watched the video and “explore” Greece. They were motivated as in this lesson they were allowed to make their own choices and follow any link they found on the specific website the T uploaded on the Google Doc. During the planning stage they asked for clarifications regarding the questions they had to answer and vocabulary they needed. They were also still insecure regarding the use of technology (how to insert a picture on a document and change its size and place on it. During process writing Ls collaboratively nicely, assigning roles and explaining each other the procedure especially to novice ones. In cases of problems they discussed them in groups and made their own decisions as they were encouraged to do so by the T. They started to feel more confident about using Google Docs and more eager to learn how to use Blogger and the class blog. Some of the boys were frustrated when they thought that their post hadn’t been saved. The girls were more patient and tried to find solutions by themselves or asking the T. During the evaluation stage they commented on each others’ posts after discussing with their group mates. When the T said: That’s all for today!!” they refused to leave and they continued writing comments!!
Lesson 4 Ls logged in the Gmail accounts and found the Google Document relatively easily this time except for one of the girls’ groups who needed help. The group sitting next to them offered their help. They made too much noise during collaborative tasks since all groups had to work on the same Document. They needed help with “copy and paste” which was offered to them. Inserting pictures and adjusting their size also made them nervous so they asked for help.
278 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
During process writing the T had to remind them the procedure of revising the other groups’ drafts and the criteria they should use to do it. The novice students showed increased interest in the whole process and, asking their peers and the T questions, they tried to respond to the tasks. During posting their menus they were too noisy as all of them wanted to type. There was one argument between the members of one of the boy’s groups but the T sorted things out easily invited them to take turns as they did in the previous lesson. They made constructive (oral) comments on their peers’ final products during the evaluation stage regarding food, pictures and the justification their classmates used. They invited the T to present her model post which she did. When they are asked to choose between playing Quizlet games to practice new vocabulary and write comments on the posts they chose the second.
Lesson 5 Ls logged in the Gmail accounts and found the Google Document very easily this time. New options offered by Google Docs (highlighting and underlying) made the Ls very willing to work with them and also ask for clarifications. They enjoyed experimenting with different colours and fonts but as the text which the T invited them to read was too long they are also given a photocopy. Almost all Ls chose to read the online text though. The T set a deadline to help them manage their time during process writing. They used photocopied story maps and guidelines to create the group stories. They seemed excited to create their story and asked a lot of questions regarding the procedure. The fact that this project was a semi – structured one gave them the freedom and flexibility to choose what their final product would be. Despite the T’s encouragement to paint pictures and create a video or a digital story, all groups chose to post their stories on the class blog instead. During posting, they seemed more and more autonomous as they asked fewer questions concerning the specific procedure. Nice collaboration and group decision making throughout the lesson fulfilled the T’s expectations! They still needed guidance during the final products’ evaluation in order to acquire critical thinking skills and become able to use the criteria which were given to them and suggest improvements or changes.
Lesson 6 Each group had been invited to a separate Google Doc in this lesson. Ls were reacted positively when they realized that they were invited to write about the things they considered important. They were willing to discuss and write in groups and then present their work in class. They discussed and decided who the presenter would be. Ls were impressed and extremely quiet during watching the videos regarding the environment and they agreed gladly to participate in the European School radio competition!! Free online surfing rendered them more willing to work on their final product and eager to collaborate. During the implementation stage, the learners needed encouragement to use the useful phrases which were provided by the T and take the criteria into serious consideration. One of the girls’ groups asked for help regarding vocabulary during revising their peers’ first draft.
279 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
They happily announced that they had finished on time.
Lesson 7 Ls seemed inspired by today’s topic regarding their favourite kind of holidays. Despite the slow Internet connection they worked nicely, being allowed to free online search. They were eager to suggest their ideal holiday location. Nice collaboration throughout process writing despite the fact that some learners still used the mother tongue to communicate with their peers. They were a little noisy during revising the first draft. Some groups needed more time to finish their products so the rest of them played Quizlet games meanwhile. As learners are familiarized with the use of the class blog, they post their products without the T’s help. They make their own decisions about the pictures and their post organization. Their digital writing skills seemed to be improved. We were all surprised to find out that all groups recommended the same holiday type (camping) giving different justifications for their choice. The products’ evaluation was a pleasant experience for most of them as some girls were unwilling to present their work orally. But they were very interested in their texts organization and presentation of their blog posts. They were all praised by the T who gave them Marshmallows candies as a “camping activity”.
Lesson 8 A collaborative Google Document invites learners to discuss and guess the lesson’s topic. A second one invites them in the world of sports and football which was one of the reasons boys were very excited and noisy during this lesson. The girls were not so excited though since they also love sports but football is not their favourite one. But they tried hard to create their final product asking the T questions not only concerning vocabulary and language structures but also regarding football rules and players. New vocabulary on Quizlet facilitated the procedure for them too. Since groups had a hard time to complete a story plan on the second collaborative Google Document at the same time, the T suggested using their notebook instead. They were reluctant to present and evaluate their blog posts this time without explaining the reasons so the T facilitated the procedure reading their stories herself. After a while, they not only picked up the torch but also made some constructive comments on their peers work.
Lesson 9 During the 9th lesson all learners seemed to be familiar enough with both Web 2.0 tools since they helped each other and felt really proud of themselves to do it. They didn’t ask for help regarding the use of technology but they faced difficulties with the new vocabulary and the fact that they had to look into themselves and discover their strengths and the positive elements of their own character. This time the one thing that confused them was the T’s encouragement to describe themselves using only positive adjectives. The learners opened Blogger application without help in order to read a boy’s letter and discussing in groups they decided the kind of advice they had to give him.
280 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
During process writing, groups exchange opinions freely, and for the first time, they revised the first draft checking the product requirements without the T’s remind. Free searching for pictures and friendship quotes and having the chance to make their own decisions caused feelings of freedom and responsibility at the same time. All groups decided cooperatively about the quotes and pictures to be used on the class poster so they praised by the T.
Lesson 10 The learners were informed that this would be the last PBL lesson so they seemed disappointed and tried to persuade the T to continue preparing lessons for them. She promised to do so and they agreed to start working. During all stages they worked willingly on the collaborative Google Document admitting that some of them didn’t actually know what bullying was. All groups worked independently, as they are given the chance to make a lot of choices throughout this lesson regarding their final products and the ways they would use to present them. Groups made different choices this time. During the implementation stage, process writing was practised without the T’s help as even the novice learners are encouraged and assisted by their peers. They all posted their texts on the class blog and then, during the evaluation stage, they chose role – playing or reading to present them. All learners eagerly painted pictures as homework for the class video using captions taken from their own texts. They watched the class video and enjoyed the T’s and each other’s praise for their extraordinary work!!
281 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX XII: POST- SEMI – STRUCTURED INTERVIEW QUESTIONS (Greek version) Ερωτήσεις ημιδομημένης συνέντευξης με τους μαθητές μετά από τη διαφοροποιημένη παρέμβαση για τη βελτίωση των ικανοτήτων γραπτού λόγου και νέων εγγραμματισμών των μαθητών Φύλο: ______Ηλικία: ______Τάξη: ______Εθνικότητα: ______Γλώσσα που μιλούν στο σπίτι: ______1. Ποια είναι η γνώμη σου για το διαφορετικό τρόπο που διδάκτηκες το μάθημα των Αγγλικών τους τρεις αυτούς μήνες; 2. Πώς ένοιωσες που τα μαθήματα αυτά γινόταν στο εργαστήρι υπολογιστών του σχολείου?
