iholmesPGCert_2025

Categories
Case Studies

Case Study 1: Scaffolding interactions and learning – diversifying task outcomes and media 

Introduction and Background

This case study focuses on learners at LCF in Language Development, which aims to support speakers of English as an additional language. However, first language (L1) English students also find it useful for communicating at an advanced academic level. I aim to address diversity of linguistic and communicative ability as well as cultural and neurological diversities. My approach in general is based on the paradigm of communicative language teaching (Nunan, 1991) and although this can be interpreted to mean a variety of strategies (Thornbury, 2016), this has been the architecture of my prior teacher training (CELTA and DELTA- see appendix for acronyms) and practice.

Evaluation

My strategy currently relies on assumptions about providing a range of tasks (in a range of media) – which have differentiated points of production (even to the extent that learners may not do the tasks at all and simply observe others doing it). Peer learning leverages the knowledge and skill of the L1 learners. I draw on a mediation between what Vygotsky (1987) defines as the more knowledgeable other (MKO) and the zone of proximal development (ZPD) for the learner (a space in which I also facilitate scaffolding). I aim to foster a community of practice and learning based on the assumption that all knowledge acquisition begins through engagement in social interaction (Wenger, 2000). This approach is easier to measure regarding specific speaking lesson aims than it is for academic research and writing lesson aims.

Moving Forward


The media for materials is predominantly digital, however responding to feedback from peer observation regarding accessibility, I have increased haptic tasks that can also be done with paper handouts and whiteboards. Rather than black and white on slides and materials, I use pastel colours and avoid contrast issues (BDA, 2023). Despite dyslexia being the most common specific learning difficulty, intersectionality makes it difficult to differentiate dyslexia from other general learning issues and to design effective strategies for different cultural contexts (Davies, 2022). The multilingual classroom presents challenges for teaching and learning in respect of dyslexia in the context of a ‘super-diversity’ of learning needs (Peer and Reid, 2016), where data on students is not always available or reliable.  

Aside from development of reading and writing skills, students also need to develop their interactive speaking and listening skills for seminar work (this has been identified by both learners and course leaders). My approach to this is to scaffold conversation by allowing space for preparation thinking time (Kerr, 2017), but also by making learners cognizant of cultural differences in turn taking (Frendo, 2005, pp.115-116) and allowing them to reflect on the possible impacts for intercultural communication.

Figure 1. Selected Lesson Slides using text and diagram (source: Frendo, 2005, p.117)

Learners then have the opportunity for semi-controlled practice in pairs before freer practice in a larger group. – Feedback from observation (see appendix) of this approach reports that:  

L1 students were first to speak, but the L2 students were paying close attention and soon joined in. The L2 students brought their cultural perspectives, and experiences of the global fashion market into the discussion. The conversation grew organically, everyone participated, and it is clear that they had grown in confidence and conversational ability thanks to tasks. (see Appendix 2)

This is a procedure which I aim to employ and test for efficacy with other Language Development groups. Regarding reading and writing tasks, deciding which strategy to use and when (Deunk et al., 2015) and not knowing which combination of students will be in each (non-compulsory) session presents the differentiation problematic, and a strategy for mediating the issues of complexity raised above (Davies, 2022; Peer and Reid, 2016) needs to be developed through further research of literature and more accurate profiling of learners, which can more effectively identify complex needs. 

Action Points:

What: 1:Trial this lesson approach with Bsc_Msc_Fashion Management class- (gather feedback from observation). 2: Implement this lesson approach with new groups April May – and 3: with all groups for new academic year

When: 1:January (February) 2025, 2: April/May 2025, 3: October/November 2025

What: Gather data from admissions and course leaders on neurodiversity of students who may attend my classes in new academic year – and design lessons to support these students.

When: September 2025

Appendix 1: Acronyms:

CELTA- Certificate in English Language Teaching to Adults

DELTA – (Level 7) Diploma in English Language Teaching to Adults

Appendix 2: Peer Observation Notes

Holmes_20.01.25.docx

References

BDA _British Dyslexia Association (2023) Creating a dyslexia friendly workplace. Available at: https://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/advice/employers/creating-a-dyslexia-friendly-workplace/dyslexia-friendly-style-guide (Accessed: 20.02.25) 

Deunk, M., Doolaard, S., Smale-Jacobse, A., and Bosker, R. J. (2015) Differentiation within and across classrooms: A systematic review of studies into the cognitive effects of differentiation practices. RUG/GION 

Frendo, E. (2005) How to Teach Business English, Harlow: Pearson

Kerr, P. (2017) ‘How much time should we give to speaking practice?’ The Cambridge Papers in ELT series. [pdf] Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Nunan, D. (1991) ‘Communicative Tasks and the Language Curriculum.’ TESOL Quarterly. 25 (2): 279–295.  Available at: doi:10.2307/3587464. JSTOR 3587464. (Accessed on 20.02.25) 

Thornbury, S. (2016) ‘Communicative language teaching in theory and practice.’ In Hall, G. (ed.) The Routledge Handbook of English Language Teaching. Abingdon, Oxon.: Routledge, pp. 224–237. 

