Constructivism in foreign language learning.

Abstract

As Standards for Foreign Language Learning by ACTFL suggests,

communication skills are essential in foreign language/L2 acquisition.

The author of this article identifies a constructivist approach as a

useful and effective tool for improving communication skills in foreign

language/L2 education. Although the aim of this article is not to

overwhelm readers with the complicated paradigm of constructivism, it

hopes to present a practical option in applying a constructivist

approach in basic lesson plans.

Introduction

One of the prerequisites in foreign language/L2 acquisition is to

become good communicators using the target language. Accordingly,

Standards for Foreign Language Learning established by ACTFL (Standards,

1996) emphasizes the importance of communication skills in foreign

language/L2 learning. According to the standards (1996), although

recognizing the value of grammar and vocabulary is important, the

ultimate goal of today's foreign language students is to acquire

the ability to communicate with others in meaningful and appropriate

ways. In other words, foreign language learners must become critical

thinkers who know how to apply language or convey their thoughts in a

variety of situations.
Effective classroom instruction strategies require more than an

understanding of the significance of communication skills. To foster

students to become proficient communicators, instructors must provide

foreign language/L2 learners with conditions for applying and practicing

the language they have just learned, yet, "language classes limit

adequate practice opportunities for each student" (Lee, 1995, 11).

Although various factors affect this problem, this paper identifies

three issues: (1) overcrowded classrooms; (2) limited availability of

target language speakers; and (3) conventional foreign language

textbooks based on behavioristic learning. A constructivist approach is

one way to address those issues.

This paper will first briefly explain constructivism. Next this

paper will present the instructional experiment in which a

constructivist approach was applied to a fourth-semester Japanese

language course, along with discussion of its effects in the foreign

language classroom. Finally, the paper will present student feedback

concerning their classroom experience. The aim of this article is not to

overwhelm readers with a complicated discussion of constructivism, but

rather to present a practical option in applying a constructivist

approach to even simple classroom lessons. Moreover, the students'

positive feedback following this experimental lesson will hopefully

encourage foreign language/L2 educators to experiment with their lesson

plans and discover a more creative and active learning environment.

Constructivism
The development of constructivism in education is attributed to

such psychologists and philosophers as Jean Piaget, Lev Vigotsky, John

Dewey, and Jerome Brunner (Matthews, 2003). It is understood as a

complex combination of learning theory, philosophy, pedagogy, and

psychology (Goldberg, 2002). In the area of foreign language/L2

education, constructivism is often associated with the use of technology

in the classroom (e.g., Chuang, & Rosenbusch, 2005; McDonough, 2001;

Ruschoff, & Ritter, 2001). Constructivism emerged in reaction to the

traditional educational approach widely practiced in eighteenth--and

nineteenth-century Europe and America (Matthew, 2003). The

teacher-centered traditional instruction strategy, also called the

information transmission model, is an instructional approach in which a

teacher transmits information to the students with relatively little

emphasis placed on the practicality or significance of the content

(Sercu & Bundura, 2005). In traditional education, instructors are

able to predict the outcomes of the instruction based on the notion that

they control what students will learn by linking student responses from

lower level to higher level skills (Ruschoff, & Ritter, 2001).

Although instructors determine learning outcomes for students (Roblyer,

Havriluk, Edwards, & Havriluk, 1997), traditional education falls

short in preparing students to be critical thinkers. In many instances

today, "entrenched and passive traditional practices persist"

(Marlowe & Page, 2005, p.21). Proponents of constructivism, Marlowe

and Page summarize the foundation of a constructivist approach as:

1. about constructing knowledge, not receiving it

2. about thinking and analyzing, not accumulating and memorizing

3. about understanding and applying, not repeating back

4. being active, not passive. (Marlowe & Page, 2005)