1ος άξονας: Απόψεις των μαθητών σχετικά με τη μάθηση της ξένης γλώσσας μέσω συνθετικών εργασιών με ενσωμάτωση τεχνολογιών της πληροφορίας και των επικοινωνιών 1. Ποια είναι η γνώμη σου σχετικά με τη μάθηση μέσω συνθετικών εργασιών; (Είναι διασκεδαστική, βαρετή, ενδιαφέρουσα;) 2. Γιατί; 3. Ποιο στάδιο απόλαυσες περισσότερο; (Σχεδίαση, Υλοποίηση, Αξιολόγηση) 4. Γιατί το συγκεκριμένο στάδιο/στάδια; 5. Κάλυψαν τα ενδιαφέροντά σου τα θέματα με τα οποία ασχοληθήκαμε; 6. Ποιο σου άρεσε περισσότερο από όλα; 7. Γιατί; 8. Ποιο σου άρεσε λιγότερο από όλα; 9. Γιατί; 10. Τι πιστεύεις σχετικά με την ενσωμάτωση τεχνολογιών της πληροφορίας και των επικοινωνιών στο μάθημα των Αγγλικών; 11. Αντιμετώπισες δυσκολίες; 12. Αν ναι, τι είδους δυσκολίες αντιμετώπισες; 13. Νομίζεις ότι απέκτησες κανούργιες δεξιότητες μετά από αυτά τα μαθήματα; 14. Αν ναι, ποιες είναι αυτές; i. Μπορείς τώρα να σερφάρεις στο Διαδίκτυο για να βρείς πληροφορίες; ii. Μπορείς τώρα να χρησιμοποιήσεις μια μηχανή αναζήτησης; iii. Μπορείς τώρα να αξιολογήσεις κριτικά μια πληροφορία που θα βρεις στο Διαδίκτυο; iv. Μπορείς τώρα να μαντέψεις το περιεχόμενο μιας ιστοσελίδας διαβάζοντες μόνο τη διεύθυνσή της; v. Μπορείς τώρα να κάνεις Αντιγραφή και Επικόλληση από μια ιστοσελίδα; 282 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
vi. Μπορείς τώρα να χρησιμοποιήσεις λογαριασμό ηλεκτρονικού ταχυδρομείου; vii. Μπορείς τώρα να χρησιμοποιήσεις εργαλεία Web 2.0; viii. Αν ναι, ποια εργαλεία; ix. Το Quizlet; i. Τα Google Docs; ii. Μπορείς τώρα να ανοίξεις ένα Έγγραφο Google και να δουλέψεις πάνω σε αυτό; iii. Μπορείς τώρα να δημιουργήσεις ένα νέο Έγγραφο Google; iv. Την εφαρμογή Blogger; v. Μπορείς τώρα να ανοίξεις την εφαρμογή Blogger και κάνεις μια νέα ανάρτηση; vi. Μπορείς τώρα να εισάγεις μια εκόνα ή ένα video σε μια ανάρτηση; vii. Μπορείς τώρα να διορθώσεις μια ανάρτηση; viii. Έχεις βελτιώσει την ικανότητά σου να γράφεις ψηφιακά; ix. Αν ναι, σε ποιο βαθμό;
2ος άξονας: Απόψεις των μαθητών για τα εργαλεία Web 2.0 και τη συνεργατικότητα σε περιβάλλον μάθησης μέσω συνθετικών εργασιών 1. Ποια είναι η γνώμη σου σχετικά με τη συνεργατική δουλειά στη χρήση των Google Docs; i. Συνεργάστηκες καλά με τους συμμαθητές σου; ii. Θα προτιμούσες να δουλεύεις μόνος σου; a. Αν ναι, γιατί; b. Αν όχι, γιατί όχι; 2. Νομίζεις ότι η συνεργατική δουλειά στη χρήση των Google Docs σε βοήθησε να βελτιώσεις τις ικανότητές σου στο γραπτό λόγο; i. Αν ναι, με ποιο τρόπο; a. Βελτίωσες το λεξιλόγιό σου; b. Σε βοήθησε να παράγεις ιδέες; c. Σου είναι πιο έυκολο να φτιάχνεις σωστές προτάσεις συνεργατικά; ii. Αν όχι, γιατί όχι; 3. Ποια είναι η γνώμη σου για τη συνεργατική δουλειά στη χρήση του ιστολογίου τάξης; i. Συνεργάστηκες καλά με τους συμμαθητές σου; ii. Θα προτιμούσες να δουλεύεις μόνος σου; a. Αν ναι, γιατί; b. Αν όχι, γιατί όχι; 4. Νομίζεις ότι η συνεργατική δουλειά στη χρήση του ιστολόγιου τάξης σε βοήθησε να βελτιώσεις τις ικανότητές σου στο γραπτό λόγο; i. Αν ναι, με ποιο τρόπο; a. Βελτίωσες το λεξιλόγιό σου; b. Σε βοήθησε να παράγεις ιδέες;
283 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
c. Σου είναι πιο εύκολο να φτιάχνεις σωστές προτάσεις συνεργατικά; ii. Αν όχι, γιατί όχι; 5. Ποια είναι η γνώμη σου για τον τρόπο που συνεργαστήκατε με τα μάλη της ομάδας σου; (ήταν ισότιμη συνεργασία ή όχι) 6. Μπορείς να μου δώσεις ένα παράδειγμα; 7. Πώς ένοιωθες όταν εξέφραζες την άποψή σου στην ομάδα; 8. Πώς ένοιωθες όταν η άποψή σου γινόταν αποδεκτή από την ομάδα; 9. Ποια είναι η γνώμη σου για την ανάθεση ρόλων στα μέλη της ομάδας σου; 10. Πώς ένοιωθες όταν έπαιρνες ανατροφοδόητηση από τους συμμαθητές σου;
3ος άξονας: Απόψεις των μαθητών σχετικά με την διαδικασία παραγωγής γραπτού λόγου και τα Web 2.0 εργαλεία 1. Ποια είναι η γνώμη σου για τη διαδικασία παραγωγής γραπτού λόγου; 2. Αντιμετώπισες δυσκολίες; i. Αν ναι, τι είδους δυσκολίες; 3. Ποιο στάδιο της διαδικασίας παραγωγής γραπτού λόγου ήταν το πιο δύσκολο για σένα; i. Η παραγωγή ιδεών; ii. Γιατί; iii. Η πρώτη γραφή; iv. Γιατί; v. Η βελτίωση των κειμένων των συμμαθητών σου; vi. Γιατί; vii. Η διόρθωση του δικού σας; viii. Γιατί; ix. Η δημοσίευση του τελικού κειμένου; x. Γιατί; 4. Ποιες δραστηριότητες σε βοήθησαν σε βοήθησαν να βελτιώσεις τις ικανότητές σου στο γραπτό λόγο; i. Πριν από το γράψιμο ii. Κατά τη διάρκεια του γραψίματος iii. Δραστηριότητες βελτίωσης iv. Δραστηριότητες διόρθωσης v. Δραστηριότητες δημοσίευσης 5. Είχες ποτέ χρησιμοποιήσει Google Docs πριν από αυτά τα μαθήματα; 6. Πώς ένοιωσες χρησιμοποιώντας τα; 7. Νομίζεις ότι τα Google Docs σε βοήθησαν να βελτιώσεις τις ικανότητές σου στη διαδικασία παραγωγής γραπτού λόγου; i. Αν ναι, με ποιο τρόπο; o Λόγω: 284 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
a. Δραστηριοτήτων καταιγισμού ιδεών; b. Γιατί; c. Δραστηριοτήτων παραγωγής ιδεών; d. Γιατί; e. Των συνδέσμων; f. Γιατί; g. Των χρήσιμων φράσεων; h. Γιατί; i. Της συνεργατικότητας; j. Γιατί; k. Της ευκαιρίας που είχες να βελτιώσεις τη δουλειά των συμμαθητών σας; l. Γιατί; m. Της ανατροφοδότησης από τους συμμαθητές σου; n. Γιατί; 8. Είχες χρησιμοποιήσει την εφαρμογή Blogger πριν από αυτά τα μαθήματα; 9. Πώς ένοιωσες χρησιμοποιώντας τη; 10. Νομίζεις ότι το ιστολόγιο τάξης σε βοήθησε να βελτιώσεις τις ικανότητές σου στη διαδικασία παραγωγής γραπτού λόγου; 11. Αν ναι, με ποιο τρόπο; o Λόγω: a. Των υποδειγματικών κειμένων; b. Γιατί; c. Των video; d. Γιατί; e. Των συνδέσμων; f. Γιατί; g. Της ευκαιρίας που είχες να σχολιάσεις τη δουλειά των συμμαθητών σου; h. Γιατί; i. Της ανατροφοδότησης από τους συμμαθητές σας; j. Γιατί; k. Της συνεργατικότητας; l. Γιατί;
Συνολική ερώτηση Θα ήθελες να συνεχίσουμε να δουλεύουμε με αυτό τον τρόπο στο μάθημα των Αγγλικών;
Σε ευχαριστώ πάρα πολύ για τη συμμετοχή σου σε αυτή την έρευνα!!!!!!!!!!!!
285 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX XIII: POST- SEMI – STRUCTURED INTERVIEW QUESTIONS (English version)
Post- semi – structured interview questions (experimental group)
Gender: ______Age: ______Class: ______Nationality: ______Language spoken in the learner’s house: ______
Warm up: 1. What do you think of the different way in which these lessons were taught? 2. How did you feel about these lessons being taught in the school computer lab?
1st axis: Students’ attitudes towards PBL and ICT integration in the FL classroom 1. What is your opinion of PBL? (Is it fun, boring, interesting?) 2. Why? 3. Which stage did you enjoy the most? (Planning, implementation, evaluation stage) 4. Why the specific stage or stages? 5. Do you think that the projects’ topics covered your interests? 6. Which one did you like the most? 7. Why? 8. Which one did you like the least? 9. Why? 10. What do you think of the integration of ICT in our classroom? 11. Did you face any difficulties? 12. If yes: What kind of difficulties? 13. Do you think that you have acquired new skills after these lessons? 14. If yes: What are these skills? i. Can you now surf the Internet to find information? ii. Can you now use a search engine? iii. Can you now critically evaluate online information? iv. Can you now predict the content of a web page based on the URL? v. Can you copy and paste information from a web page? vi. Can you now use an email account? vii. Can you now use Web 2.0 tools? viii. If yes: Which tools? 286 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
ix. Quizlet? x. Google Docs? xi. Can you now open a Google Document and work on it? xii. Can you now create a new Google Document? xiii. Blogger? xiv. Can you now open Blogger application and post an article on a blog? xv. Can you now insert a picture or a video in a post? xvi. Can you now edit your article after posting it? xvii. Have you now improved your digital writing skills? xviii. If yes: To what extent?
2nd axis: Students’ attitudes towards Web 2.0 tools and collaboration in a PBL environment 1. What is your opinion about collaborative work during the use of Google Docs? i. Did you collaborate well with your peers? ii. Did you prefer to work on your own? 1. If yes: Why? 2. If not: Why not? 2. Do you think that working collaboratively using Google Docs helped you improve your writing skills? i. If yes: In what way? ii. Did you improve your vocabulary? iii. Did collaboration with peers help you to generate ideas? iv. Is it easier for you to make correct sentences working collaboratively? v. If not: Why not? 3. What is your opinion about collaborative work during the use of the class blog? i. Did you collaborate well with your peers? ii. Did you prefer to work on your own? a. If yes: Why? b. If not: Why not? 4. Do you think that working collaboratively using the class blog helped you improve your writing skills? i. If yes: In what way? a. Did you improve your vocabulary? b. Did collaboration with peers help you to generate ideas? c. Is it easier for you to construct correct sentences when working collaboratively? ii. If not: Why not?