Wenger, E. (1998) ‘Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity.’ Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education 6(2):185-194 Available at DOI: 10.1023/A:1023947624004 (Accessed 23/02/25) 

Vygotsky, L. S. (1987) ‘Thinking and speech’. In R.W. Rieber & A.S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky, Volume 1: Problems of general psychology (pp. 39–285). New York: Plenum Press. (Original work published 1934.) 

Categories
Reflective Posts

Reflective Post 1: Reflections on ‘moral goods’ and the critique

McDonald and Michaela (2019) explore ‘moral goods’ and ‘the critique’ – from the perspective of what matters for studio instructors. This provoked me to reflect – what matters to me?  – how does this affect my instruction and the diverse students I teach.  

The term critique is not unproblematic – the emphasis is on the critical, and outside of the academic context, this is perhaps something which humans try to avoid being, in day-to-day life. The crit’ can range from the traditional presentation of a student’s work, followed by an interrogation, to one-to-one feedback. It is with the former that I first had experience, as both tutor and assessor, on the UAL Pre-sessional English (PSE) in 2021. 

The crit forms the primary speaking element of the PSE assessment, for which students who speak English as an additional language need to reach a threshold grading to progress to their main courses at UAL. It is this participation which often causes the greatest anxiety, especially for those more introverted learners. The students develop a creative project and then present their work, followed by a Q&A by 2 tutors (and sometimes students). Over the 4 years that I have been doing this course, the time allocated for the presentation has been incrementally reduced and vis-a-vis the time for critique has increased. This is presumably because it is the most exposing of communicative ability – presentations can be learned by rote – or read from script. I encourage students to move away from this rote learning to make it as live as possible, both for pragmatics – passing the course, and perhaps for fostering something more moral– developing a fundamentally human skill in the age of machines.  

From the position of ‘moral realism,’ how we take part in the world is manifest as ‘participation in practice,’ and this practice involves (normative) ‘real moral reference points’ (Yanchar and Slife, 2017, p.165). Using this frame, McDonald and Michela (2019) investigate three types of ‘moral goods’: student development; teacher/practitioner self-cultivation; and for other stakeholders, through investigating how instructors talk about critiques. The paper finds that these moral goods can both reinforce and pull against each other – and that instructors are often mistaken in their view of a good and that this can interfere with actually achieving it (Ibid, p.28).  

AI has already revolutionized the way in which we can produce text and is therefore becoming a less reliable measure of communicative, academic and professional capacity. In future, the viva – currently reserved for Phd students – may become part of the method for assessment for written papers at other levels. This would increase the need for students to embrace the critique, however how instructors should approach this regarding diversity is another point for reflection. My point of departure here, drawing on Harris (2022. P101), is to investigate how I can help make this form of participation meet the historically underrepresented needs of introverted learners, whilst building skill and confidence through practice.  

Harris, K. (2022), ‘Embracing the silence: introverted learning and the online classroom’ Spark: UAL Creative Teaching and Learning Journal, 5 (1) 101-104 

McDonald, J. and Michela, E. (2019), ‘The design critique and the moral goods of studio pedagogy,’ Design Studies 62 (2019) 1- 35 

 Yanchar, S. C., & Slife, B. D. (2017), ‘Theorizing inquiry in the moral space of practice’, Qualitative Research in Psychology, 14(2)146 -170. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2016.1264517. (Accessed on 11.01.25) 

Categories
Reflective Posts

Hello everyone

I’m Ian I have worked with UAL since 2021 as an Associate Lecturer and Language Development Tutor – I have worked across colleges – CSM – LCC and CCW and I currently work at LCF East Bank with the Fashion Business School and with the LCF IISF Team at Lime Grove Pre Degree School. I have worked as a teacher of English language since 2007, as an actor since the late 90s, (in theatre and film in the UK and Italy) and, more recently, as a producer/ presenter and journalist with BBC Learning English and BBC World Service. My most recent experience as student in HE was doing an MSc with Queen Mary University London in International Public Policy, from which I graduated in 2023. I look forward to meeting the rest of the Friday cohort in January.