Why People Study English - Research Paper Example

Conceptual Framework Name Institution Conceptual Framework Introduction There are several reasons why people study the English language. The phonology of English motivates people to reflect on the objectives of teaching the language. Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Language ensure that such people learn English in order to apply it wherever it is used. People are also able to communicate with one another when they have a common language to use. However, people commit phonological errors when using vocabularies. Therefore, Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages must help the native and non-native people to understand the language and avoid making phonological mistakes. Some of these people can be the K-12 students when speak other languages. Additionally, this concept will be explained using a conceptual framework. A conceptual framework is a paradigm or conception of what the study intends to focus on. It is also a tentative theory about the phenomenon being investigated. The function of theory is to inform the study design by assisting in the assessment and refinement of the goals, the development of relevant and realistic questions, the selection of suitable methods and the identification of prospective validity risks. It also assists in the justification of research. This research proposes to determine how English tutors should help K-12 students how to avoid pronouncing problems. The paper will first focus on the research questions and aims and will present the background of the topic. Second, it will provide a critical overview of the paradigm and will explain how this best fits the research. Third, it will present a concept map of the conceptual (theoretical) framework. Fourth, it will discuss each element of the study and the links to the literature and to the researcher’s world values and paradigm. Fifth, the paper will explain the method and data collection tools used. Finally, the paper will provide an analysis with references to the literature and clear links to the conceptual framework. A. Research Question(s) and Aim(s) Accompanied by a Rationale to Provide Background The teaching of the English language has evolved through the years. Various techniques have been developed for teaching English to speakers of other languages (TESOL) (McKay, 2006). Traditional approaches gave precedence to grammatical capabilities as the basis of language efficiency (Toohey, 2000). Teachers believed they could teach how to avoid phonological errors through direct tutoring or through a method that employed drilling or repetitive practices. The grammar tutoring approaches were inductive and deductive. Teachers assumed that learning the language involved creating a huge range of grammatical patterns and sentences as well as learning to generate these swiftly and accurately in the correct situation (Mackey & Gass, 2007). Several abilities were developed after a fundamental command of language was established using managed practice and verbal drilling for skills such as writing, reading, listening and speaking. This strategy often used various techniques such as changeover drills, question/answer practice, dialogue memorisation, and writing practice and guided language forms (Creese, 2005). Teachers who tutored speakers of other languages in English had to pay more attention to correct grammar mastery and pronunciation in the initial stages of language learning, because if the learners made mistakes, it would affect their permanent learning abilities (Edwards and Zampini, 2008). Generally, K-12 students must have writing, listening, speaking and reading skills in order to avoid some of the phonological errors. Despite having these skills, some K-12 students continue to have problems pronouncing some of the words and it the teachers’ duty to help them speak correct English. Additionally, the Japanese and Spanish students make the words bud and bad sound identical resulting to misunderstanding. Jenkins (2000) states that language tutors usually differentiate between language aspects mastered through the four major language skills. Reading and listening are ‘input’, ‘receptive’ or ‘passive’ skills, while writing and speaking are ‘output’, ‘productive’ and ‘active’ skills. These skills are mainly manifested in actual communication. For instance, students take notes while listening to their instructors. To clarify the message they received from the instructor, they interpret their notes and show their comprehension by asking questions. It would not be appropriate to teach each skill separately because in meaningful conversation, individuals use language skills in tandem rather than separately (Riggenbach, 2000). Therefore, the four skills must be taught together. The main aim of this study is to explain how t o avoid errors committed by K-12 students. The research questions are as follows: a) What are the skills that teachers should instill in the students? b) How can the teachers ensure that the students’ skills improve? c) What are some of the learning methods that the teachers can use? d) What are the teachers’ roles in the language lessons? e) What are some of the errors that students make? B. Critical Overview of the Paradigm and Explanation as to How It Fits the Study 1. Critical Overview of the Paradigm A paradigm is an essential element of study design. It allows the researcher to situate his or her work. It includes general theoretical assumptions and assumptions shared by researchers operating in a particular institution or studying