287 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
5. What would you say regarding the way the members of your group collaborate? (Equally or not). 6. Can you give me an example? 7. How did you feel when you expressed your own opinion? 8. How did you feel when you were heard by your teammates? 9. What is your opinion on the roles when have been assigned to the group members? 10. How did you feel about your peers making corrections and giving feedback?
3rd axis: Students’ attitudes towards process writing and Web 2.0 tools 1. What do you thinκ about process writing? 2. Did you face any difficulties? i. If yes: What kind of difficulties? 3. Which stage of process writing was the most difficult for you? i. Brainstorming/generating ideas ii. Why? iii. Writing the first draft iv. Why? v. Revising the peers’ drafts vi. Why? vii. Editing viii. Why? ix. Publishing your final draft x. Why? 4. Which tasks do you think helped you to improve your writing skills? i. Pre – writing tasks ii. While – writing tasks iii. Revising tasks iv. Editing tasks v. Publishing tasks 5. Had you ever used Google Docs before these lessons? 6. How did you feel using them? 7. Do you think that Google Docs helped you improve your process writing skills? i. If yes: In what way? o Due to: a. Brainstorming tasks? b. Why? c. Generating ideas tasks? d. Why? 288 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
e. The links offered? f. Why? g. The useful phrases provided? h. Why? i. Their collaborative way of working? j. Why? k. The chance they gave you to revise other groups’ work? l. Why? m. The chance they gave you to receive peers’ feedback? n. Why? 8. Had you ever used Blogger before these lessons? 9. How did you feel using it? 10. Do you think that the class blog helped you improve your process writing skills? i. If yes: In what way? o Due to: a. The model texts presented? b. Why? c. The videos offered? d. Why? e. The links provided? f. Why? g. The chance it offered you to comment on other groups’ work? h. Why? i. The chance it offered to receive peers’ feedback? j. Why? k. Its collaborative way of working? l. Why?
Overall question 1. Would you like us to continue working this way in the English class?
Thank you very much for your participation in this research!!!!!!!
289 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX XIV: TRANSCRIPTS FROM THE LEARNERS’ ANSWERS TO THE POST- SEMI – STRUCTURED INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
1. Ποια είναι η γνώμη σου για το διαφορετικό τρόπο που διδάχτηκες το μάθημα των Αγγλικών τους προηγούμενους μήνες; L1: Ενθουσιαστικός και χαρούμενος! Περάσαμε καλά! L2: Αυτό μας βοήθησε πιο πολύ βασικά στα Αγγλικά. Τα projects και όλα αυτά. L3: Πιστεύω ότι μας βοήθησε αρκετά. L4: Μου άρεσε πολύ γιατί μαθαίναμε πιο πολλά πράγματα, εξελισσόμασταν και ήταν ωραίο αυτό! L5: Μου άρεσε πολύ επειδή καθόμασταν και βρίσκαμε διάφορα πράγματα και η συνεργασία ήταν πολύ ωραία. L6: Ήταν πάρα πολύ διασκεδαστικός και πάρα πολύ ενδιαφέρων. L7: Πολύ ωραία. L8: Ωραίος! Και μας έμαθε πάρα πολλά πράγματα. L9: Ήτανε Τέλεια!! Θέλω να τα ξανακάνουμε!! L10: Εεε μου άρεσε γιατί πιστεύω ότι μας βελτίωσε όλους πιο πολύ. L11: Καλά! Πολύ ωραία! Μου άρεσε! L12: Καλά ήταν. Μου άρεσε!! L13: Πολύ καλά! L14: Εντάξει. Μια χαρά ήταν. L15: Ότι είναι πάρα πολύ καλός τρόπος μάθησης. L16: Α, έτσι μου άρεσαν πιο πολύ!
2. Ποια είναι η γνώμη σου σχετικά με τη μάθηση μέσω συνθετικών εργασιών (projects); L1: Ότι είναι πολύ ωραία τα projects επειδή μας δημιουργούν μια ομαδικότητα και συνεργασία...... γιατί χωριστήκαμε σε ομάδες και εφαρμόζαμε...... γιατί μπορούσαμε να συμφιλιωθούμε με ανθρώπους και να δούμε τη γνώμη τους. L2: Ναι, εκτός από ένα τα περισσότερα μου άρεσαν...... γαιτί δουλεύαμε συνεργατικά ....γιατί προσπαθούσαμε να δώσουμε ιδέες για το πώς να γράψουμε την ιστορία πολλές φορές. L3: Ήταν όλα τα projects πολύ καλές ιδέες. Εμένα μου άρεσαν γιατί έπρεπε να βάλουμε το μυαλό μας να σκεφτεί.....και επειδή εφαρμόζαμε τις ιδέες μας. L4: Ήταν διασκεδαστικό πολύ!!...Γιατί ψάχναμε, βρίσκαμε άλλα πράγματα και ήτανε...και κάναμε και αστεία με αυτά και ήταν ωραία!! L5: Ήταν πολύ ωραίο! ....γιατί ακούγαμε και των άλλων γιατί μπορούσαμε να γράψουμε τι γράψανε....γιατί μαθαίναμε λέξεις που δεν ξέραμε. L6: Ήταν μια διαφορετική εμπειρία γιατί μπορούσαμε να δουλέψουμε και με τον υπολογιστή.
290 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
L7: Ήταν ωραίο γιατί καταλάβαινε ο καθένας τι ήξερε και τι έπρεπε να φτιάξει...γιατί το ετοιμάζαμε σαν ομάδα....συνεργαζόμασταν και ήταν ωραίο. Μου άρεσε το “camping” γιατί εκεί βοήθησα περισσότερο και μου άρεσε. L8: Μας βοηθάει να ανακαλύπτουμε πράγματα που μπορεί να μην τα ξέραμε...γιατί τα παρουσιάζαμε και ακούγαμε όλα τα παιδιά και μαθαίναμε κι άλλα πράγματα. L9: Με δύο λέξεις: ό, τι καλύτερο. Μου άρεσαν όλα τα projects. Μου άρεσε η παρουσίαση και η δουλειά που κάναμε. Γιατί βγάζαμε τέλειες ιδέες και πάνω από όλα μου άρεσε να διαβάζουμε αυτά που είχαμε κάνει. L10: Ε, δεν έχω παράπονο είναι μια χαρά όλα. Μου άρεσε που συνεργαζόμασταν όλοι μαζί.....γιατί ήμουν με τους φίλους μου L11: Έμαθα πολλά πράγματα...ήταν ενδιαφέροντα... όταν τα προετοιμάζαμε έπρεπε να σκεφτείς τι να κάνεις. L12: Καλά ήταν. Μου άρεσε που συνεργαστήκαμε.....γιατί ήμουνα με τους φίλους μου. L13: Είναι πολύ καλή. Γιατί είμαστε σε ομάδες και με κάποια παιδιά δε γνωριζόμασταν, όπως π.χ. τον Στ. Δεν τον ήξερα και τώρα τον έμαθα καλύτερα στην ομάδα και ...κάναμε και τη συνεργασία και τώρα ξέρουμε πού είναι ο καθένας και πού όχι. L14: Καλό ήτανε γιατί κάναμε projects στους υπολογιστές. Και ήμασταν ομάδες. Και εμένα γενικά μου αρέσει να βλέπω τι γράφουν οι άλλοι. L15: Ήταν πάρα πολύ ενδιαφέρον. Γιατί δουλεύαμε σε ομάδες όλοι μαζί. L16: Είναι πολύ καλό. Μου άρεσε που είμασταν σε ομάδες.