Thus, a constructivist approach teaches students to discover their

own answers and produce their own concepts and interpretations (Marlowe

& Page, 2005). In addition, a constructivist approach includes

interactive and collaborative learning as well as a flexible curriculum

(Brooks & Brooks, 1993). Although there are various interpretations

of constructivism, the basic concept is to offer student-centered

learning with an emphasis on experiences, knowledge construction and

learning process (Ali, 2004). "A constructivist approach" as

the model used in the lesson should be distinguished from constructivism

as a theory because, in addition to being subdivided into numerous

categories (Matthews, 2000), the paradigm of constructivism involves

complex intersections of "different founders and advocates,

schools, foci, and disciplinary approaches" (Richardson, 2003,

p.1624). Consequently, it is not possible to simply define this

experimental lesson as total constructivism. Therefore, the author

determines that "a constructivist approach" is more

appropriate for the purpose of this paper.

Project Procedure and Discussion

In order to address the three issues identified earlier, the author

created a lesson that involved an active, creative, and socially

interactive learning process in which students would construct their own

knowledge using their prior knowledge, a process governed by basic

constructivist theory as discussed in the preceding section. This

experimental lesson plan employed the theme of Hanami, a Japanese custom

of cherry blossom viewing. Although students did not use the regular

textbooks, the new sentence structures and grammar in the textbook were

included in the hanami lesson. This theme was chosen simply because this

experimental lesson was conducted in March, which is hanami season in

Japan.

The intermediate Japanese course met three times a week for fifty

minutes each. Because of the limited scheduling, we completed this

lesson in a period of one week, one hundred fifty total minutes of class
time. Five major lesson objectives were established as follows. By the

end of this lesson, students will learn:

1. Japanese culture: cherry blossom viewing

2. New sentence structure, use of verbal gerund + shimau and its

contraction form, cyau

3. New sentence structure, use of verbal gerund + kara

4. The use of the ni particle as expression of purpose; with

nominal referring to activity; with a verbal of motion

5. Practice and review nominal, verbal, adjectival words.

In a constructivist lesson, objectives are only guidelines. If

students show interest in learning something more, they should be

encouraged to pursue their own research, as constructivism promotes a

flexible curriculum. Prior to the first day, students were divided into

small groups. Breaking students into small groups provides more

opportunity to practice the target language, as well as reinforcing

their knowledge through group discussion and collaboration. Each group

was then given an assignment to find out information concerning hanami.

They were encouraged to use any type of resource, such as the internet,

books, and magazines. They were also instructed to prepare a list of

verbal, nominal, and adjectival words, both in English and Japanese,

from their findings.

Day one: Each group reported their findings in class, along with

their vocabulary list. To avoid any duplicate information, each group

took turns. Then, the master vocabulary list was produced. The

instructor prepared various pictures of hanami scenes and projected them

on the large screen in class. Group research and presentation of hanami

visuals were necessary for students to gain prior understandings and

facts before actual readings in the target language took place. Marlowe

and Page (2005), and Buschoff & Ritter (2001) describe a

constructivist learning as "an active process in which learners

construct new knowledge and awareness based upon current and past

knowledge and experience" (p. 221). Although hanami is one of the

most widely practiced customs in Japan, a majority of students will

never have heard of the lesson plan format word hanami. Without any prior knowledge,

students will struggle to make sense of this popular culture in their

initial reading.

Day two: Having some kind of understanding of hanami, students read

a short paragraph about hanami in the target language which included

some familiar vocabulary words as well as some of the new sentence

structures from the lesson objectives. Students read in the group first,

then with the whole class. During group readings, the instructor advised

students to discuss the meaning of the story and to identify the new

structural patterns. In the class reading, the instructor asked the

students to point out the new sentence structures while they read out
loud. Afterwards, the instructor finally explained the new sentence

structures and vocabulary words. Each group then proceeded to read and

to practice sample dialogues. The sample dialogues were created by the

instructor, as was the short paragraph, to ensure that each contained

the new sentence structures and some of the new vocabulary. These

dialogues offered different contextual use of the newly-learned sentence

structures. However, these dialogues were intentionally kept short with

two exchanges per dialogue, in order to give students an opportunity to

continue and complete them. Each group acted out one of the dialogues in

class.

