|
|
|
| 2019年度 異文化言語教育評価論 |
Chapter 5 The Advantages of Interact
5.3 Advantages of Interact –
Survey Data
n Table 5.4 shows the frequencies with which each quality discernable.
→The most commonly
commented on advantage of interact in comparison with converse
was its perceived authenticity and interactiveness.
5.3.1 Authenticity and Interactiveness
n The respondents commented on authenticity of interact as
follows:
・interact represents “push towards more
authentic, real users of the language”
・”giving the message
to the students that speaking the target language is important in learning a
second language”
→Interact promoted a future-focused authenticity, interpreted in both
situational and interactional terms.
・contrary to a
prepared role-play, interact “helps the students to really as they would
if they find themselves in France” (by a second French teacher)
・through interact,
students could “start to see that the target language is not a school subject
but a living language spoken by millions of people around the world”
5.3.2 Positive Impact
n The respondents commented on positive impact of interact
as follows:
・in contexts where
students “encouraged to work more independently,” they were “usually more
willing to take risks” and could “have much more fun and be more creative”
・peer-to-peer
interactions contribute to enhance positive reception by students and they
could speak for real purposes, with their peers.
・because students
have opportunity to converse with each other rather than the teacher, they
could be less anxious and they could enjoy a more relaxed assessment
environment.
5.3.3 Validity, Reliability and
Potential for Washback
n In the perception of a number of respondents, the validity and
reliability of the assessment was enhanced as follows:
・”more interactions/opportunities
to interact give a better picture” of proficiency and “allow students to
demonstrate what they have learned”
・the assessment enabled
“a genuine reflection of what they can do”
→this provide “a more
accurate measure of the student’s ability to respond to interaction in a
real-life situation”
・”students’ fluency
has definitely improved and they feel at ease speaking”
5.4 Advantages of Interact – Interview
n The interview enabled the opportunity to elicit parallel qualitative
data concerning teachers’ perceptions of interact in comparison with converse.
5.4.1 Authenticity and Interactiveness
n In the interview, participants (teachers) were asked what they
understood to be main purpose of interact.
n It is suggested that the main purpose of interact was “the
idea of moving real life interactions, spoken interactions, into an assessment
situation.”
⇔Converse, which did not facilitate the goal of authenticity, was not useful
or fit for this purpose because it was “a bit artificial.”
n The old conversation standard (=converse) focuses on the kids
producing as many [appropriate] level structures, grammatical structures as
they could get or merit in a really artificial way.
⇔By contrast, interact was “way more natural.”
n In terms of assessment, interact meant that accuracy was
required, but its purpose was to contribute meaningfully to the communication.
n A consequence of moving away from artificiality became development
of students’ skills in using language more naturally and more flexibly.
5.4.2 Positive Impact
n Positive impact on students was seen in the facility to record
several interactions over time.
n One teacher said, “Balancing out across several interactions made
less stressful because they can do it as many times as they want and it does
allow more creativity and more freedom for the students as well.”
n Multiple opportunities for interaction contributed positively in
terms of tapping into cumulative development in proficiency.
n The peer-to-peer interaction can actually allow some students to
achieve better results because they don’t have that anxiety towards assessment
around it.
5.4.3 Validity, Reliability and
Potential Washback
n The perspectives from the interviews contribute to the perception
from the survey comments that interact would promote assessment
opportunities that were valid and reliable.
→interact enabled
teachers to “see that the students can carry on a conversation with spontaneity
and unrehearsed.”
n Several teachers noted that the move away from the one-off
conversation to a series of interactions throughout the year was promoting
positive wash back.
5.5 Conclusion
n Interact was considered to promote more
natural, spontaneous, and authentic interactions.
n In terms of positive impact, the opportunities for multiple
interactions among peers across a range of topics contribute to improving
students’ proficiency.
n Additionally, enhanced validity and positive washback in terms of a
greater emphasis on genuine communication in the target language, was thought
to ensue.
Discussion Point
To promote students’ spontaneous
interactions, what kind of activities or tasks should be done?