3. Τι πιστεύεις σχετικά με την ενσωμάτωση τεχνολογιών της πληροφορίας και των επικοινωνιών στο μάθημα των Αγγλικών; ...... Νομίζεις ότι απέκτησες κανούργιες δεξιότητες μετά από αυτά τα μαθήματα; L1: Έξυπνο και ενθουσιαστικό. Ενθουσιάστηκα να γράφω στους υπολογιστές...... Μπορώ να γράφω πιο γρήγορα, μπορώ να εξασκώ το μυαλό μου στα ηλεκτρονικά, μπορώ να γράφω Αγγλικά και να διαβάζω...σερφάρω στο διαδίκτυο πολύ πιο άνετα για να βρω πληροφορίες και πάρα πολύ γρήγορα...να κάνω copy – paste...... Έμαθα το Quizlet Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs....να ανοίξω και να δουλέψω πάνω σε ένα.... όχι να φτιάξω ένα δικό μου. Μπορώ να δημοσιεύσω ένα άρθρο σε blog... να βάλω εικόνα, video.... να κάνω επεξεργασία. Βελτίωσα την ικανότητά μου να πληκτολογώ πάρα πολύ. L2: Θετικό. Έμαθα να χειρίζομαι πιο καλά τον υπολογιστή, έμαθα πιο καλά Αγγλικά...σερφάρω πιο άνετα για να βρω πληροφορίες, χρησιμοποιώ πιο άνετα μια μηχανή αναζήτησης... αξιολογώ τις πληροφορίες πιο
291 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
εύκολα...μαντεύω πιο εύκολα το περιεχόμενο ιστοσελίδων....κάνω copy – paste..... Έμαθα το Quizlet Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs....να ανοίξω και να δουλέψω πάνω σε ένα.... και να φτιάξω ένα δικό μου. Μπορώ να δημοσιεύσω ένα άρθρο σε blog... να βάλω εικόνα, video.... να κάνω επεξεργασία. Γράφω πολύ πιο γρήγορα τώρα. L3: Θετικά. Μόνο στο πρώτο project δεν ήξερα τι πρέπει να κάνουμε αλλά από κει και ύστερα ήταν όλα εύκολα.... σερφάρω πιο εύκολα για να βρω πληροφορίες, χρησιμοποιώ πιο άνετα μια μηχανή αναζήτησης... αξιολογώ τις πληροφορίες πιο εύκολα...μαντεύω πιο εύκολα το περιεχόμενο ιστοσελίδων....κάνω copy – paste...χρησιμοποιώ email... Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs....να ανοίξω και να δουλέψω πάνω σε ένα.... και να φτιάξω ένα δικό μου. Μπορώ να δημοσιεύσω ένα άρθρο σε blog... να βάλω εικόνα, video.... να κάνω επεξεργασία μετά. Γράφω αρκετά πιο γρήγορα τώρα. L4: Δεν ήταν πρόβλημα γιατί εξελισσόμασταν και σ’ αυτό.... σερφάρω πιο εύκολα για να βρω πληροφορίες, χρησιμοποιώ πιο άνετα μια μηχανή αναζήτησης... αξιολογώ τις πληροφορίες πιο εύκολα...μαντεύω πιο εύκολα το περιεχόμενο ιστοσελίδων....κάνω copy – paste...βοηθάω τη μαμά μου στη δουλειά της τώρα...χρησιμοποιώ email... Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs....να ανοίξω και να δουλέψω πάνω σε ένα.... και να φτιάξω ένα δικό μου. Μπορώ να δημοσιεύσω ένα άρθρο σε blog... να βάλω εικόνα, video.... να κάνω επεξεργασία μετά...απλά δεν μπαίνω τώρα.. Πληκτρολογώ πιο γρήγορα τώρα. L5: Ήταν πολύ ωραία. Έμαθα να γράφω ιστορίες στον υπολογιστή.... σερφάρω πιο εύκολα για να βρω πληροφορίες, χρησιμοποιώ πιο άνετα μια μηχανή αναζήτησης... αξιολογώ τις πληροφορίες πιο εύκολα...μάλλον μπορώ να μαντεύω το περιεχόμενο ιστοσελίδων....έχω μάθει να κάνω copy – paste...χρησιμοποιώ email. Έμαθα να χρησιμοποιώ το Quizlet. Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs ....να ανοίξω και να δουλέψω πάνω σε ένα .... νομίζω ότι μπορώ να δημιουργήσω ένα καινούργιο. Μπορώ να δημοσιεύσω ένα άρθρο σε blog ... να βάλω εικόνα, video .... να κάνω επεξεργασία μετά. Γράφω πολύ πιο γρήγορα τώρα. L6: Έμαθα πολλά πράγματα που δεν ήξερα και τα χρησιμοποιώ και στο δικό μου υπολογιστή.... σερφάρω πιο εύκολα για να βρω πληροφορίες, χρησιμοποιώ πιο άνετα μια μηχανή αναζήτησης... αξιολογώ τις πληροφορίες
292 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
πιο εύκολα...μαντεύω πιο εύκολα το περιεχόμενο ιστοσελίδων....κάνω copy – paste...χρησιμοποιώ email..... Έμαθα να χρησιμοποιώ το Quizlet. Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs....να ανοίξω και να δουλέψω πάνω σε ένα.... και να φτιάξω ένα δικό μου. Μπορώ να δημοσιεύσω ένα άρθρο σε blog... να βάλω εικόνα, video.... να κάνω επεξεργασία μετά. Βελτίωσα αρκετά την ικανότητά μου να γράφω ψηφιακά. Στο σπίτι δε χρησιμοποιούσαμε αρκετά τον υπολογιστή γιατί δεν ήξερα και πολλά πράγματα αλλά τώρα με τη βοήθεια αυτού του προγράμματος μπορώ. L7: Μου άρεσε....έμαθα πολλές λέξεις.... σερφάρω πιο εύκολα για να βρω πληροφορίες, χρησιμοποιώ πιο άνετα μια μηχανή αναζήτησης... αξιολογώ τις πληροφορίες πιο εύκολα...δεν είμαι σίγουρη αν μπορώ να μαντεύω το περιεχόμενο ιστοσελίδων....κάνω copy – paste...χρησιμοποιώ email... Έμαθα να χρησιμοποιώ το Quizlet. Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs....να ανοίξω και να δουλέψω πάνω σε ένα.... δε θυμάμαι να δημιουργήσω ένα δικό μου. Μπορώ να δημοσιεύσω ένα άρθρο σε blog... δεν πολυθυμάμαι να βάλω εικόνα, video.... μπορώ να κάνω επεξεργασία μετά. Βελτίωσα σε μεγάλο βαθμό την ικανότητά μου να γράφω ψηφιακά. L8: Κάποιες εφαρμογές που δεν ξέραμε μπορούμε τώρα να τις χρησιμοποιούμε...... Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ το Διαδίκτυο πολύ πιο καλά από πριν και έμαθα πολλές πληροφορίες που δεν ήξερα... σερφάρω πιο εύκολα για να βρω πληροφορίες, χρησιμοποιώ πιο άνετα μια μηχανή αναζήτησης... αξιολογώ τις πληροφορίες πιο εύκολα...μαντεύω πιο εύκολα το περιεχόμενο ιστοσελίδων....κάνω copy – paste...χρησιμοποιώ email πολύ καλύτερα από πριν..... Έμαθα να χρησιμοποιώ το Quizlet. Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs....να ανοίξω και να δουλέψω πάνω σε ένα.... και να φτιάξω ένα δικό μου. Δεν ξέρω αν μπορώ να ανοίξω ένα blog... αν είμαι εκεί μπορώ να βάλω εικόνα, video....και να κάνω επεξεργασία μετά. Βελτίωσα σε μεγάλο βαθμό την ικανότητά μου να γράφω ψηφιακά. Πριν έγραφα λίγα πράγματα αλλά τώρα γράφω λίγα παραπάνω, περισσότερα από όσα περίμενα. L9: Ήτανε μια χαρά. Ήταν τέλειο. Δουλεύω καλύτερα τον υπολογιστή τώρα. Ας πούμε παλιά δεν ήξερα πώς να μπαίνω στα blogs στα gmail και σ’ αυτά... σερφάρω πιο εύκολα..στο YouTube μπαίνω πιο πολύ, αλλά αν θέλω να βρω πληροφορίες, χρησιμοποιώ πιο άνετα μια μηχανή αναζήτησης...ας πούμε παλιά δεν ήξερα τι μου βγαζε... δεν είμαι σίγουρος αν μαντεύω το περιεχόμενο μιας ιστοσελίδας.. κάνω copy – paste, κατεβάζω και τραγούδια πιο εύκολα.... χρησιμοποιώ email... Έμαθα να χρησιμοποιώ το Quizlet