Day three: On day two, each group was directed to create a

three--to five-minute short skit, whose only requirement was to include

the new sentence structures introduced in the hanami lesson. The

instructor did not specify topics for the skits. The groups presented

their skits on day three. They produced creative and interesting skits

on topics ranging from Star Trek, Japanese restaurant, and hanami at a

park. The variety of topics reflects Alesandrini and Larson's

(2002) observation that "Outcomes of constructivist activities are

unique and varied." (p. 119) Providing students such creative

freedom allows them to relate to the learning material in a way that is

understandable and meaningful to the individual student. At the end of

the third class meeting, students were given the worksheet with sample

sentences and exercises for practice writing. After the hanami lesson,

the students had to post their response to the question "What did

you learn this week?" on the Blackboard, a web-based course

management system. Answering this question enabled the students to

reflect and review their learning. It also helped instructors to assess

students' learning to help plan future lessons. Most of the

activities took place through group collaboration. As Goldberg (2002)

suggests, "students learn best through concrete experience,

dialogue, [and] active learning" (p.53). Thus, a collaborative

group project such as skit production offers the most concrete

experience possible in a typical American classroom setting. Moreover,

through collaborative learning students can actively engage in dialogues

that provide more opportunity to use the target language.

Questionnaire Summary

A week after the hanami lesson, the instructor conducted a survey

to seek feedback from the students. Students answered the questionnaires

by reflecting on the Japanese lessons from the past two weeks (textbook

based lesson in week one; hanami lesson in week two). Fifteen students

out of twenty responded to the questionnaires. Of the fifteen, thirteen

answered that they noticed differences between the first week and the

second week. Two answered that they did not really notice difference.

Those who answered "Yes" explained as follows:

* "Learned the contents based on the textbook without using

the textbook."

* "Integration of the grammar lessons into a cultural

lesson."

* "The class was much more group oriented."

* "The emphasis was on learning through experience more so

than just learning by reading the book."

* "More interaction with speaking and role playing through

group projects."

* "Had to use the new grammar learned in these projects. So

the grammar became applied."

* "The activities seemed to be more engaging for students and

creativity."

* "The students actually created some of the materials to be

studied."

Asked whether they would remember more from the first lesson, the

hanami lesson, or neither, fourteen students answered that they would

remember the contents of the hanami lesson more. Only one student

answered "neither"; and no one chose the first week's

lesson. However, asked which lesson approach they preferred, eleven

students chose the hanami lesson, but three chose both, and one student

answered, "I don't know." The students gave similar

explanations for the questions concerning preference and retention:

* "It was something different from the norm."

* "I find cultural ideas and customs fascinating."

* "The parts where we do things in groups help me to learn

more."

* "Hand on learning and class participation helps me learn

more because I am an auditory learner."

* "By applying the lesson in real conversation, that my peers

and I came up with, gave me a better understanding of the subject matter

than the memorization of the materials in the textbook."

* "As for the skits, I enjoyed them because they were funny

and when you enjoy learning, you remember more."

* "Group projects make learning more enjoyable."

* "It was more practical use for learning Japanese."

* "It was stealth learning: The class was focused on the

hanami story that we didn't realize that we were learning some new

grammar in the process."

The student who answered "Neither" commented, "The

topic based is more fun, but the more drills is easier to study and

remember," while one student who answered "I don't

know" said, "They both teach us well in different ways."

The following student comments were significant enough to be mentioned:

* "Although culture based topic is good, I don't like to

make skit because other groups skits doesn't help me."

* "Personally, I think your "experiment" was pretty

successful. I'm not sure if it's the ultimate method to

follow, though."

* "I do think we have great textbooks for this class, but

learning about Hanami seemed more practical. I was able to communicate

better with Japanese students (both on campus and those that I know who

are living in Japan). And, it gave me a little bit more insight into

Japan's culture, instead of CC's about working in the

office."

* "I felt like I could converse with my Japanese friends much

more after this lesson than I have in the past."

With a few exceptions, most students enjoyed the lesson with the

hanami story. Their reasons can be summarized as follows: (1) they

enjoyed cooperative/collaborative learning; (2) studying about culture

makes language learning more engaging and interesting; (3) applying the

lesson to the skits student produce enables them to understand the

concepts better. However, we must also recognize that not everyone

favors such a non-traditional approach. Some students do prefer the

drills and memorization of teacher-centered behavioristic learning.

Conclusion

A constructivist approach makes it possible to alleviate some of

the obstacles to developing good communication skills for foreign

language/L2 learners. In overcrowded classrooms, where instructors have

difficulty giving personal attention, students may assist each other in

understanding new information through group discussion and

investigation; thus, students become active participants instead of

passive learners, waiting to receive information. Skit creation enables

students to gain knowledge by applying new information in a variety of

situations; in addition, students tend to create skits that are related

to their own experiences, making the skits more meaningful and

interesting for the whole class.

In summary, a constructivist approach fosters creative and

autonomous thinkers who are able to convey their thoughts in a wide

variety of different situations. The students' constructive

feedback also suggests that a constructivist approach to even a simple

lesson plan can exert a positive influence on foreign language/L2

learning. Such application of constructivism enhances the ability of

foreign language educators to develop better communicators.

Reference

Alesandrini, K. & Larson, L. (2002). Teachers bridge to

constructivism. The Clearing House. 75(7), 118-121.

Ali, A. (2004, Spring). Applying constructivism in a traditional

environment. [Electronic version]. Academic Exchange Quarterly. 71-75.

Brooks, J. G. & Brooks, M. G. (1993). A case for constructivist

classrooms. Alexandria, VA: ASCD

Chuang, H. & Rosenbusch, M. H. (2005). Use of digital video

technology in an elementary school foreign language methods course.

British Journal of Educational Technology. 36 (5), 869-80.

Goldberg, M. F. (2002). 15 School questions and discussion: From

class size, standards, and school safety to leadership and more. Lanham,

MD: Scarecrow Press.

Huxford, L. & Littledyke, M. (Eds.). (1998). Teaching the

primary curriculum for constructive learning. London: David Fulton

Publishers.

Lee, L. (1995). Learning stragegy instructions as a key to success

in second language learning. Northeast Conference Newsletter, 37, 11-13.

Matthews, M. R. (2000). Appraising constructivism in science and

mathematics. In D. Phillips (Ed.), Constructivism in education (pp.

161-192). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Matthews, W. J. (2003). Constructivism in the classroom:

Epistemology, history, and empirical evidence. Teacher Education

Quarterly. 30(3), 51-64.

Marlowe, B. A. & Page, M. L. (2005). Creating and sustaining

the constructivist classroom (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

McDonough, S. K. (2001). Way beyond drill and practice: Foreign

language lab activities in support of constructivist learning.

International Journal of Media. 28 (1), 75-81.

Richardson, V. (2003). Constructivist pedagogy. Teachers College

Record. 105(9), 1623-1640.

Robyler, E., Havriluk, M.D., Edwards J., & Havriluk, M.A.

(1997). Integrating educational technology into teaching. Upper Saddle

River, NJ: Merril.

Ruschoff, B. & Ritter, M. (2001). Technology-enhanced language

learning: Construction of knowledge and template-based learning in the

foreign language classroom. Computer Assisted Language Learning.

14(3-4), 219-232.

Sercu, L., & Bandura, E. (2005). Foreign language teachers and

intercultural competence. An international investigation. Clevedon:

Multilingual Matters.

National standards in foreign language education project (NSFLEP).

(1996). Standards for foreign language learning: Preparing for the 21st

century. Lawrence, KS: Allen Press.

Yuko Prefume, Baylor University, TX

Yuko Prefume is Lecturer in Japanese at Baylor University