a particular subject (Myers, 2009). Paradigms normally include specific methodological approaches associated with hypotheses. Some examples of general or abstract paradigms include idealistic positions such as pragmatism, realism, constructivism and positivism; each embodies varying ideas concerning reality to gain knowledge. Some paradigms are important for qualitative studies, such as phenomenology, postmodernism, feminism, critical theory and Interpretivism. Interpretivism, which is also linked to post-positivism, is frequently used in qualitative study and highlights the significance of recognizing every person’s reality perceptions. Study should include people’s experiences in the world, and such experiences are deemed applicable truth. Interpretive methods place the significant performances of human subjects at the core of systematic explanation. It is carried out from an experience-near viewpoint such that the investigator fails to begin with ideas determined before but instead permit these to develop from field encounters. Interpretivism concentrates on systematically revealing significant practices, while indicating how the practices build up to produce observable results. Interpretive study is unique in its assessment standards, data review, idea formation, and research design approach. Interpretive methods include a direction that view people’s actions as important and traditionally contingent. Interpretivism model researchers depend on insiders’ perspectives and particular projects including case studies. A comparative ontology are projected, therefore, various diverse realities exist in the world making the study to consider how people situations, experiences, and conducts build naturally subjective realities. Actually, qualitative study even upholds subjective experience reality. Reality includes things that people build in their minds as a result of theorising. Consequently, investigators can critic one another’s work as an explanation instead of a truth. Human conduct is a sophisticated interaction of socio-psychological facets. According to Interpretivists, these factors fail to loan themselves; a) How the Conceptual Framework Fits the Study The conceptual framework fits the study in such a way that it will help TESOL tutor K-12 students. It also forms the study’s essence. The conceptual framework in this study is in the form of a diagram that clarifies all the things that must be studied by teachers who want to become effective in their duties. Some of the results include speaking as explained below. Speaking is a significant skill that can help K-12 students to avoid the phonological flaws. Teachers must ensure that K-12 students acquire all the skills they need. Ideally, in the learning and teaching process, learners must be given opportunities to practise speaking a language (Segalowitz, 2010). The teachers can help these students through role playing, games, discussions, monologues and dialogues. The students must be able to speak English fluently and articulate phonemes properly, utilise the correct stress and accent patterns and speak in different situations and genres. Most speakers of other languages have problems with language skills (Walsh, 2006). These problems can be addressed through cooperative learning methods. Cooperative learning can be employed because the tutor can place students in several groups throughout the learning and teaching process. K-12 students enjoy studying together because teams can facilitate their learning. They would be able to collaborate with one another depending on the groups formed. Collaboration can improve speaking skills and positively affect the learners’ vocabulary pronunciation and self-esteem (Mackey & Gass, 2007). K-12 Students can select their own studying partners to help them study the materials and can have additional opportunities to practise speaking with their friends. The teachers can introduce activities throughout the learning and teaching process, such as communicative responsibilities that require students to speak out. C. Concept Map of the Conceptual (Theoretical) Framework English is a global language used in technology, science, business, economics, commerce, diplomacy, and education (Oldham, 2005). This is the main reason why TESOL (Teachers of Speakers of Other languages) have realized its important when teachers K-12 students. Its importance is indisputable. However, understanding the language is joined with usage and practice. Therefore, most people find it very hard to use English as a second language and the conceptual framework will find the phonological errors they make. As the diagram indicates, there is a variables’ relationship brought about by the project’s output. Phase 1, which is the INPUT, indicates the theories supporting the research. Phase 2, which is the PROCESS, shows teh errors they make such as consonant quality, extended sounds, omission, word stress, and quality of vowels. The last phase, OUTPUT, it touches on the phonological errors’ identification that affects the language users. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR TESOL Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 D. Discussion of Each Element of the Conceptual Framework and the Links to Literature and My Own Values/View of the World i. Variables Teachers ensure that they instil knowledge in the students. They make sure that k-12 students can fluently use the English language either in their classroom or outside the classrooms (Hutchinson and Waters, 1990). The second variable includes the educational materials. These materials include books, journals, magazines, or the media. The other variable includes the student’s first language. Teachers may find difficulties while trying to teach the students because they already use the initial language but through appropriate materials, they are able to learn the English language. ii. Phonological flaws: Such faults include extended and omitted sounds, pronunciation, consonants, and vowels. Some of the students may have problems uttering some of teh words for the first time. iii. Variable effects: The mentioned variables may affect every student differently. Some of them may be highly affected while others may be lowly affected depending on their ability to comprehend a new language. In my own view, I believe that teachers should use every technique to ensure that their K-12 students understand the English language. The current world is global and people should have a language that can help them to understand each other. Students too have an obligation to make sure that they exhaust every material that could help them avoid some of the English language errors. They should take English as a language that could help them in future such as in businesses or other activities. E. Identification of Method and Data Collection Tools, with References to the Literature and Clear Links to the Conceptual (Theoretical) Framework Qualitative research mainly depends on four data collection methods: participant observation, observation, interviews, and material and document review (Miles & Huberman, 2006). The first primary data collection method is observation. Observation includes the methodical noting and recording of events and artefacts. It is conducted in the societal setting selected for the research. Observational records are often called field notes, which are concrete, unbiased and detailed descriptions of what the researcher observes. A researcher who relies on observation does not play a particular role in the study sample, but remains a modest observer. For instance, a researcher can conduct a study in a school and record and explain the complex interactions and activities that were observed. Observation ranges from a prepared comprehensive behaviour notation planned by checklists to a holistic account of behaviour and events. In the early phases of a qualitative study, the researcher enters the environment (in this case, the school) with a broad area of focus but with no pre-set categories or stern observational checklists. This allows the researcher to discover recurring relationships and behaviour patterns. After the researcher identifies and describes these patterns through a review of field notes, checklists become more suitable and sensitive to the context. The researcher will also be able to use focused observation techniques during the later phases of the study to explain relationships and behaviour in various settings. The major data collection technique used in the study was observation. Observation plays an important role in qualitative studies. It discovers sophisticated relationships in natural societal environments. Studies that use in-depth interviews also use observation as a significant tool, since the researcher notes the interviewee’s body language, words and gestures. In observation, the researcher is fully involved in the study. Some of the challenges involved in this technique include danger, uncomfortable moral dilemmas and discomfort. Even though a researcher observes from a distance, some settings may be dangerous. For instance, street ethnography explains study environments that may be emotionally and physically dangerous places. Observation includes the methodical noting and recording of events and artefacts. It is conducted in the societal setting selected for the research. Observational records are often called field notes, which are concrete, unbiased and detailed descriptions of what the researcher observes. A researcher who relies on observation does not play a particular role in the study sample, but remains a modest observer. For instance, a researcher can conduct a study in a school and record and explain the complex interactions and activities that were observed. Observation ranges from a prepared comprehensive behaviour notation planned by checklists to a holistic account of behaviour and events. In the early phases of a qualitative study, the researcher enters the environment (in this case, the school) with a broad area of focus but with no pre-set categories or stern observational checklists. This allows the researcher to discover recurring relationships and behaviour patterns. After the researcher identifies and describes these patterns through a review of field notes, checklists become more suitable and sensitive to the context. The researcher will also be able to use focused observation techniques during the later phases of the study to explain relationships and behaviour in various settings. Researchers visited various elementary schools to observe how teachers dealt with K-12 students especially those who used other languages. A comparison was made between students using other languages and those who used the English language to see the group that made many phonological flaws. During the observation process, several participants were selected for the study. After the selection, the observer had to be in the classroom as the TESOL instructor is teaching to view their reactions and responses to the teachings. The observer had to also engage in the learning in order to be familiar with the learning environment. The second data collection technique used in the