293 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs....να ανοίξω και να δουλέψω πάνω σε ένα.... νομίζω θυμάμαι να δημιουργήσω ένα δικό μου. Το blog το ξέρω απ’ έξω. Μπορώ να δημοσιεύσω ένα άρθρο σε blog... μπορώ να βάλω εικόνα, video.... μπορώ να κάνω επεξεργασία μετά, πας στις αναρτήσεις και το βρίσκεις. Γράφω πολύ πιο γρήγορα τώρα..και με κλειστά τα μάτια. Παλιά έγραφα με τα δύο δάχτυλα, τώρα γράφω με όλα τα δάχτυλα!! L10: Ε, λίγο, όχι περίεργο, λίγο δυσκολεύτηκα στην αρχή αλλά μετά ΟΚ....τώρα γράφω πιο γρήγορα, τις λέξεις τις ξέρω καλά τις Αγγλικές και τις Ελληνικές, χρησιμοποιώ πιο εύκολα το Internet.... σερφάρω πιο εύκολα για να βρω πληροφορίες, χρησιμοποιώ πιο άνετα μια μηχανή αναζήτησης... αξιολογώ τις πληροφορίες πιο εύκολα... μπορώ να μαντεύω το περιεχόμενο ιστοσελίδων πιο εύκολα τώρα....κάνω copy – paste...χρησιμοποιώ email... Έμαθα να χρησιμοποιώ το Quizlet. Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs....να ανοίξω και να δουλέψω πάνω σε ένα.... δε θυμάμαι πολύ καλά να δημιουργήσω ένα δικό μου. Μπορώ να δημοσιεύσω ένα άρθρο σε blog... δεν πολυθυμάμαι να βάλω εικόνα, video.... μπορώ να κάνω επεξεργασία μετά. L11: Απέκτησα καινούργιες ικανότητες. Έμαθα να γράφω κάποιες λέξεις που δεν ήξερα να γράφω....Έχω γίνει λίγο καλύτερος στο να σερφάρω αλλά θα χρειαστώ ακόμα...... αξιολογώ τις πληροφορίες πιο εύκολα... μπορώ πιο εύκολα να μαντεύω το περιεχόμενο ιστοσελίδων....κάνω copy – paste...χρησιμοποιώ email, έφτιαξα και δικό μου... Έμαθα να χρησιμοποιώ το Quizlet Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs....να ανοίξω και να δουλέψω πάνω σε ένα.... δε θυμάμαι να δημιουργήσω ένα δικό μου. Μπορώ να δημοσιεύσω ένα άρθρο σε blog... δεν πολυθυμάμαι να βάλω εικόνα, video.... μπορώ να το διαμορφώσω μετά. Βελτίωσα αρκετά την ικανότητά μου να γράφω ψηφιακά. L12: Κι αυτό μου άρεσε. Γράφω πιο γρήγορα τώρα.....σερφάρω πιο εύκολα για να βρω πληροφορίες, χρησιμοποιώ πιο άνετα μια μηχανή αναζήτησης γιατί πριν έγραφα πάρα πολύ αργά... αξιολογώ τις πληροφορίες πιο εύκολα... δεν είμαι σίγουρος αν μπορώ να μαντεύω το περιεχόμενο ιστοσελίδων πιο εύκολα τώρα....κάνω πιο εύκολα copy – paste....έμαθα να χρησιμοποιώ email... Έμαθα το Quizlet και μου άρεσε πολύ γιατί ήταν σαν παιχνίδι. Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs....να ανοίξω και να δουλέψω πάνω σε ένα.... δεν είμαι σίγουρος ότι μπορώ να δημιουργήσω ένα δικό μου. Μπορώ να δημοσιεύσω ένα άρθρο σε blog... δε θυμάμαι να βάλω εικόνα, video ούτε να κάνω επεξεργασία μετά. Βελτίωσα την ικανότητά μου να γράφω ψηφιακά, θα έλεγα αρκετά. L13: Καλό το είδα επειδή τις περισσότερες εφαρμογές δεν τις ξέραμε καθόλου και τώρα που τις μάθαμε είναι καλύτερα και από κει και πέρα να
294 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
κάνουμε πράγματα. χρησιμοποιώ πιο εύκολα το Internet.... σερφάρω πολύ πιο εύκολα για να βρω πληροφορίες, χρησιμοποιώ πιο άνετα μια μηχανή αναζήτησης... αξιολογώ τις πληροφορίες πιο εύκολα... μπορώ να μαντεύω το περιεχόμενο ιστοσελίδων πιο εύκολα τώρα....κάνω copy – paste και με το ποντίκι και με το πληκτρολόγιο...χρησιμοποιώ email... Έμαθα το Quizlet, με βοήθησε πολύ στις λέξεις και να γράφω πιο γρήγορα αυτό με τους κομήτες. Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs....να ανοίξω και να δουλέψω πάνω σε ένα.... μπορώ να δημιουργήσω ένα δικό μου. Μπορώ να δημοσιεύσω ένα άρθρο σε blog... μπορώ να βάλω εικόνα, video.... μπορώ να κάνω επεξεργασία μετά. Βελτίωσα αρκετά την ικανότητά μου να γράφω ψηφιακά. L14: Πιο εύκολο ήταν. σερφάρω πολύ πιο εύκολα για να βρω πληροφορίες, χρησιμοποιώ πιο άνετα μια μηχανή αναζήτησης τώρα γιατί πληκτρολογώ πιο γρήγορα τώρα... μπορώ να αξιολογώ τις πληροφορίες πιο εύκολα... δεν είμαι σίγουρος αν μπορώ να μαντεύω το περιεχόμενο ιστοσελίδων πιο εύκολα τώρα....κάνω copy – paste αυτό είναι εύκολο...δεν έχω μάθει να χρησιμοποιώ email... Έμαθα το Quizlet... Δε θυμάμαι να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs, έχω καιρό να μπω. Μπορώ να δημοσιεύσω ένα άρθρο σε blog... δεν ξέρω αν μπορώ να βάλω εικόνα, video.... δεν μπορώ να κάνω επεξεργασία μετά. Βελτίωσα την ικανότητά μου να γράφω ψηφιακά. Δεν ξέρω σε ποιο βαθμό. L15: Μια χαρά. Στην αρχή ζοριζόμουνα να γράψω αλλά τώρα έχω γίνει πολύ καλύτερος στο γράψιμο. Έμαθα καλύτερα Αγγλικά..... σερφάρω πολύ πιο εύκολα για να βρω πληροφορίες, χρησιμοποιώ πιο άνετα μια μηχανή αναζήτησης... αξιολογώ τις πληροφορίες πιο εύκολα... δεν είμαι σίγουρος αν μπορώ να μαντεύω το περιεχόμενο ιστοσελίδων πιο εύκολα τώρα....κάνω copy – paste αυτό είναι πανεύκολο...χρησιμοποιώ email... Έμαθα το Quizlet αλλά δε θυμάμαι τώρα να το βρω. Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs....να ανοίξω και να δουλέψω πάνω σε ένα.... μπορώ να δημιουργήσω ένα δικό μου. Μπορώ να δημοσιεύσω ένα άρθρο σε blog... μπορώ πανεύκολα να βάλω εικόνα, video.... μπορώ να κάνω επεξεργασία μετά. Βελτίωσα αρκετά την ικανότητά μου να γράφω ψηφιακά. L16: Κι αυτό μου άρεσε. Γράφω πιο γρήγορα τώρα. σερφάρω πολύ πιο εύκολα για να βρω πληροφορίες, χρησιμοποιώ πιο άνετα μια μηχανή αναζήτησης γιατί πριν έγραφα πάρα πολύ αργά... αξιολογώ τις πληροφορίες πιο εύκολα... δεν είμαι σίγουρος αν μπορώ να μαντεύω το περιεχόμενο ιστοσελίδων πιο εύκολα τώρα....κάνω πιο εύκολα copy – paste αν και αυτό το ήξερα από πριν....έμαθα να χρησιμοποιώ email... Έμαθα το Quizlet και μου άρεσε πολύ.
295 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Μπορώ να χρησιμοποιώ Google Docs....να ανοίξω και να δουλέψω πάνω σε ένα.... μπορώ να δημιουργήσω ένα δικό μου. Μπορώ να δημοσιεύσω ένα άρθρο σε blog... δε θυμάμαι να βάλω εικόνα, video ούτε να κάνω επεξεργασία μετά. Βελτίωσα την ικανότητά μου να γράφω ψηφιακά, θα έλεγα από τη μέση προς πολύ, κάπου ενδιάμεσα.
4. Ποια είναι η γνώμη σου σχετικά με τη συνεργατική δουλειά στη χρήση των Google Docs;....Νομίζεις ότι η συνεργατική δουλειά στη χρήση των Google Docs σε βοήθησε να βελτιώσεις τις ικανότητές σου στο γραπτό λόγο; Αν ναι, πώς;
L1: Θεωρώ ότι ήταν πάρα πολύ καλή ιδέα διότι δίναμε ιδέες και βλέπαμε τις ιδέες των άλλων και μπορούσαμε να πούμε τη δική μας γνώμη και να ακούσουν οι άλλοι τη γνώμη μας...... Συνεργαστήκαμε πολύ καλά, ισότιμα...έλεγα ελεύθερα τη γνώμη μου....είχαμε κάποιες διαφωνίες αλλά τα βρίσκαμε εύκολα....Έξυπνο και βοηθητικό να μας διορθώνουν οι συμμαθητές μας γιατί ήταν κάπως πιο εύκολο να τελειώσουμε πιο γρήγορα το project...... Με βοήθησε πάρα πολύ, βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου, είχα περισσότερες ιδέες και κάνω πιο εύκολα σωστές προτάσεις. L2: Δουλεύαμε καλά στα Google Docs. Δεν είχαμε κάποιο πρόβλημα. Δε θα προτιμούσα να δουλεύω μόνη μου γιατί πολλές φορές δεν ήξερα μερικά πράγματα και τα κορίτσια με βοηθούσανε, κι εγώ το ίδιο όταν δεν ξέρανε κάτι...... Βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου, μου έρχονταν πιο γρήγορα ιδέες ακούγοντας τις ιδέες των άλλων και να φτιάχνω πιο σωστές προτάσεις. L3: Ήταν μια χαρά, είμασταν πιο καλά σαν ομάδα, μερικές φορές δεν είχαμε τις ίδιες ιδέες από εικόνες ή τραγούδι αλλά, εντάξει, βρίσκαμε λύση. Γενικά τα πήγαμε πολύ καλά σαν ομάδα...... Με βοήθησε στο γραπτό λόγο γιατί γράφαμε σε άλλη γλώσσα....βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου, είχα πιο εύκολα ιδέες και φτιάχνω πιο σωστές προτάσεις. L4: Ήταν ωραία, διασκεδαστικά. Συνεργαστήκαμε πολύ καλά. Βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου, είχα περισσότερες ιδέες και κάνω πιο σωστές προτάσεις. Γιατί συζητούσαμε και οι τρεις τις προτάσεις και φτιάχναμε μια φυσιολογική πρόταση. L5: Συνεργαστήκαμε πάρα πολύ ωραία επειδή ακούγαμε απόψεις και μετά...αυτό! Με βοήθησε να βελτιώσω το γραπτό λόγο, στο λεξιλόγιο, να έχω περισσότερες ιδέες και πάρα πολύ στο να φτιάχνω σωστές προτάσεις. L6: Στην αρχή ήταν λίγο δύσκολα γιατί δεν είχα μάθει πώς δουλεύουν τα άλλα κορίτσια αλλά μετά που το συνήθισα ήταν πολύ εύκολο. Προτιμώ να δουλεύω ομαδικά γιατί θέλω να βλέπω και τις γνώμες των άλλων. Βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου αρκετά και βρίσκω πιο εύκολα ιδέες. Και έμαθα τη θέση των λέξεων και των ρημάτων που μπαίνουμε. 296 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
