In this assignment I report
on an action research project I undertook in an attempt to maximise students’
opportunities to interact through the medium of the target language (TL) during
formal teaching time on a part-time BA Honours Course in Modern Irish Language and Literature. The assignment involves
accreditation for a module entitled ‘The Professional as Researcher’, part of the
taught element of an EdD degree course which I am presently pursuing. Nevertheless, it is important to mention
here that reflection in and on teaching (Schon, 1983) and modifications of
practice have always been integral to my work as a nursery teacher (1984-87), a
primary teacher (1989-98), a teacher educator (1998-2002) and a third level
lecturer (2002-). On leaving the
primary classroom I published a series of reflective articles (Mac Corraidh,
1998a, b; 1999a, b, c, d, e) in the hope of illuminating their potential
contribution to professional discourse around the complexities of Irish-medium
education.
I feel that this action
research enquiry afforded me the opportunity to work in the direction of some
of my educational values. Firstly, I
feel that adult learners should have opportunities to explore their learning
during non-contact times and that learning should take place at all times and
in all contexts. Secondly, I believe
that a knowledge of the Irish language may provide adults and children in this
society with a much wider cultural and educational experience in much the same
way as Baker (1995, pp 10-1) wrote of the advantages of bilingualism as an
awareness of ‘different systems of behaviour, folk sayings,
stories, histories, traditions, ways of meeting and greeting’. The outcomes of this project have been
educative both to myself and to the students.
The educativity for me lies in learning which teaching
methods are least and most effective and for the students in realising that
second language learning is a marathon task.
The first section involves
the background to the project, my reasons for wanting to research second
language teaching and learning methods, personal and locational contexts of the
research and a review of some of the literature on this area. My engagement with the methodology of action
research, and the research design and ethical issues form the second section. I describe the project itself in section
three and findings are laid out in section four. My learning from carrying out the project and its significance
make up section five. Finally,
conclusions and a reflective consideration of the action research approach are
offered in section six.
1 BACKGROUND/CONTEXTS
1a Personal
It would be useful if I gave a short personal
history of my involvement in second language teaching. After graduating with an honours degree in
Celtic Languages and Literature in 1982, my first formal experience was to
supervise an Irish-medium nursery.
However my fascination with second language learning stems from
voluntary work I did as a teenager in the nineteen seventies in a society named
Cumann Chluain Ard established in
1936 for the promotion of the Irish language in the city of Belfast (Maguire,
1900, p 30; O’Reilly, 1999, pp 74-7). I
taught ab initio and advanced Irish
language courses to adult learners on a voluntary basis there for many years
(1975-1984). I wanted others to share
in the insights and educational advantages I had gained from having a knowledge
of this language. This society had an
enormous influence on both my personal and professional life. It
allowed me to bridge between generations and cultures as I, a teenager, was
teaching adult learners of different religious persuasions and
nationalities. It also gave me invaluable
practice in second language teaching through the medium of the TL a subject I
considered and discussed with experienced voluntary and professional teachers
at an early age. Most importantly, my experiences
in trying to teach and learn Irish as a second language enable me to recognize
the enormity of the task for an adult to learn a second language.
I spent three years in the Irish-medium
nursery (1983-86) and then went to teach a year-one class of six children in a
newly established Irish-medium primary school in Belfast (1986-87). I completed a PGCE course in primary
education, began a part-time master’s degree course in Modern Irish Language and Literature, and married in the following
year (1987-88) and was then appointed to teach a primary six transfer class in
a well-established Irish-medium school in Belfast from September 1988. Throughout this time I also taught GCSE
Irish at evening classes in a technical college and taught Irish also at the
three different levels offered in the continuing education department of a
university. These varied professional
experiences raised questions in my mind about how best the acquisition and
learning of a second language could be facilitated.
I taught for ten years in an Irish language
immersion transfer primary classroom (1988-98) and was initially astounded but
later fascinated by the grammatically inconsistent interlanguage the pupils
created in their attempts to communicate in the second language (Baker and Prys
Jones, 1998, p 702). These systematic,
intermediate and aberrant language forms created by pupils as a consequence of
receiving the curriculum through the medium of a second language remain my
biggest research interest. I was then
employed by a university college in Belfast as a teacher educator, teaching
curriculum studies and theories of bilingualism, bilingual education and second
language learning. I spent four years
(1998-2002) at this college and moved in January 2002 to another university and
to a completely different type of teaching responsibility.
1b Locational
Since January of this year I
have been teaching part-time adult learners on both Diploma and undergraduate
degree courses in Modern Irish Language
and Literature. The work I do now
is subject-based whereas my work in second language classrooms and in teacher
education had a multifaceted base. I
had gained a masters degree with distinction in Irish Language and Literature (1990) from the institution in which
I now teach. Therefore I was very
comfortable with the areas of study in modules I had to prepare and I was quite
confident in my teaching competence as well.
However I also recognised from my own teaching experience how enormous a
task it is for an adult to try to learn a second language. I also acknowledged the fact that these
learners have very few opportunities to engage with the Irish language beyond
the time they spend in formal learning.
Within the state of Northern Ireland there are no speakers of what is termed
'survival' or native Irish. There were small communities in mid and west Tyrone
(Stockman and Wagner, 1965), North Antrim (Wagner, 1969), and South Armagh (Sommerfelt, 1929) where Irish
survived into the 1950s but these small isolated language communities no longer
exist.
Presently, however there is
huge interest in the Irish language in the city of Belfast. This is indicated
by the large enrolments (around sixty in each year) on the diploma and honours
degree courses on which I teach and the demand for Irish language classes
generally. Nic Craith (1995, p 14)
reported the latest census figure of 142,003 people or 9.5 per cent of the
population of the state of Northern Ireland who indicated having ‘some knowledge
of Irish’.
Returning to my current position, there are
some fascinating sub-groups within the complex cohort I teach. There are those who attended controlled
schools and did not have the opportunity to learn Irish as it is not offered in
this sector, those who have been educated at primary level through the medium
of Irish and parents of children who attend such Irish-medium schools. Others work in various posts such as
secretary, and classroom assistant in Irish-medium education schools, and see
the need to improve their literacy skills in Irish. However there is also the driving force of employment in Irish
language industries such as tourism and translation at work.