study was questionnaires amongst TESOL instructors. Most of the teachers who agreed to take part were given questionnaires with several questions. The questions were divided into two parts, whereby some were open ended-questions that required then to explain their answers while some were closed ended where they were required to given one responses either tick or given a yes/no answer. The observers viewed the participation level of the students, general learning climate, cooperation and support level, as well as the problem-solving skills of the students. Recording was an important part of the observation process. Some of the observers recorded their observations at teh spot while others decided to record their observations after leaving the classrooms. F. Discussion of Analysis with References to the Literature and Clear Links to the Conceptual (Theoretical) Framework Teachers have a role to instill knowledge in their students. Therefore, they must introduce techniques that they feel will make students understand without difficulties. The ability to use these techniques will also ensure that students avoid phonological errors. Additionally, to Avoid some of the flaws made by most K-students, teachers should introduce cooperative learning is the best method to teach the students, as collaboration can maximise their learning (Bohn & Munro, 2007). This will give them the ability to pronounce difficult words, use vowels and consonants, and even speak fluently using the language. The advanced students can help the low-level students understand the subject matter better. Cooperative learning rewards the team instead of the person, thereby motivating the students to master their academic materials. Every team member is accountable for learning the materials and helping the other members understand the subject matter and accomplish the assignments provided by the teacher. Thus, this forms an atmosphere of achievement. Cooperative classrooms emphasise mediated education. Mediation includes coaching, modelling and facilitation. Facilitation entails building a rich setting and activities for connecting new knowledge to previous knowledge, offering chances for cooperative problem solving and work and giving students authentic education tasks (McKay, 2006). Coaching involves providing clues and hints, offering feedback, redirecting the learners’ efforts and helping them use the cooperative learning approach. The decision to integrate cooperative learning tasks in a syllabus must be based on a cautious examination of the goals of the course. For instance, if teachers expect learners to use theoretical information in real-world challenges or to exhibit problem-solving or decision-making skills, it is appropriate to use teamwork. The classroom size is a significant component that should be considered when using cooperative education. Each team must have the correct number of students for them to participate properly and effectively. Individual responsibility is essential to team success. Self recognition responsibility is another way that TESOL teachers can help their students in pronunciation and avoiding phonological errors. Students can be directed towards becoming liable to their respective work by offering means and ways; a) clear participatory strategies and explicit directions so that the learners know everything about their work; b) carefully defined outcomes, responsibilities, and tasks for small group and class activities; c) Sharply focused and substantive signals for pronunciation modification and self-supervision. Reference list Bohn, O.-S., & Munro, M. J. (Eds.). (2007). Language Experience in Second Language Speech Learning: In Honour of James Emil Flege. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D., Goodwin, J., & Griner, B. (2010). Teaching Pronunciation: A Course Book and Reference Guide (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Creese, A. (2005). Teacher Collaboration and Talk in Multilingual Classrooms. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Edwards, J., & Zampini, M. (2008). Phonology and Second Language Acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1990). English for Specific Purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jenkins, J. (2000). The Phonology of English as an International Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Mackey, S., & Gass, S. (2007). Second Language Research: Methodology and Design. NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. McKay, S. (2006). Researching Second Language Classrooms. NY: Routledge. Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (2006). Qualitative Data Analysis: An expanded sourcebook (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Myers, D. (2009). Qualitative Research in Business and Management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Neuman, L. (2009). Understanding Research. Boston, MA: Pearson Education Inc. Oldham, R. (2005). YBM ELS Curriculum, 11th English Camp 2005 Korea YBM, Korea: SISA Inc. P.1. Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Riggenbach, H. (2000). Perspectives on Fluency. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Richards, K. (2003). Qualitative Enquiry in TESOL. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Segalowitz, N. (2010). The Cognitive Bases of Second Language Fluency. New York: Routledge. Toohey, K. (2000). Learning English at School: Identity, Social Relations and Classroom Practice. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Walsh, S. (2006). Investigating Classroom Discourse. London: Routledge. Read More