L7: Συνεργαστήκαμε καλά γιατί μπορούσαμε να βοηθήσουμε τους άλλους σε κάτι που δε θυμάται κάποιος. Βελτίωσα την ικανότητά μου να γράφω ένα κείμενο γιατί γράφαμε πιο πολύ, βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου και βρίσκω πιο εύκολα ιδέες. Φτιάχνω πιο σωστές προτάσεις συνεργατικά. L8: E, ας πούμε τα αγόρια μπορούσαν να μας βοηθήσουν και παραπάνω αλλά δεν το έδειχναν. Με βοήθησε η συνεργατική δουλειά γιατί, ας πούμε, πιο πριν έγραφα λίγα πράγματα σε ένα κείμενο και τώρα γράφω και το εξηγώ όλο.... βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου και βρίσκω πιο εύκολα ιδέες.....φτιάχνω πιο σωστές προτάσεις συνεργατικά. L9: Συνεργαστήκαμε καλύτερα από όλα στα Google Docs. Προτιμούσα όπως δουλέψαμε με συνεργασία. Γιατί βρίσκαμε τέλειες απόψεις και μου άρεσε γενικά η συνεργατική δουλειά. Βελτίωσα το γραπτό λόγο πάρα πολύ. Στο λεξιλόγιο με βοήθησε πάρα πολύ. Μου έρχονταν πιο εύκολα πάρα πολλές ιδέες. Κάνω πιο σωστές προτάσεις συνεργατικά. L10: Μια χαρά ήμασταν. Προτιμούσα έτσι όπως δουλεύαμε ομαδικά γιατί άμα δε βρίσκεις κάτι δεν είναι ανάγκη να... έχεις κάποιους δίπλα σου και μπορούν να σε βοηθήσουν ενώ μόνος σου δεν είναι και τοσο εύκολο. Από ότι ήμουνα παλιά τώρα έχω βελτιώσει πολύ το λεξιλόγιό μου. Ναι βρίσκω πιο εύκολα ιδέες και φτιάχνω πιο σωστές προτάσεις. L11: Δουλέψαμε, πηγαίναμε στα sites μας είχατε βάλει, τα βλέπαμε όλα σαν ομάδα και μετά τα συζητούσαμε και διαλέγαμε το καλύτερο. Προτιμούσα να δουλεύουμε ομαδικά γιατί όλοι μαζί έχουμε καλύτερες ιδέες. Με βελτίωσε πάρα πολύ στο γραπτό λόγο, στο λεξιλόγιο και είχα περισσότερες ιδέες. Έφτιαχνα καλύτερες προτάσεις γιατί είναι πιο εύκολο επειδή όσο πιο πολλοί τόσο περισσότερες ιδέες. L12: Συνεργαστήκαμε καλά στα Google Docs. Προτιμούσα όπως δουλέψαμε με συνεργασία. Γιατί βρίσκαμε ιδέες και παίρναμε αποφάσεις, μου άρεσε γενικά η συνεργατική δουλειά. Βελτίωσα το γραπτό λόγο μέτρια. Στο λεξιλόγιο με βοήθησε πάρα πολύ. Μου έρχονταν πιο εύκολα πάρα πολλές ιδέες. Κάνω πιο σωστές προτάσεις συνεργατικά. L13: Ωραία. Καλύτερα προς το τέλος επειδή πιο πολύ βάζαμε κανόνες ποιος να γράφει κλπ. Βελτιώθηκε ο γραπτός λόγος μου γιατί ξέρω πιο πολλά πράγματα και μπορώ να τα γράψω πιο αναλυτικά. βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου και βρίσκω πιο εύκολα ιδέες.....φτιάχνω πιο σωστές προτάσεις δουλεύοντας σε ομάδα. L14: Κάποιες φορές συνεργαστήκαμε όμορφα, άλλες όχι. Κυρίως ήταν οι εικόνες που βάζαμε. Εκεί για να επιλέξουμε ποια θα βάλουμε μερικές φορές συμφωνούσα εγώ με το Μ. και η Ν. με τη Ν. Δε θα προτιμούσα όμως να δουλεύω μόνος...το λεξιλόγιό μου είναι καλύτερο, κάποιες φορές σκεφτόμουν ιδέες κατευθείαν και άλλες καθόμουν.
297 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
L15: Συνεργαστήκαμε καλά απλά εγώ ήμουνα πολύ στον κόσμο μου. Προτιμώ όμως να δουλεύω σε ομάδα....βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου και ήταν πιο εύκολο να βρίσκω ιδέες.....έτσι κι έτσι φτιάχνω πιο σωστές προτάσεις τώρα. L16: Ήταν πολύ καλή. Μια χαρά δουλέψαμε. Δε θα προτιμούσα να δουλεύω μόνος. Βελτίωσα το γραπτό λόγο γιατί γράφαμε πολλές εκθέσεις, έμαθα πολλά πράγματα που θα μπορώ να τα χρησιμοποιήσω σε άλλες εκθέσεις. Και από άποψη λεξιλογίου.
5. Ποια είναι η γνώμη σου για τη συνεργατική δουλειά στη χρήση του ιστολογίου τάξης;.....Νομίζεις ότι η συνεργατική δουλειά στη χρήση του ιστολογίου τάξης σε βοήθησε να βελτιώσεις τις ικανότητές σου στο γραπτό λόγο; Αν ναι, πώς; L1: Με βοήθησε. Όλες οι ομάδες και η ομάδα μας συνεργαστήκαμε πάρα πολύ καλά.... Με βοήθησε να βρίσκω ιδέες και να τις γράφω, με βοήθησε στο να γράφω πιο γρήγορα και να βλέπουν οι άλλοι την ιδέα μου γραπτώς. L2: Κι εκεί πέρα βασικά στην αρχή δυσκολευτήκαμε επειδή ήταν πιο δύσκολο αλλά μετά το βρήκαμε.... Με βοήθησε στο γραπτό λόγο κάπως γιατί διαβάζαμε κιόλας αυτά που γράφαμε στο τέλος οπότε ναι με βοήθησε στο να φτιάχνω πιο σωστές προτάσεις πιο πολύ. L3: Συνεργαστήκαμε καλά.... Βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου και βρίσκω πιο εύκολα ιδέες και φτιάχνω πιο σωστές προτάσεις τώρα. L4: Ε, κάναμε και οι τρεις κάτι από αυτό και ήτανε... η μία έβαζε εικόνες, η άλλη έκανε κάτι άλλο και έτσι συνεργαστήκαμε.... L5: Εγώ με την ομάδα μου συνεργαστήκαμε πάρα πολύ καλά, δουλεύαμε όλοι, όλοι κάναμε από κάτι.....Βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου και βρίσκω πιο εύκολα ιδέες. L6: Εντάξει. Είχαμε αρκετή συνεργασία και αλλάζαμε, δηλαδή δεν είχαμε...π.χ. δεν έδινα μόνο εγώ ιδέες, ούτε η Μ. έγραφε μόνο, ούτε η Ελ. έγραφε μόνο στο τετράδιο. Το κάναμε ανταλλαγή συνέχεια... Με βοήθησε να βρίσκω ιδέες και να διορθώνω πράγματα που να μην τα έχω γράψει καλά, L7: Μια χαρά, μου άρεσε η ομάδα... Έμαθα πιο πολλές λέξεις, έβρισκα πιο εύκολα ιδέες και έφτιαχνα πιο σωστές προτάσεις. L8: Πολύ καλή. Το βλέπαμε με τα παιδιά και προσπαθούσαμε να δούμε αν ήταν καλό το κείμενο ή είχε κάποια λάθη. Εμπλούτισα το λεξιλόγιό μου και είχα περισσότερες ιδέες. L9: Ήταν τέλεια. Θα προτιμούσα έτσι όπως δουλέψαμε με την ομάδα. Μου άρεσε πιο πολύ γιατί ένιωθα πιο σίγουρος. Βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου και γράφω και πιο γρήγορα. Και είχα πιο πολλές ιδέες. L10: Ήταν ωραία, αστεία, ήταν μια χαρά.... Βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου και βρίσκω πιο εύκολα ιδέες όταν γράφω. 298 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
L11: Ήταν καλή. Δουλέψαμε καλά... Βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου, σχεδόν όπως τα Google Docs, βρίσκω πιο εύκολα ιδέες όταν γράφω και φτιάχνω πιο σωστές προτάσεις. L12: Κι εκεί συνεργαστήκαμε καλά.....μου άρεσε να λέω τη γνώμη μου. Λίγο καλύτερο είναι το το λεξιλόγιό μου τώρα και βρίσκω πιο εύκολα ιδέες όταν γράφω....η συνεργασία με βοήθησε να έχω ιδέες και να φτιάχνω πιο σωστές προτάσεις. L13: Μου άρεσε η συνεργατική δουλειά όταν ανεβάζαμε στο blog, συνεργαστήκαμε πολύ πιο καλά.... Με βελτίωσε ότι γράφαμε πολλά πράγματα, διάφορα και ξέραμε πολλά πράγματα. Μάθαμε καινούργια πράγματα. Το λεξιλόγιό μου ήταν καλύτερο, η συνεργασία με βοήθησε να έχω ιδέες και να φτιάχνω πιο σωστές προτάσεις. L14: Τις περισσότερες φορές συνεργαστήκαμε καλά. Θα προτιμούσα να δουλεύω μόνος σε αυτό το στάδιο γιατί είναι πιο εύκολα τα πράγματα και όταν είναι εύκολα προτιμώ μόνος.... Λίγο με βοήθησε στο γραπτό λόγο, σχεδόν τίποτα, δεν ξέρω. L15: Κι εκεί συνεργαστήκαμε καλά..... Βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου και βρίσκω πιο εύκολα ιδέες όταν γράφω. L16: Κι εκεί συνεργαστήκαμε μια χαρά. Έμαθα πολλά πράγματα για το γραπτό λόγο, λεξιλόγιο και γραμματική, μου είναι πιο εύκολο τώρα να φτιάχνω σωστές προτάσεις.