Ellis (1996, p 16) acknowledged the complexity of second language acquisition and outlined a framework of interrelated factors in the investigation of the phenomenon. These are: situational factors, input, learner differences, learner processes and linguistic output. Pertinent to this assignment is age factor, which the author classifies as a key learner difference along with aptitude and intelligence, motivation and needs, personality and cognitive style. Baker and Prys Jones (1998, p 688-693) cited sustained motivation, materials tailored to the communicative needs of adult learners, teaching approaches, methods tailored to the requirements of adults, autonomy, responsibility, flexibility, and an environment that facilitates learning as the particular considerations in adult language learning. These considerations undoubtedly reflect the mammoth task of learning a second language as an adult but the same authors also claimed that there is essentially no difference between the way children and adults learn a second language as there is no evidence from research to indicate that adults do not learn languages as well as children do. Singleton (1989), (cited in Baker, 1996, p 84) in his comprehensive review of age factor in second language learning claimed that ‘there are no age related differences in the process of language learning. Younger and older second language learners tend to show a similar developmental sequence and order’.
Being aware of the ethical issues of protecting individual rights, preserving anonymity and gaining permission to do the research (see ethical statement in Appendix 1), I wrote to the students to ask for their assistance in the project (see Appendix 1b) and to my Head of School for permission to carry out the research (see Appendix 1a). Participants were kept fully informed of my intentions and progress and I took a sensitive approach throughout the enquiry, an absolute necessity when working with adults.
What
was my concern?
My concern was that students did not have
enough opportunities during formal teaching time to interact with each other and
with myself through the medium of the TL and also that they did not have many
authentic TL opportunities beyond the lectures. I discussed this concern with the group whom I kept fully
informed as research participants, central to the enquiry.
Why
was I concerned?
I was concerned because students need to gain
oral competence in Irish and they were not afforded opportunities to do so
beyond their experiences in the lectures and seminars. Therefore, I planned to change my practice
in order to maximise these opportunities during contact time with myself and
indeed to make it clear that language learning should permeate almost every
aspect of their lives.
What
did I think I could do about it?
Agreeing with Krashen’s (1984) ideas that
immersion in the TL and comprehensible input aid language acquisition, I
prepared short light topics for conversation for use in break times based on
language and literature topics and structured my teaching in order to afford
students more opportunities to interact with each other through the medium of
the TL. Lectures on language began at
six o'clock with a break at 6.50 until 7.05. Then began a lecture on an area of
literature with a break at 7.50 until 8.05 when a seminar took place on either
a short story or a novel. Having
identified the concern, I looked at my own practice and planned some action in
a facilitating fashion, intervening only to provide vocabulary, and idiomatic
expressions when demanded. I also
shifted the emphasis in my teaching from being teacher-dominated to one that
encouraged more student-student interaction. This was achieved through
discussion groups, immediate use of learned material and students teaching
fellow students (see Appendix 2).
How
did I show the situation as it was?
While assessing the group's oral competence
in the first semester, I had found that the majority of the students struggled
to survive both in general conversation and in responding to set
questions. I had discussed this area of
the students’ learning profile with my colleague who had also assessed the
students and had noted some of his comments.
He had also identified a deficit in oral skills: ‘they
appeared very nervous and were finding it hard to find words to respond to
verbal stimuli based on work in the module.
We really need to work on this area. They are lacking in basic
vocabulary and are uneasy about conversing in Irish’. I believed that the results of that
assessment also clearly indicated a need for improvement in this area. Students indicated to me in discussions with
them that I should provide more active class participation for them through
oral work in small groups, because as one of them remarked, ‘students can learn from each other as well
as from the teacher’.
I asked the group of twenty-one students to
give a written response to the question:
'How can I improve my practice so that you spend more time communicating
with myself and with each other in the TL?'
There were four responses, which was an indication of the students'
satisfaction with my teaching, as one wrote, ‘I don’t see how you could improve your practice’. Another student expressed the opinion that I
was not ‘extracting opinions on
literature from the students and that there was too much teacher-talking’ and
indicated that her main concern was ‘oral/aural
competence’. She
proposed an ‘informal, relaxed,
unassessed structure’ for people to practise speaking. Another student felt that ‘my teaching style had begun to acknowledge
the maturity of the group’ but that I should, ‘ascertain the knowledge already within the group, draw it out and
proceed from there’. Finally it was
suggested that I should ‘discuss with the
students how we feel our learning experience could be improved, monitor
progress of students and evaluate their learning’.
What
kind of data-gathering techniques did I use?
I identified two students who would have
indicated to me that they were struggling in oral skills in Irish and asked
them to keep a reflective journal until the end of the module. One of the
students did not keep the journal but the other diligently did until he
realised that it was eating into his studying time, which was
sparse
enough as he is a teacher, parent and part-time adult learner. The journal indicated the frantic efforts of
an adult, part-time student trying to find time to engage with Irish through
listening and reading, ‘nothing. Too
tired. At school until 7.30’. Reading or listening was usually done early Saturday morning,
while travelling in the car, or late at night when everyone else was asleep, ‘managed to spend an hour revising in my
parents’ home in Roscommon when everybody else had gone to bed’; ‘did
not do anything for the rest of the evening-domestic matters prevailing ‘time
won’t give me time’’. It was an
eternal struggle between domestic chores, family commitments and study. Real dread of the oral examination was
clear, ‘the less said about that the
better’. When I mentioned it, he
asked, ‘where did those twelve weeks go?
Tempus fugit’. He indicated that
passive activities such as watching football on television were a real
distraction. On April 29th
he decided to stop keeping the journal, ‘this
journal is eating into my time – de thairbhe sin, stopfaidh mé (because of that
I shall stop)’.
I also kept a reflective journal (Appendix
2), which I consider below. It has two
major features: planning and
reflecting. I divided the three hours
into periods of time which facilitated introduction of objectives,
collaboration in pairs, discussion, collaboration in pairs with new partner,
break conversations, lecturing, larger group discussions, reporting back to
whole class, seminars and recap. Each
week I planned for light conversations on linguistic and literary themes and
used the themes to facilitate the activities just outlined.
The oral work on language started very
successfully with an authentic news item from the Irish language channel
TG4. The students really applied
themselves to the task. Our consideration
of learners’ spoken and written errors, ‘brought
smiles to their faces’. However, it
also, ‘brought a realisation…that they
had still to work at them to eradicate them’.
Some students took a while to cross the
communicative barrier and I used this knowledge, ‘to target those individuals’. The
challenge of the, ‘massive variance in
second language competence and knowledge of language and literature generally’ was
partly overcome by collaborative learning and more frequent interventions on my
behalf. The few students who really
struggled did, with, ‘assistance, praise
and practice get to their destination’.
Having to answer language and literature
questions in the TL worried some students however I believe I calmed them with
the knowledge, ‘that I was the assessor
of their knowledge, knew what the domain of the tests was and that all that
they needed to show was creativity and originality’. Nevertheless the gaps in the students’ knowledge of
Irish grammar indicated that these students would benefit from straight grammar
lessons in future modules.
The final week brought two very different
types of evidence. One of the students
said that The Course Director had noticed a discernible improvement in her oral
Irish. However once again students’
fear of tests was also clearly evident, but ‘I tried to put the whole question into perspective by saying that they
represented only half of all the available marks and that they had already
successfully completed the other half’.
The most successful aspect of the oral work
on literature was the reading aloud of excerpts from the prescribed texts, ‘in the larger groups I witnessed more able
students taking on a teaching role in explaining words and phrases’; ‘those students who would usually interact
through the medium of the TL did so on this occasion but others who don’t, set
about the task I felt with a renewed determination’.
Levels of language in the autobiographical
writings from the Donegal Gaeltacht proved
very suitable for the students and consequently, ‘ this will mean a change in plans for next year in that this type of
writing will be used as an introductory text’.
Discussions on literature took place enthusiastically with little
intervention and gave the appearance that student confidence was growing. The plan in seminars to pair people with a
student with whom they had interacted minimally was a rewarding exercise for
the students. I saw it as, ‘a magnificent learning exercise for both
parties’.
I believe that students
benefited from the breadth of the literature we considered. The investigation of aspects of the Munster
dialect in Machnamh Seanmhná (An Old
Woman’s Reflections) by Peig Seyers was highly entertaining – an essential
ingredient in successful learning.
Nevertheless one student remarked that, ‘we had not delved deeply enough into the literature’. I
agreed and indicated that, ‘ I would be
decreasing the quantity in order to facilitate that deeper consideration’.
I asked the students for written responses as
to the approach I adopted and asked them to consider whether my modified
practice had resulted in them having more confidence to communicate in the
TL. I got eighteen written responses
from a total of twenty-one students and the following issues arose in them,
which I unpack below:
·
progress in students’ spoken Irish;
·
group work;
·
tutor intervention;
·
reading texts aloud;
·
gaps in students’ knowledge;
·
tests;
·
translation work;
·
error analysis;
·
writing;
·
literature;
·
break conversations.
The vast majority of students indicated that
they now felt more confident in speaking Irish. Some declared this without qualification, ‘confidence has improved during the year’; ‘outside of class now it
seems more natural to talk Irish to anyone I know, can and wants to – I will
have more confidence for this oral’. Others, however while recognising some improvement
still had their doubts, ‘I think I am
more confident in spoken Irish but would still need a lot more practice’; ‘I
feel a bit more confident in oral Irish but there are plenty of gaps due to my
own limitations’; ‘I feel more confident in a way but this year has made me realise
how much more I have to learn to become fluent’.
A small number of students claimed that they
had not gained more confidence because of such intrinsic factors as reticence, ‘I find it difficult sometimes still trying
to speak in Irish. The words are there but still it is quite
difficult’; ‘At present I don’t feel much more confident. My
spoken Irish is still my biggest concern.
I always feel I have to prepare well for orals rather than conduct a
conversation naturally’; fear of erring, ‘Personally,
I am reluctant to speak in the language unless I feel that what I am saying is
accurate in that language so it probably is a good thing where one is compelled
to speak’; and comparing performance to more fluent learners, ‘I have not gained confidence for oral
because I compare with others’. One
student was clearly undecided, ‘more
confident? - not too sure’. Another
was intimated by the formality of the oral examinations, ‘I think I would feel more relaxed if it was not in a classroom. I feel I might be able to express myself
better’ while finally one student had reconciled himself to being on a
journey, ‘I found that the language we
were using was very difficult to understand but I did understand that it was
part of the learning process’.
Group work attracted a lot of comment which
centred on the success of the paired group work and students’ clearly expressed
satisfaction with it, ‘I would like to
see more pair work and small group work as it is easier to speak out and
express yourself in small groups -–very successful’; ‘working in pairs was very helpful especially when you are
struggling with sentences or phrases, the other person can help you out’. Students had divided opinions of the work in
larger groups of six. Some students
felt intimidated by the more fluent students, ‘the large groups sometimes can be difficult as the people with a lot
of Irish can be a little daunting’; ‘I enjoyed working in pairs but I didn’t
gain practice in speaking in bigger groups because of higher level of ability
but I did gain from listening’. Others
thought it a beneficial exercise, ‘work
in pairs helpful but work in groups was better so the conversation always moves
along. More ideas to share so more talk
generated’; ‘working in larger groups introduced a variety also which helped to
keep the interest going’.
Tutor intervention proved to be satisfactory
and was described as, ‘sensitive’; ‘helpful’;
‘enthusiastic’; ‘about right’; ‘’adequate’; ‘minimal, tolerant, not
discouraging and therefore correct’. One
student indicated that there should be more general discussion on literature ‘not led or generated by the teacher’ while
another expressed frustration with the amount of intervention directed at her
personally, ‘I need a lot of time,
probably more than my share and I can’t process language quickly enough for
accurate spontaneity required by speech…like being pushed up against barriers
of learning, personal barriers of language’.
During literature seminars
we read aloud together excerpts from prescribed texts. Students’ comments deemed it very edifying, ‘reading aloud helped me a lot’; ‘it was the
most beneficial and influential part of the course as regards the oral aspect’;
‘reading out loud has been very useful for pronunciation and
comprehension’.
Three students commented on gaps in their
knowledge but all indicated overall improvement in linguistic competence. One student, on the struggle to make space
for himself, stated, ‘there is simply not
enough time for us to speak Irish in two classes per week’. A student noted the disparity between the
approach I had taken during this enquiry and ‘examination formula’. One
student commented on how informative it was to consider the translations
authors did and to compare them to their own efforts to see, ‘how the mind of the writer worked’. I was surprised that only one student
expressed an opinion on the sessions we held on common errors learners of Irish
make. However she made an astute remark
about spoken and written language, ‘much
of our spoken Irish is reflected in what we write. I found the session on common mistakes we were all making very
useful.’
Writing essays in Irish was reckoned by one
student to be, ‘very good practice’. Literature seminars inspired another student
to read literature beyond the prescribed texts, ‘feedback on literature gave me an interest in other authors not so far
covered and I got ‘An Chéad Chloch’ out of the library as a result’. Only one student expressed an opinion on
the break-time conversation topics stating that it was often, ‘difficult to concentrate on an allocated
topic at break. Conversation tended to stray.
Enough to say, ‘talk in Irish at break’.
How
did I judge progress?
I had to find some evidence to show that the action
I took in improving my practice actually had an influence on the oral
competence of the students. I asked a
student to keep a reflective diary (Data Archive 1) and requested written
comments on progress from students (Data Archive 2). I also kept a reflective diary, weekly plans and reflections, on
each teaching session (see Appendix 2).
I believe that progress can be judged by the student’s reflective
journal, from the written responses of the group and from comments in my own
reflective journal. I also believe that
self-confidence and a realisation that their oral language skills would not be
perfected overnight are key factors, which I hoped to build over the weeks.
How
did I make sure that any statements I made were reasonably fair and accurate?
I wrote to The Course Director, to The Co-coordinator of Teaching and
Learning in another school in the university and to the Head of Irish in a university college asking them to validate my
claims to knowledge as a result of the action enquiry (see Appendix 1c). The
Course Director supported my enquiry from the beginning and has agreed that
we will use the findings to restructure our oral language work in the coming
years. I described the nature of the
enquiry to The Co-coordinator of Teaching
and Learning in another school in the university and he agreed to validate
my claims to knowledge. The Course
Director is familiar with the kind of improvement in language teaching that
I am trying to bring about and with the problems adults face in their strenuous
efforts to acquire fluency in Irish.
The Co-coordinator of Teaching and
Learning would be aware of generic teaching and learning issues but not
those specific to language teaching. I
looked for validation of my claims in the form of their comments.
The Course
Director noted (see Appendix 1d) that I had ‘a
very healthy appetite to be a reflective practitioner’ and wrote of my ‘strong and worthy conviction’. He commented that we were both ‘unswerving in our objective to improve the
quality of our classes.’ He had
noticed a ‘monumental improvement’ in
students’ oral competence, a result of my ‘patience
with adult learners’.
In the written communication from The Co-coordinator of Teaching and Learning (see Appendix 1e) the very apt verb ‘energise’ was used to describe my
attempts at maximising TL use. He
questioned the rigour of my research and the generalisibilty of my
findings. In discussions with him, I
explained that I and my learning were the focus of this action research
project, that the results were for this small group of adult learners only and
that I was not claiming generalisibility.
The Head of Irish
wrote
(see Appendix 1f) that my claims to knowledge were based on direct experience
coupled with a readiness to question my professional practice and accept
constructive criticism. It
was stressed that I had illuminated methods, which are successful in adult
learning.
I believe that there are a number of
significant findings from this enquiry.
The adult, part-time learner faces massive problems in finding space to
study due to domestic commitments and responsibilities. The greater interaction through the TL
during teaching time has increased oral competence in the majority of cases but
features of personality such as natural reticence can impede performance. Oral work in pairs with a minimal and
unintimidating audience was a very successful teaching strategy and although
work in larger groups was flowing, rewarding and interesting it intimidated
weaker students. My level of
intervention and response seems to have been well measured although there is
always room for improvement. Reading
texts aloud was conducive to improving oracy skills and was entertaining for
students. An examination of common
errors was very illuminating for students, reflected their efforts and
indicated what was still to be achieved.
Answering questions and writing essays in the TL, although initially
daunting was rewarding to students in the end.
Authentic language occasions such as listening and responding to news
items appeared to facilitate application to task. Autobiographical texts contain suitable, comprehensible input for
these part-time students and the consideration of these texts was found to
augment motivation. Finally the enquiry
illustrated the importance and effectiveness of appropriate planning,
reflecting and modifying in language teaching.
6 CONCLUDING REMARKS, REFLECTIVE
CONSIDERATION OF ACTION RESEARCH APPROACH
Baker, C. (1995) A Parents’ and Teachers’ Guide to
Bilingualism, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters
Baker, C. (1996) Foundations of Bilingualism and Bilingual
Education, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters
Baker, C. and
Prys Jones, S. (1998) Encyclopedia of
Bilingualism and Bilingual Education,
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Elliott, J.
(1991) Action Research for Educational
Change, Buckingham: Open University
Press.
Ellis, R. (1996) Understanding Second Language Acquisition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hart E. and Bond
M. (1995) Action Research for Health and
social Care: A Guide to Practice, Buckingham: Open University Press.
Kemmis, S. (1988)
Action Research, in Keeves, J. (Ed) Educational
Research, Methodology and Measurement:
An International Handbook, Oxford:
Pergamon, pp 42-9.
Mac Corraidh, S.
(1998a) Sainchúrsa Gaeilge do mhúinteoirí i nGaelscoileanna (A Specialised
Course in Irish for Teachers in Irish-medium Education) An tUltach, 75 (11), pp 14-6.
Mac Corraidh, S.
(1998b) Tús ar dhíospóireacht ar an bhunscolaíocht Ghaeilge, An tUltach, 75 (12), pp 14-6.
Mac Corraidh, S.
(1999a) Saintréithe an churaclaim ag eochairchéim a haon (Characteristics of
the curriculum at keystage one, An
tUltach, 76 (1), pp 20-2.
Mac Corraidh, S.
(1999b) An mhatamaitic sa bhunscoil (Mathematics in the primary school), An tUltach , 76 (2), pp 16-8.
Mac Corraidh, S.
(1999c) An Ghaeilge sa bhunscolaíocht Ghaeilge (Irish in Irish language primary
education), An tUltach, 76 (3), pp
10-2.
Mac Corraidh, S.
(1999d) An eolaíocht sa bhunscolaíocht (Science in primary education), An
tUltach, 76 (3), pp 10-2.
Mac Corraidh, S.
(1999e) Sainchúrsa Gaeilge do mhúinteoirí i nGaelscoileanna: achoimre (A
specialised course in Irish for teachers in Irish-medium Education: a
synopsis), An tUltach, 76 (5), pp
14-5.
Mac Corraidh, S.
(1999/2000) Cúrsa inseirbhíse i mBéal Feirste don Ghaeloideachas (An
in-service course for Irish-medium education in Belfast), Teangeolas, 38/9, pp 36-47.
Maguire, G. (1990) Our Own
Language, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
McNiff, J. with
Whitehead, J. (2002) Action
Research: Principles and Practice, London: Routledge Falmer.
Nic Craith, M.
(1995) The symbolism of language in Northern Ireland, in Kockel, U. (Ed) Landscape, Heritage, and Identity: Case Studies in Irish Ethnography,
Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
OReilly, C.
(1999) The Irish Language in Northern
Ireland: London, Macmillan.
Schon, D. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner,
London: Temple Smith.
Singleton, D.
(1989) Language Acquisition,
Clevedon: Multilingual Matters
Sommerfelt, A. (1929) South Armagh Irish, Norsk Tidsskrift for Sprogvidenskap, Suppl. Bind V111.
Stockman, G. and Wagner, H. (1965) Contributions to a study of Tyrone Irish: some aspects of the vocabulary, grammar and phonology of Tyrone Irish, with texts, in Sommerfelt, A. (Ed) Lochlann: A Review of Celtic Studies, 3, pp 43-236, a monograph reprinted from Norsk Tidsskrift for Sprogvidenskap, Suppl. Bind V111.
Wagner, H. (1969) Linguistic Atlas and Survey of Irish Dialects, Vol. 1V, Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.
These are my ethical
statement and letters of consent, which were sent to the Head of School, to
students involved in research and to the validation group.
I am a university lecturer, teaching adult
learners on a part-time honours degree course. During this research, I will observe the
highest possible ethical standards.
Data gathering will be performed with integrity.
I will fully acknowledge the work of others
and will report my findings honestly and truthfully. This research project will benefit both my students
and myself. While
acknowledging the rights of all the research participants, I retain the right to
report, providing that I have carried out the research in a consistently
ethical manner.
Letter to my Head of School
Head of School,
Phone Number.
Dear Mr G
As part of my EdD studies, I intend to carry out an action research
project in order to investigate how I can improve my practice in affording
opportunities for students to interact with each other and with myself through
the medium of the target language. I am writing to ask your permission to carry
out this research with my second year group. None of the students will be
identified. Your name will not appear in
any document and I shall be happy to share new knowledge with other staff in
the school
Yours,
Seán
Dear student,
I intend to investigate how I can improve my teaching so that you are
afforded more opportunities to interact with other students and with myself
through the medium of Irish. This will
form part of my studies on an EdD course. If you agree to this proposal please
sign below. No student will be
identified in the assignment.
Is mise,
Seán
Dear colleague,
I am writing to ask you for some assistance with research I am carrying
out. I am investigating my practice in
language teaching in order to improve it by affording students more
opportunities to interact with each other and with myself through the target
language, Irish. I would be grateful if you would give me permission to use
your feedback on my efforts. Any
information you offer will be handled in confidence. Your name will not appear in any published documents without your
consent and prior viewing of the context.
Yours,
Seán
Appendix 1d: Written comments of The Course Director:
The initial thought for your project indicates a healthy appetite to be a reflective practitioner and I have a strong sense that your approach is very student-centred. You show a strong and worthy conviction and the emphasis on extra-curricular learning is excellent. You could have said more about the mature nature of the cohort. The modules of the part-time BA basically follow that of the full-time BA where most students enter after seven years of Irish. We must now restructure in the light of our direct experience and interaction with mature students to tailor it more to their needs (e.g. Use of TL in second year in order to build confidence. I am extremely pleased to have you as a colleague as we are both unswerving in our objectives to improve the quality of classes we provide. It was unfortunate that the approach did not apply throughout the module.
The students’ written responses represent monumental improvement. I certainly noticed a big difference in competence of students at end of module. The emphasis on oral work is something, which the Diploma students continually ask for. We are now making oral count for 33% of year two rather than 16.6% in order to meet that demand by the students.
We should with your permission look at the comments in detail and use them as central planks in revising plans for the new course layout. As tutor for two years previous, I could confirm that their oral competence and confidence has been through your patient strategies.
Appendix
1e: Written comments of The Co-coordinator of Teaching and Learning:
Your paper explains in a straightforward way your attempt to ‘energise’ oral competence. My main concern would be, is it rigorous enough research to make significant claims for improvement? As it stands it reads very much in a narrative, descriptive style rather than systematic and analytical mode. Should you explain ‘action research’ at the outset? Would four responses from sample group of twenty-one students be statistically significant? Can you generalise from opinions of two students?
Appendix
1f: Written comments of The Head of Irish in a university
college:
Your claims are based on experience as a teacher from nursery to third level in second language teaching and immersion teaching and therefore reflect accurately your impressions of the needs of students and of your own strengths. The fact that you asked the students shows that you can take on board constructive criticism and are prepared to question your own professional practice. The fact that you are thinking about publishing this further demonstrates your own professional critical attitude and your openness to accept criticism and not hide behind your professional mask. You show that reading aloud really works well with adult learners. This is very interesting as in my experience with male A level students this would not have worked. These students make a big investment and you are trying to cater for all sorts of needs, all of which you have to cater for.
Newly proposed timetable in
lectures/seminars to encourage more teacher/student and student/student
interaction through the medium of the target language.
6.00 – 6.10 I
introduce teaching objectives and new material.
6.10 – 6.20 Students
collaborate in pairs on language work (translation, grammar etc.)
6.20 – 6.30 I
lead discussion on results from collaboration.
6.30 – 6.40 I
introduce further new material.
6.40 – 6.50 Students
collaborate with new partners in oral and written work.
6.50 – 7.05 Students
take part in light conversation topics I prepare on various topics.
7.05 – 7.35 I
deliver lecture on Modern Irish Literature
7.35
– 7.50 Students (in larger groups)
discuss aspects of lecture by ways of questions I shall prepare.
7.50
– 8.05 Students take part in light
conversation topics I shall prepare related to literary topics.
8.05
– 8.20 Representative from each group
reports back on findings which whole class consider and respond to.
8.20
– 8.50 Seminar in which I shall lead
a discussion on specific areas being covered in literature lectures.
8.50 – 9.00 Recap,
conclusion and indications of following week's work.
Language and literature
topics for light conversation during the two breaks
6.50 – 7.05 and 7.50 – 8.05
respectively.
There are five teaching weeks remaining for
this module on Modern Irish Language and Literature. My proposals for topics of
conversation during break-times are shown in the table below. These topics will be
discussed through the medium of Irish and I shall have a facilitating role in
providing not only vocabulary, expressions, and idioms, but also encouragement
and inspiration.
Week
8 (19.03.02)
I shall ask students to
describe to their partners what they did during the holiday weekend around St.
Patrick's Day and what their plans are for Easter. I shall explain how difficult yet homely some of
Séamus
Ó Grianna's language is using the first two pages of the novel and students will
ask how others found the language in Caisleáin
Óir.
Week
9 (9.04.02)
I shall assist in revision of the past tense
as students tell their partners what they did over the Easter holiday
period. I shall tell of my
favourite writer in Irish and ask students to discuss their favourite writers.
Week
10 (16.04.02)
I shall facilitate revision of the future
tense by asking students to describe what they will do in the summer. I shall
tell of my current reading in Irish and get students to discuss these
questions: What are you reading presently in Irish? In English?
Week
11(23.04.02)
The conditional mood will be reviewed as I
encourage students to consider this type of question: What would you do if you
were to win one million pounds?
Students will discuss together all the literature we have covered in this
module.
Week
12 (30.04.02)
I shall provide visual
stimuli (mainly good quality photographs), which students will discuss. I shall ask what the students thought of the
course in literature through direct and open questioning.
Week
8 (19.03.02)
6.00 – 6.10
I introduce teaching objectives and new
material: I shall explain the changes in my practice and state that we are
going to watch and discuss video material in the form of the previous evening's
weather and news on TG4, discuss what we did on St. Patrick's Day, have a
lecture on Séamus Ó Grianna's Caisleáin
Óir, discuss aspects of the novel such as characterisation and use of
language, examine the first two pages for insights into the novel and recap on
everything.
6.10 – 6.20
Students collaborate in pairs on language
work (translation, grammar etc.):
students will watch the short news item twice and discuss it.
6.20 – 6.30
I lead discussion on results from
collaboration: I shall explain some of
the dialectal forms of the newsreaders.
6.30 – 6.40
I
introduce further new material: we
shall watch the weather item twice.
6.40 – 6.50
Students collaborate with new partners in
oral and written work: students will
use their notes to: discuss the news
item with new partner.
6.50 – 7.05
Students take part in light conversation
topics I prepare on various topics: students will tell in the past tense what
they did over the St. Patrick's Day holiday.
7.05 – 7.35
I deliver lecture on Modern Irish Literature:
I shall deliver a lecture on the novel Caisleáin Óir.
7.35 – 7.50
Students (in larger groups) discuss aspects
of lecture by way of questions I shall prepare: we shall examine and discuss
aspects of language in the novel.
7.50 – 8.05
Students take part in light conversation
topics I shall prepare related to literary topics: students will examine the first two pages of the novel together
in groups.
8.05 – 8.20
Representative from each group reports back
on findings which whole class consider and respond to: findings will be reported and examined.
8.20 – 8.50
Seminar in which I shall lead a discussion on
specific areas being covered in literature lectures: we shall consider a letter
the author wrote in 1927, an article on the novel as a source of social history
and one on instances of good writing in the novel.
8.50 – 9.00
Recap, conclusion and indications of
following week's work: I shall re-cap on the lectures and seminar, ask what
their impressions of the new arrangements are and indicate further reading.
Tonight's changes worked fairly well, it
seemed to me and there was a lot of student/student interaction. It was difficult to stick to the planned
times exactly but generally my plans were adhered to. The students thought that the news items were a great idea. The newscasters were from County Kerry and
County Galway and spoke in their respective dialects. I played the news item twice and explained some of the dialectal
forms to the students. I then allowed them to listen again and take notes. They then worked in pairs to discuss the
item, which centred on road accidents.
We then examined their responses and understanding together. There were also dialectal problems with the
news item. Native speakers of all
languages tend to take short cuts e.g. chuile áit = gach uile áit
(everywhere). Once these were
explained, students did not have any problems understanding. They then discussed the weather with a new
partner.
The light conversation at break was also a success and it seemed that the students were really getting into the spirit of the changes. They applied themselves to the task as I went from group to group intervening only when necessary.
In considering the language of the novel Caisleáin Óir, there was plenty of
verbal communication based on the first two pages of the book. In the larger groups, I witnessed more able
students taking on a teaching role in explaining phrases and words. As one large group we successfully talked
about some of the main themes in the book: the national school system, language
contact, corporal punishment, intergenerational attitudes to Irish and the use
of humour in the novel.
Those students who would usually interact in
the medium of the TL did so on this occasion but others also set about the
task, I felt, with a renewed determination.
A few are still finding it difficult to cross the barrier into second
language communication. At break-time,
I had a conversation with a student who would certainly fall into this category
and he explained how as a father, teacher and part-time adult learner that he
was finding it hard to fit in all the reading and feared that his oral skills
were not improving. This student is
worried about his achievement in spoken Irish and is worried about having to
talk about literature in an oral examination.
I feel that this student will be a real litmus test for the changes I
have introduced.
Generally there was a buzz about the lecture
theatre, which I did not perceive previously.
The main question I have is, is it not too much to expect students to be
more or less fully involved in oral and written work for a continuous period of
three hours? Seemingly, not if I can
maintain interest at tonight’s levels but that demands meticulous
preparation. Students also need to make
a big effort to have both passive and active interaction with the TL beyond the
formal teaching hours they get. On these issues, I suggested
they listen to Raidió na Gaeltachta, watch TG4, find other Irish speakers and
keep a journal. Not too much to
ask!
Week
9 (9.04.02)
6.00 – 6.10
I shall introduce teaching objectives and new
material and explain that we are going to examine learners' errors in speaking
and writing Irish, discuss what we did over the Easter holiday, have a lecture
on Eoghan Ó Dónaill's Scéal Hiúdaí
Sheáinín, discuss aspects of it, have a seminar on the first chapter of the
book and finally recap on everything.
6.10 – 6.20
Students collaborate in pairs on language
work (translation, grammar etc.): students will consider some common errors and
discuss them.
6.20 – 6.30
I lead discussion on results from
collaboration: I shall examine some of the common errors learners make.
6.30 – 6.40
I introduce further written errors.
6.40 – 6.50
Students collaborate with new partners in
oral and written work in discussing their own errors and considering the errors
I indicated.
6.50 – 7.05
Students take part in light conversation topics I prepare on various topics: students will tell in the past tense what they did over the Easter holiday.
7.05 – 7.35
I deliver lecture on Modern Irish Literature:
I shall deliver a lecture on the novel Scéal
Hiúdaí Sheáinín.
7.35 – 7.50
Students (in larger groups) discuss aspects
of lecture by way of questions I shall prepare: we shall examine and discuss aspects of autobiographies in modern
Irish with clear reference to Scéal
Hiúdaí Sheáinín.
7.50 – 8.05
Students take part in light conversation
topics I shall prepare related to literary topics: students will discuss their favourite writers in Irish.
8.05 – 8.20
Representative from each group reports back on findings which whole class consider and respond to: findings about favourite writers will be reported and examined.
8.20 – 8.50
Seminar in which I shall lead a discussion on
specific areas being covered in literature lectures: we shall consider the
first chapter of the novel Scéal Hiúdaí
Sheáinín.
8.50 – 9.00
Recap, conclusion and indications of
following week's work: I shall re-cap on the lectures and seminar, and indicate
further reading.
Reflection
on week 9
The first thing I remarked on tonight was
that it had been a long Easter break and that I was sure that students would
have plenty to converse about. I
introduced the new material as learners’ errors, which immediately brought
smiles to their faces. This
was a very worthwhile exercise as it gave the students the opportunity to
discuss the errors and to understand how many second language errors are the
consequences of first language interference.
Students
appreciated having the chance to ask me exactly why these examples were
erroneous and there was a healthy discussion both between the students and
myself and among themselves. As we
analysed the errors I indicated how many of these features were appearing in
the speech of younger children in Gaeltacht areas and in the interlanguage of
immersion pupils. I
believe that it brought about a realisation on many students’ behalves that
they were making many of these errors and that they had still to work at them
to eradicate them.
The conversation at break was also a success
tonight and I witnessed most pairs attempting to interact through
the TL. However there are still some
students who have not crossed that communicative barrier as yet and I shall
have to target these individuals soon.
The past tense is probably the easiest one to handle in Irish and is one
that the students have covered comprehensively. Therefore the interactions I listened to were quite fluent and
surprisingly accurate as well!
The literature being considered tonight was a
Gaeltacht autobiography entitled Scéal
Hiúdaí Sheáinín. It is an account
of life in the west of Ireland from a man born in 1853. We considered the life and times of the
author and we drew our attention to the themes of the book. Students have studied this type of
literature from other parts of the country and this led to a discussion of the
merits of the genre. It was clear to me
from students’ comments that the level of reading in this autobiography was
much more suitable for these students those materials I had covered
previously. This will mean a change in
plans for next year in that this text will be used as an introduction to the
genre.
The second break involved a discussion of
students’ favourite writers in Irish.
This meant that they had to express the meaning of favourite in Irish
but it also gave me the chance to find out who is reading what beyond the
prescribed texts. This is really the
first book these adult students have encountered and the conversations were
highly illuminative of the enormous enthusiasm adults learners bring to the
course. Reporting of findings was
interesting in that I found that I had to give very few words or
assistance. It appears students’
confidence is growing.
The seminar was a very satisfying
exercise. I asked the students to join
with a partner with whom they had interacted very little before. They then read the first chapter of the
autobiography to each other. The first
thing I noticed was that no one was struggling and that there was a high but
bearable and acceptable (welcome) noise-level.
I knew that these learners at this point in their acquisition of reading
and comprehension skills were comfortable with this type of literature. I witnessed attempts at native speech
intonation, pronunciation and style, which pleased me a lot. This was a magnificent learning exercise for
both parties.
Week
10 (16.04.02)
6.00 – 6.10
I introduce teaching objectives and new
material: the ideas of discourse as a framework for the grammar of the Irish
language and of the big, metaphoric watch with large (e.g. paragraphs) and
small parts (words).
6.10 – 6.20
Students collaborate in pairs on language
work (translation, grammar etc.): students will consider the material in
English and discuss it through Irish with the help of the translated version.
6.20 – 6.30
I lead discussion on results from
collaboration: discussion on understanding of written discourse and of the
metaphor.
6.30 – 6.40
I introduce further new material: further
explanation of written discourse.
6.40 – 6.50
Students collaborate with new partners in
oral and written work: students will discuss further the written material.
6.50 – 7.05
Students take part in light conversation
topics I prepare on various topics: students will tell in the future tense what
they will do over the summer.
7.05 – 7.35
I deliver lecture on Modern
Irish Literature: I shall deliver a lecture on the novel Rotha Mór an tSaoil.
7.35 – 7.50
Students (in larger groups) discuss aspects
of lecture by way of questions I shall prepare: we shall examine the telling, writing and editing of the novel.
7.50 – 8.05
Students take part in light conversation
topics I shall prepare related to literary topics: discuss what they are
presently reading in Irish and in English.
8.05 – 8.20
Representative from each group reports back
on findings which whole class consider and respond to: further examination of
novel: themes and language.
8.20 – 8.50
Seminar in which I shall lead a discussion on
specific areas being covered in literature lectures: a consideration of the
chapter Lá Fhéile Pádraig
8.50 – 9.00
Recap, conclusion and indications of
following week's work: written discourse and the novel Rotha Mór an tSaoil.
.
I introduced my objectives for the evening
and explained that this was really an exercise in collaborative learning as a
way of revising for the class test that was coming up very soon. I advised the students
firstly to read the English version of the section on language as a system of
sounds and how we might use the metaphoric watch with its cogs and small parts,
which must all, operate in unison in order that the watch might function
accurately. To transfer this to language
systems and to consider it in the second language proved an enormous task for a
lot of the students and demanded that I intervened to a greater extent than had
been my previous practice. What made
matters worse was the nature of the translation of the original English
material. It did not facilitate the conveying of the meaning in the original
version. Nevertheless, it produced a
lot of interaction including explanations and illuminations on more
knowledgeable students to those who have only rarely considered these matters. That
is a feature of this cohort, which is a great challenge in that there is
massive variance in second language competence and in knowledge of language and
literature generally. We only covered
the metaphor and I said that I would provide a clearer translation for next
week.
We then followed the same methodology to
consider written discourse and criteria used to ascertain the quality of long
written pieces such as discussion essays.
This proved more successful as the subject was easier to comprehend and
therefore was not as demanding as the other subject through the TL.
In general the student body
is proficient in the use of the future tense, which actually is quite
straightforward to form and to use in Irish.
A
few people struggled but with assistance, praise and patience they eventually
got to their destination.
In the lecture we talked about the fact that
Seán Ó hEochaidh had written down this account from the telling of Micí Mac
Gabhann and how Proinsias Ó Conluain had edited the work. I asked the students to work in their groups
and to consider an abridged version, which I had taken from a recently
published book on the subject. Again
this type of natural, homely language is very attractive to the students and
points to future methods of instruction and language use.
We did not have time to read the section
entitled St. Patrick’s Day (Lá Fhéile
Pádraig) from the book which I provided for them on but I asked them to
consider it in their own time.
Students are worried that they will be
answering questions on language and on literature through the TL. We then had a discussion on second language
acquisition in which I alluded to Krashen’s ‘comprehensible input’ theory and
other ideas about the use of the TL in the instruction of the language and of
other subject areas. I also strongly
indicated that the greater emphasis would be on the conveying of meaning, in
communicating and less on accuracy and form.
I do believe they went home a little more reassured of their ability to
answer the questions in the class tests.
Week
11 (23.04.02)
6.00 – 6.10
I introduce teaching objectives and new
material: quick consideration of new translation of metaphorical watch; the
idea of discourse as a framework for the grammar of language.
6.10 – 6.20
Students collaborate in pairs on language
work (translation, grammar etc.): students will consider the material in Irish
and discuss it through Irish with the help of the original English version.
6.20 – 6.30
I lead discussion on results from
collaboration: discussion on understanding of written discourse and its
assessment from the points of view of presentation, relevance, thought content,
organisation, coverage and style.
6.30 – 6.40
I introduce further new material: further
discussion on the assessment of written discourse.
6.40 – 6.50
Students collaborate with new partners in
oral and written work: students will discuss further my translated version of
the original English material, ensuring their knowledge of terminology.
6.50 – 7.05
Students take part in light conversation
topics I prepare on various topics: students will practise their use of use of
the conditional mood - Cad é dhéanfá dá mbainfeá milliún punt? What would you do if you won one million
pounds?
7.05 – 7.35
I deliver lecture on Modern Irish Literature:
I shall deliver a lecture on the novel Machnamh
Seanmhná (An Old Woman’s Reflections) by Peig Seyers.
7.35 – 7.50
Students (in larger groups) discuss aspects
of lecture by way of questions I shall prepare: we shall examine the cultural
and literary contexts of the book.
7.50 – 8.05
Students take part in light conversation
topics I shall prepare related to literary topics: they will discuss the
literature we have covered in this module.
8.05 – 8.20
Representative from each group reports back
on findings which whole class consider and respond to: further examination of
novel: literary aspects.
8.20 – 8.50
Seminar in which I shall lead a discussion on specific areas being covered in literature lectures: a consideration of the last chapter.
8.50 – 9.00
Recap, conclusion and indications of
following week's work: written discourse, the novel Machnamh Seanmhná, the sentence and revision of module.
.
I introduced the objectives for the evening
and realised immediately that pupils wanted some idea of the content of the
upcoming class tests on language and literature. We discussed this and it was evident that some students are
worried about responding in Irish to the questions. I explained that I was the assessor of their knowledge, had a
knowledge of the domain of the tests which would be examined and that what they
needed to demonstrate was creativity and originality.
However, things did go as planned as the
students wanted to cover some areas of grammar they were unsure of still. We did that and also considered various
structures and phrases they would need in their written and oral
examinations.
Students demonstrated the student-friendly
translations of the language material that I provided for them and said that
the level of language was much easier to handle.
The conversation at break was quite
successful and lead to a comprehensive revision of the conditional mood in
Irish. The gaps in the students’
knowledge however has forced me to reconsider the approach taken on this model
where language systems in general have been addressed when evidently these
part-time students would benefit more from straight Irish lessons.
We considered then both the literary and
cultural contexts of the autobiography Machnamh
Seanmhná (An Old Woman’s Reflections).
This led to a discussion in the TL about island life and specifically
life on the Blasket Islands at the beginning of the twentieth century. We also made a comparison between the type
of language used by Peig and the language of Tomás Ó Criomhthainn the author of An tOileánach (The Islander). This was also an ideal opportunity to bring
in some aspects of the dialect of Munster which was an entertaining aspect of
the interaction tonight.
The conversation at break was in preparation
for the oral examination and involved the literature that we have covered in
the module. Again
students availed of this opportunity to discuss material, which will be
assessed. I moved from group to group
and assisted in the construction of utterances indicating a liking or disliking
for different authors. The feedback was
informative in that I found that a lot of the students were not able to
purchase the prescribed texts and were depending on sections, which I provided
in seminars.
In our discussion of the literary aspects of
the book, we examined the final chapter of the book and the deeply religious
nature of the language involved. A consideration then followed of the social
and cultural context, reality for such faith in and reverence for the Creator
in spite of the evidently materialistically impoverished life on the Blaskets.
Another inspiring concept for the students was the rich
oral tradition of the island in contrast to the aforementioned material
poverty. These were formally uneducated community but yet a highly learned
one. Students perceived this from the
text and talked in an interested fashion about it.
The recap involved ensuring that all students
were aware of the content of all examinations, that they should answer the
questions in Irish and that the following week would be used to answer all
their inquiries.
6.00 – 6.10 I introduce teaching objectives
and new material. I shall explain that
this evening’s time will not be used as planned to introduce new material but
instead will be taken up by revisiting the concepts of language and the
literature that we covered
6.10 – 6.20 Students collaborate in pairs on
language work (translation, grammar etc.) This time will be used for pairs to
formulate questions, which we shall discuss.
6.20 – 6.30 I lead discussion on results from
collaboration. This discussion will be
driven by feedback from pairs.
6.30 – 6.40 I introduce further new
material. No new material will be
introduced.
6.40 – 6.50 Students collaborate with new
partners in oral and written work.
Pairs will discuss their understanding of issues I have identified,
which will appear, on the upcoming written class-test.
6.50 – 7.05 Students take part in light
conversation topics I prepare on various topics. This time will be used to allow students to discuss some of the
topics that will arise in the oral test such as a comparison of the literature
in Irish they have considered with literature in other languages.
7.05 – 7.35 I deliver lecture on Modern Irish
Literature. I shall revisit briefly in
a general fashion the books we have covered in this module.
7.35 – 7.50 Students (in larger groups)
discuss aspects of lecture by ways of questions I shall prepare. These groups will discuss various aspects
including language use, themes, and characterisation.
7.50 – 8.05 Students take part in light
conversation topics I shall prepare related to literary topics. This will be a break for the students.
8.05 – 8.20 Representative from each group
reports back on findings which whole class consider and respond to. Feedback
about language, themes and characterisation will be considered.
8.20 – 8.50 Seminar in which I shall lead a
discussion on specific areas being covered in literature lectures. I shall use
this time to give indicators as to the demands of the literature questions in
the class-test.
8.50 – 9.00 Recap, conclusion and indications
of following week's work. I shall
indicate further reading for both language and literature.
1 Reflective diary kept by
student during enquiry.
2 Written responses from students as to their
progress and my new teaching approach.