6. Ποια είναι η γνώμη σου για τη διαδικασία παραγωγής γραπτού λόγου; Ποιες δραστηριότητες/στάδια της διαδικασίας παραγωγής γραπτού λόγου σε βοήθησαν σε βοήθησαν να βελτιώσεις τις ικανότητές σου στο γραπτό λόγο; L1: Μου φάνηκε και αυτό πάρα πολύ ωραίο. Όταν γράφαμε μου άρεσε περισσότερο και όταν γράφαμε στον υπολογιστή. Με βοήθησε που διορθώναμε ένα τετράδιο από μια άλλη ομάδα. Το θεωρώ έξυπνο όταν οι άλλοι διόρθωναν τα λάθη μας και καλυτερεύανε το δικό μας project όπως κι εμείς το δικό τους. Πιο βοηθητικό ήταν όταν διορθώναμε ο ένας του άλλου. L2: Νομίζω η διόρθωση. Και αυτή που κάναμε εμείς στους άλλους και το αντίθετο. Πολλές φορές προσπαθούσαμε κι εμείς να βρούμε τα λάθη και μας διορθώνανε οι άλλοι τα λάθη που κάναμε εμείς. Οπότε νομίζω ότι και τα δύο βοηθάνε. L3: Πιστεύω πως μας βοήθησε γιατί βάζαμε τη φαντασία μας μέσα σ’ αυτό... Ήταν λίγο δύσκολη η διόρθωση των άλλων γιατί ήταν δύσκολο να καταλάβουμε τι είχαμε κάνει λάθος αλλά με βοήθησε πιο πολύ γιατί ήξερα τι είχα κάνει λάθος. 299 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
L4: Ήταν διασκεδαστικό γιατί διορθώναμε, το δίναμε στους άλλους, ήταν ωραίο. Με βοήθησε η διόρθωση που κάναμε εμείς στους άλλους επειδή βλέπαμε εκεί τι έχει γίνει. L5: Ήταν νομίζω ωραία κι αυτή επειδή μπορούσαν και οι άλλοι να διορθώσουν αυτά που είχαμε κάνει κι εμείς λάθος, να δουν αυτά που είχαμε γράψει. Όταν διορθώναμε των άλλων με βοήθησε περισσότερο. L6: Ήταν πολύ ενδιαφέρον γιατί βλέπαμε και διορθώναμε όμως από το κείμενο και το βάζαμε και ήταν πολύ ωραίο επειδή το γράφαμε στον υπολογιστή. Με βοήθησε όταν διορθώναμε περισσότερο. Και των άλλων και το δικό μας για να φτιάξουμε το τελικό κείμενο. L7: Ωραία γιατί μετά μπορούσαμε να τα γράφουμε πιο εύκολα στον υπολογιστή. Με βοήθησε όταν γράφαμε το πρώτο κείμενο στο τετράδιο. L8: Προσπαθούσαμε όλοι μαζί μέχρι να μας έρθουν ιδέες και όταν μας βάζατε πόσες λέξεις πρέπει να έχει το κείμενο εκεί λίγο μπορούσαμε και το χάναμε γιατί μπορούσαμε και βάζαμε λιγότερες ή περισσότερες. L9: Αυτό μου άρεσε πάρα πολύ. Να διορθώνουμε των άλλων και οι άλλοι να διορθώνουν τα δικά μας. Είχα λίγο δυσκολία στο λεξιλόγιο στην αρχή στο γράψιμο του πρώτου κειμένου. Λίγο δυσκολεύτηκα στο να καταλάβω τι μας διόρθωναν οι άλλοι. Λίγο. Με βοήθησαν τα Quizlet στην αρχή..η προετοιμασία πριν γράψουμε...Ήταν πολύ βοηθητικό που διορθώναμε των άλλων. Με βοήθησαν τα Google Docs γιατί αν έκανα λάθος μια λέξη τη διόρθωνε από μόνος του ο υπολογιστής και την έγραφα σε ένα χαρτάκι για να τη μάθω και πιο πολύ από όλα με βοήθησαν στις παραγράφους κι αυτά. Τα model texts ήταν πιο βοηθητικά από όλα λόγω λεξιλογίου και οργάνωσης του κειμένου. L10: Πιστεύω ότι δεν είχαμε κανένα πρόβλημα. Ένοιωθα λίγο περίεργα να δούμε πώς θα τα πάμε αλλά τα καταφέρναμε, είμαστε μια χαρά. Με βοήθησε όταν γράφαμε στο τετράδιο γιατί όταν τα γράφεις σημαίνει ότι τα ξέρεις και βελτιώνεσαι άμα έχεις κάνει λάθος. L11: Μια χαρά μου φάνηκε. Είχα δυσκολία γιατί εγώ όπως ξέρετε δε γράφω καλά στο τετράδιο, τα γράμματά μου. Προσπαθώ να τα βελτιώσω. Γενικά με βοήθησαν οι αρχικές ασκήσεις, με το Quizlet γιατί βελτίωσα το λεξιλόγιό μου. L12: Καλή ήταν η διαδικασία. Πιο πολύ στην αρχή που βρίσκαμε ιδέες και γράφαμε το πρώτο κείμενο. Ήταν δύσκολο το ότι διορθώναμε των άλλων. Με βοήθησε όταν παίρναμε πίσω το δικό μας περισσότερο για να φτιάξουμε το τελικό κείμενο. L13: Καλή ήταν η διαδικασία γιατί ήταν καλύτερα να γράφουμε πρώτα στο χαρτί, παρά να τη γράφουμε μονοκοπανιάς εκεί πέρα, γιατί μιλούσαμε πιο πολύ και ήμασταν δεμένη ομάδα και συνεργαζόμασταν πολύ καλά. Με βοηθούσε όταν διορθώναμε τους άλλους γιατί έπρεπε να βρούμε εμείς το σωστό.
300 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
L14: Εκεί δεν έκανα τίποτα... μόνο όταν γράφαμε εμείς. Δεν ξέρω τι με βοήθησε. Νομίζω όταν κάναμε την τελική ανάρτηση. L15: Μια χαρά, δεν ήταν καθόλου δύσκολο. Με βοήθησαν οι δραστηριότητες πριν γράψουμε γιατί με βοηθούσαν να έχω περισσότερες ιδέες. L16: Πολύ ωραία. Μ’ άρεσε. Με βοήθησε πιο πολύ ο χρόνος που γράφαμε στο τετράδιο.
7. Θα ήθελες να συνεχίσουμε να δουλεύουμε με αυτό τον τρόπο στο μάθημα των Αγγλικών; L1: Ναι, φυσικά. Μου άρεσε πάρα πολύ! L2: Ναι. L3: Ναι. Με μια λέξη ήταν τέλειο! L4: Ναι!! L5: Ναι!! L6: Ναι!!!!! L7: Ναι, πολύ! L8: Ναι. L9: Το ρωτάτε; Και βέβαια ναι! L10: Φυσικά. L11: Ναι, και βέβαια! L12: Ναι. L13: Ναι εγώ θα ήθελα. L14: Ναι. L15: Ναι. L16: Αχ ναι θα ήθελα να δουλεύουμε έτσι, να γράψουμε άλλα 30 projects!!
301 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX XV: PRE- AND POST- TEST RESULTS
Table 1: Pre – and post – tests results (scores – percentages) of the students of the experimental group Pre- and post- tests results Experimental group Learners Gender Pre –test Post – test Variation L1 female 11.6/20 58 % 15.7/20 78.5% 21% L2 female 16.3/20 81.5% 20/20 100% 18.5% L3 female 14.9/20 74.5% 19.8/20 99% 24.5% L4 female 6.6/20 33% 16.3/20 81.5% 48.5% L5 female 14.6/20 73% 19.8/20 99% 26% L6 female 8.9/20 44.5% 15.5/20 77.5% 33% L7 female 4.6/20 23% 14.2/20 71% 48% L8 female 9.8/20 49% 16.7/20 83.5% 34.5% L9 male 7.1/20 35.5% 11.5/20 57.5% 22% L10 male 4.2/20 21% 10.9/20 54.5% 33% L11 male 4.9/20 24.5% 12.5/20 62.5% 37.5% L12 male 6/20 30% 10.1/20 50.5% 20.5% L13 male 4.2/20 21% 6.6/20 33% 12% L14 male 9.3/20 46.5% 15/20 75% 28.5% L15 male 5.4/20 27% 8.5/20 42,5% 15.5% L16 male 18.1/20 90.5% 20/20 100% 9.5%
Table 2: Pre – and post – tests results (scores – percentages) of the students of the control group Pre- and post- tests results Control group Learners Gender Pre –test Post – test Variation L1 female 6.2/20 31% 11.2/20 56% 25% L2 female 4.2/20 21% 12.7/20 63.5% 42.5% L3 female 8/20 40% 10.8/20 54% 14% L4 female 6.4/20 32% 10/20 50% 18% L5 female 8.3/20 41.5% 4.4/20 22% -19.5% L6 female 10.3/20 51.5% 11.9/20 59.5% 8% L7 female 6.6/20 33% 10.9/20 54.5% 21.%5 L8 female 6.6/20 33% 9.3/20 46.5% 13.5% L9 female 14.6/20 73% 14/20 70% -3% L10 male 5.2/20 26% 7.9/20 39.5% 13.5% L11 male 7/20 35% 11.4/20 57.5% 22.5% L12 male 12/20 60% 15.9/20 79.5% 19.5% L13 male 4.4/20 22% 7.7/20 38.5% 16.5% L14 male 9.5/20 47.5% 10/20 50% 2.5%
302 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Graph A: Variation between the pre- and post – tests results of the experimental group
100 90 80 70 60 48,5 48 50 37 40 33 34,5 33 26 28 30 24,5 22 21 18,5 20,5 15,5 20 12 9,5 10
0
Male Male Male Male Male Male Male Male
Female Female Female Female Female Female Female Female L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 L6 L7 L8 L9 L10 L11 L12 L13 L14 L15 L16 Pre -test results Post - test results Variation
Graph B: Variation between the pre- and post – tests results of the control group
80 70 60
50 42,5 40 25 30 22,5 21 19,5 18 16,5 20 14 13,5 13,5 8 10 2,5
0
-10 -3
Male Male Male Male
-20 Male
Female Female Female Female Female Female Female Female Female -19,5 L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 L6 L7 L8 L9 L10 L11 L12 L13 L14
Pre -test results Post - test results Variation
303 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX XVI: USEFUL LINKS & WRITING SAMPLES FROM THE GROUP’S FINAL PRODUCTS 1. Link for the class blog https://6throckinggraders.blogspot.com/
2. Quizlet links
Lesson 1 https://quizlet.com/433198283/flash-cards/ https://quizlet.com/_75wxxn Lesson 4 https://quizlet.com/_7htnln?x=1jqt&i=1ckdz5 Lesson 6 https://quizlet.com/_7mv2ft?x=1jqt&i=1ckdz5 Lesson 7 https://quizlet.com/_7slvtd?x=1jqt&i=1ckdz5 Lesson 8 https://quizlet.com/297994825/flash-cards/ or https://quizlet.com/_4xf2a1?x=1jqt&i=1ckdz5 Lesson 9 https://quizlet.com/297994825/flash-cards/
3. Voki avatars (Lesson 6) http://tinyurl.com/u7mmbpy http://tinyurl.com/sd96t7q
4. Class video for “The Smile of the Child” https://vimeo.com/394597714
304 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
5. Writing samples from the groups’ final products
a. Lesson 1 (Flames)
The locket server
Don’t give out personal information Never send pictures to strangers Keep passwords private except from parents Don’t download anything without permission
b. Lesson 2 (Bears) My life My name is Nicol. I was born in Heraklion.We are a family of four: my parents, me and sister. I am in 6th grade of 4th primary school. My favourite subjects are Maths, Science and P.E. Two months two ago, me and my friends were listening to music. It was great. I was so happy. I realized that time passed so quickly that I had no time to do my homework. My teacher said he was disappointed. Now I am happy. I would like to take up volleyball lessons and become a doctor. I want to work in a hospital.
c. Lesson 3 (Flames)
THE ATLADIA The name is a Atladia.It is located near the Spain and Portugal.It borders with Spain, France and Portugal. It is a piece of Atlantia and has got a lot of forests and rivers.The winter is snowing and is little cold. The summer its hot and sunny.We have a lot of friendly and happy people.The country is rich and has got diamond and gold.We have a famous writer called James Gallaxy.We have a special fruit called colourful orange and has got blue,orange and yellow.It is sweet and salty.We have a traditional food called spaghetti with sauce of colourful orange.Fifteen years ago,three divers one Spain,Portugal and France dived in the Atlantic ocean and found the Atlantia,they saw a buttom and pressed it.Suddenly a piece of Atlantia came out in surface.The three people become legends.The flag of Atladia is red,blue and yellow with a dolphin in the centre. It is the most intelligent and rich country of all others in the Earth. DSS 305 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
d. Lesson 4 (Flames)
BREAKFAST Cereal Orange juice Milk
LUNCH Rice Spaggetti Fish
SNACKS Apple Carrot Crisps
All meals are healthy because they contain ingredients and proteins that children need to be strong and healthy.Breakfast contains dairy, carbohydrates and healthy drinks which give strong body.For lunch we need proteins, chicken soup and vitamins that need to have good eye.For snack we need carbohydrates that need to have strong bones.The snack contains fruit and crisps.
e. Lesson 5 (Hawks)
❤ THE SURPRISE PARTY ❤ 5 years ago, in California of America one couple, Jason and Zoe they were happy, and they were living with their Best Friends who were Marcus (Jason's best friend) and Mia (Zoe's best friend).
Jason and Zoe had to meet their best friends at the park at 10:00 in the morning.Their friends were waiting for them to came, because they were late.
Jason had decided to go to Spain, a day before his birthday.But, his friends didn't know that he was moving to another country. When his friends realized that Jason had left...they decided to go to Spain to throw a party for Jason. When Jason find out that his friends were at the door, he was very excited and very happy about it.Everybody was happy. ☺☺☺
306 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
f. Lesson 6 (Sharks)
SAVE THE TREES SAVE THE EARTH
Making simple choices to save energy may help avoid the serious concequences of global warming. For example:
We must turn off the lights when we do not need them. We should close doors immediately so heat does not escape. People can take short showers. Another thing we can do is walk or ride a bike, if we can; instead of having our parents drive us. We could turn off our computer when not in use. Don't leave it on just keep Facebook or Twitter active.
f. Lesson 7 (Panthers)
Unforgetable holidays
Dear family,
Right now I am in the forest. I'm with my friends Ioanna and Eleftheria. So I and my friends are camping and we are staying in a tent. In the morning we usually eat boiled eggs, toast and orange juice. At noon we eat sandwiches, fish and lemon juice .In the night we drink hot chocolate and bake marshmallows. The activities we do every day are fishing , make fire , make our food ,hiking and swimming.The equipment we need are a tent , sleeping are a tent , flashling , a lighter, clothes, shoes, boots , backpack , sleeping bag , food, plastic cups and plates , wood , mosquito spray , sunscreen , sunglasses , chairs and swimming suit.We are staying here for one more week . I am feeling very happy because this is my first time camping in the forest. Love, Megi
307 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
g. Lesson 8 (Hawks)
THE NEW COACH!!!
A week ago, me, Kate and Helen were training for our next football match, but something happened....
The principal announced us that our coach retired and left us.We were shocked,but then Helen thought that we should find a new coach for our team.
We were surfing the internet to see who football player was available.Then, we saw that Neymar was available so, we decided to travel to Brazil only to find him.
When we arrived, we found him and asked him to come to our school and be our coach. Suddenly, he said: "YES". When we came back to our school, he trained us and we won all the football matches. We were very excited and we decided to organize a party for our victory!!!!
h. Lesson 9 (Panthers)
Dear, Nick
Hi, how are you? I'm writing you this letter, because I want to help you for your school problem. If I were you, I would try to make some good friends that they will help you and you will help them. I don't think you should be rude and mad and you should care more about your friends. I don't think that you should work alone, but work in a group with other students, be more helpful and help your friends when they need your help. A bad friend is worse than an enemy, an enemy you can see and avoid, but to detect an insincere friend is hard." - Bangambiki Habyarimana, The Great Pearl of Wisdom
Love, J.M.E
308 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
i. Lesson 10 (Hawks)
YOU ARE NOT ALONE!!! Μy name is Sophia.One day, when I went to school I saw my classmates arguing.They couldn't relax,but somebody who didn't want to take part in the fight ,he stopped them.They continued the argument, but they started bullying each other. After that, they both started bullying me and call me names like stupid, ugly, fat and useless. All the other students were looking at them. The other day, I saw them doing the same thing to the boy. In the middle of the day, I saw the boy crying.I told him that I was being bullying by them too! I gave him 3 pieces of advice. First : You have to say this to your parents and your teacher. Second: Talk to the bullies and tell them to stop. Third : Think about the people who care about you. SPEAK UP NOW YOU ARE NOT ALONE STOP BULLING!!!
309 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
APPENDIX XVII: COMPUTER LAB PHOTOGRAPHS
Picture 1: Lesson 9
Picture 2: Lesson 10
310 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Picture 3: Sharks
Picture 4: Bears
311 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Picture 5: Panthers
Picture 6: Hawks
312 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION
MANIDAKI IRENE, “INTEGRATING EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS INTO PROJECT – BASED LEARNING TO ENHANCE YOUNG LEARNERS’ WRITING SKILLS AND NEW LITERACIES”
Picture 7: Flames
The end!!!!!!!!
313 POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION