Show simple item record

The development of oral production in a large fourth grade class through the implementation of cooperative interactional task-based lessons

dc.contributor.advisorPalalas, Agnieszka
dc.contributor.authorBarraza Botet, Farleys
dc.date.accessioned2015-04-29T22:36:27Z
dc.date.available2015-04-29T22:36:27Z
dc.date.created2015
dc.date.issued2015-04-29
dc.identifier.citationBurns, A. (1999). Collaborative action research for English language teachers. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
dc.identifier.citationBurns, R. (1994). Introduction to research methods. (2nd ed.). Australia: Pearson
dc.identifier.citationBygate, M. (1987). Speaking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
dc.identifier.citationBygate, M. (2001). Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain, (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 23-48). Harlow, UK: Longman.
dc.identifier.citationCarless, D. (2002). Implementing task based learning with young learners. ELT Journal, 56 (4), 389-396.
dc.identifier.citationCohen, A. D., & Fass, L. (2001). Oral language instructions: Teacher and learner beliefs and the reality in EFL classes at a Colombian university. Ikala, 6 (11), 43-62.
dc.identifier.citationCohen, L., & Manion, L. (1994) Research methods in education (4th ed.). London: Routledge.
dc.identifier.citationCohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). London: Routledge.
dc.identifier.citationCouncil of Europe (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, and assessment. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
dc.identifier.citationCresswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five designs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
dc.identifier.citationDenzin, N. K, & Lincoln, Y. S (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research, (3rd ed., pp. 1-32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
dc.identifier.citationDiaz, J. (2014). Implementing social strategies to improve speaking in interaction activities (Master’s thesis). Universidad de La Sabana, Chia, Colombia. Retrieved from: http://hdl.handle.net/10818/107789
dc.identifier.citationEbbutt, D. (1985). Educational action research: some general concerns and specific quibbles. In R. Burgess (Ed.), Issues in Educational Research: Qualitative Methods (pp.152-174). Lewes: Falmer.
dc.identifier.citationEllis, N. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in second language acquisition, 27, 305-352.
dc.identifier.citationEllis, R. (2003). Task-based language teaching and learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press
dc.identifier.citationEllis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar: An SLA perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 40 (1), 83-107.
dc.identifier.citationEzzy, D. (2002). Qualitative analysis: Practice and innovation. London: Routledge.
dc.identifier.citationFaerch, C. & Kasper, G. (1983). On identifying communication strategies in interlanguage production. In C. Faerch & G. Kasper (Eds.), Strategies in interlanguage communication (pp. 210-238). London: Longman.
dc.identifier.citationFeez, S., & Joyce, H. (1998). Text based syllabus design. Sydney: National Centre for English Teaching and Research, Macquarie University.
dc.identifier.citationFlick, U. (2004). Design and process in qualitative research. In U. Flick, E. Von Kardoff & I. Steinke (Eds.), A companion to qualitative research (pp. 146 –152). London: Sage.
dc.identifier.citationFlottemesch, K. (2000). Building effective interaction in distance education: A review of the literature. Educational Technology, 40(3), 46-51.
dc.identifier.citationFraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to design and evaluate research in education. (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
dc.identifier.citationGagné, N., & Parks, S. (2013). Cooperative learning tasks in a grade 6 intensive ESL class: Role of scaffolding. Language Teaching Research, 17(2), 188-209. doi: 10.1177/1362168812460818
dc.identifier.citationGarrido, B. (2012) Making communication happen: Interactive groups in the bilingual classroom. Encuentro, 21, 80-93
dc.identifier.citationGillies, R. M., & Ashman, A. F. (2000). The effects of cooperative learning on students with learning difficulties in the lower elementary school. Journal of Special Education, 34(1), 19–27.
dc.identifier.citationGlaser, B. G. (1996). Grounded theory: an interview with A. Lowe. Programme 8 of Doing a PhD in Business and Management. Glasgow: University of Sterling and Heriot-Watt University.
dc.identifier.citationGlaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago, IL: Aldane.
dc.identifier.citationHambling, V. (1997). Customizing worksheets and activities. In A. Burns & S. Hood (Eds.), Teachers’ Voices 2: Teaching disparate learner groups (pp. 77-80). Sydney: Macquarie University.
dc.identifier.citationHarmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching (3rd ed.). Essex, UK: Pearson
dc.identifier.citationHeritage, J., & Atkinson, J. (1984). Introduction. In J. Atkinson, & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis (pp. 1-15). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
dc.identifier.citationHitchcock, G. & Hughes, D. (1995). Research and the teacher (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
dc.identifier.citationHobbs, J. (2012). Task structure and patterns of interaction: What can we learn from observing native speakers performing tasks? Retrieved from EBSCO eBook Collection
dc.identifier.citationJohnson, D., & Johnson, F. (1997). Joining together: Group theory and group skills (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
dc.identifier.citationJohnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Endina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
dc.identifier.citationJohnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1994). Joining together: Group theory and group skills. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
dc.identifier.citationJohnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1999). Making Cooperative Learning Work. Theory into practice, 38(2), 67-73.
dc.identifier.citationJohnson, D., & Johnson, R. (2002). Learning together and alone: Overview and meta-analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 22(1), 95–105
dc.identifier.citationJohnson, D., Johnson, R. (1986). Learning together and alone (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
dc.identifier.citationJohnson, D., Johnson, R., & Holubec, E. (1994). Cooperative learning in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
dc.identifier.citationJohnson, D., Johnson, R., & Holubec, E. (1998a). Advanced cooperative learning (3rd ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Co.
dc.identifier.citationJohnson, D., Johnson, R., & Holubec, E. (1998b). Cooperation in the classroom (7th ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Co.
dc.identifier.citationJohnson, D., Johnson, R., & Smith, K. (1998). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom (2nd ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Co
dc.identifier.citationJohnson, D., Johnson, R., Ortiz, A., & Stanne, M. (1991). Impact of positive goal and resource interdependence on achievement, interaction and attitudes. Journal of General Psychology, 118, 341–347.
dc.identifier.citationJohnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., Roy, P., & Zaidman, B. (1985). Oral interaction in cooperative learning groups: Speaking, listening, and the nature of statements made by high, medium- , and low-achieving students. Journal of Psychology, 119 (4), 303.
dc.identifier.citationKemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1992). The Action Research Planner (3rd ed.). Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press
dc.identifier.citationKohonen, V. (1992). Experiential language learning: Second language learning as cooperative learner education. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Collaborative language learning and teaching (pp. 14-39). Cambridge: Cambridge University.
dc.identifier.citationLarsen-Freeman, D. (2001).Teaching grammar. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed., pp. 251-266). USA: Heinle & Heinle
dc.identifier.citationLightbown, P., & Spada, N. (2006). How languages are learned (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
dc.identifier.citationLong, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. J. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.413-468). San Diego: Academic Press
dc.identifier.citationLong, M. H., & Porter, P.A. (1985). Group work, interlanguage talk and second language acquisition. TESOL Quartely, 4 (1), 207-228. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0039- 8322%28198506%2919%3A2%3C207%3AGWITAS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-5
dc.identifier.citationMacías, D. F. (2011). Towards the use of focus on form instruction in foreign language learning and teaching in Colombia. Ikala, revista de lenguaje y cultura, 16(29), 127-143. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=s0123- 34322011000300005&lng=en&tlng=en. .
dc.identifier.citationMackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction and second language development. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 557-587.
dc.identifier.citationMichaelsen, L. K. (1992). Team learning: a comprehensive approach for harnessing the power of small groups in higher education to improve the academy. To improve the academy, 11, 107–122.
dc.identifier.citationMolberg, H. (2010). The consequences of motivation and linguistic self-confidence in relation to pupil’s oral interaction (Master’s thesis). Universitetet i Tromsø Retrieved from http://munin.uit.no/bitstream/handle/10037/2951/thesis.pdf?sequence=1
dc.identifier.citationMoore, M. G. (1993). Three types of Interaction. In K. Harry, M. Hohn, & D. Keegan (Eds.), Distance education: New perspectives (pp.12-24). London: Routledge.
dc.identifier.citationNaughton, D. (2006). Cooperative strategy training and oral Interaction: Enhancing small group communication in the language classroom. Modern Language Journal, 90 (2), 169-184. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00391.x
dc.identifier.citationNunan, D. (1989). Designing task for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
dc.identifier.citationNunan, D. (1989). Understanding language classroom: A guide for teacher-initiated action. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall.
dc.identifier.citationNunan. D. (2004).Task-based language teaching. UK: Cambridge University Press.
dc.identifier.citationOlsen, R., & Kagan, S. (1992). About cooperative learning. In C. Keeser (Ed.), Cooperative language learning: A teachers’ source book (pp.1-30). New York: Prentice Hall.
dc.identifier.citationPate, G. S. (1988). Research on reducing prejudice. Social Education, 52(4), 287–289.
dc.identifier.citationPeterson, S. E., & Miller, J. A. (2004). Comparing the quality of students´ experiences during cooperative learning and large-group instruction. Journal of Educational Research, 97 (3), 123-133.
dc.identifier.citationRhenals, M., & Molina, R. (2014). The Impact of oral communicative strategies through cooperative work activities on EFL beginner learners at Universidad de Cordoba. (Master’s thesis) Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Colombia. Retrieved from: http://hdl.handle.net/10818/9810
dc.identifier.citationRhode, J. (2009). Interaction equivalency in self-paced online learning environments: An exploration of learner preferences. International review of research in open and distance learning, 10 (1). Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ831712.pdf
dc.identifier.citationRichards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
dc.identifier.citationRovai, A. P., & Barnum, K. T. (2003). On-line course effectiveness: An analysis of student interactions and perceptions of learning. Journal of Distance Education, 18 (1). Retrieved from http://cade.athabascau.ca/vol18.1/rovai.pdf
dc.identifier.citationSchunk, D. (2001). Self-Regulation through Goal Setting. Retrieved from: http://www.schoolbehavior.com/Files/Schunk.pdf
dc.identifier.citationSeedhouse, P. (1999). Task-based interaction. ELT Journal, 53 (3), 149- 156.
dc.identifier.citationShachar, H., & Sharan, S. (1994). Talking, relating, and achieving: effects of cooperative learning and whole-class instruction. Cognition and instruction, 12, 313–353.
dc.identifier.citationSkehan, P. (1996b). Second language acquisition research and task-based instruction. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp.17-30). Oxford: Heinemann.
dc.identifier.citationSkehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University press.
dc.identifier.citationStorch, N. (2002). Partners of interaction in ESL pair work. Language learning, 52 (1), 119-58.
dc.identifier.citationStrauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp.273-285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
dc.identifier.citationSwain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471-84). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
dc.identifier.citationTan, I. G., Sharan, S., & Lee, C. K. (2006). Group investigation and student learning: An experiment in Singapore schools. Singapore: Marshall Cavendish International
dc.identifier.citationTello, Y. (2006). Developing pragmatic competence in a foreign language. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 8, 169-182.
dc.identifier.citationTomlinson, B. (2010). Principles of effective materials development. In N. Harwood (Ed.), English language teaching materials: Theory and practice (pp. 81-108). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
dc.identifier.citationVélez, G. (2003). English in Colombia: A sociolinguistic profile. World Englishes, 22(2), 185- 198.
dc.identifier.citationVermette, P. J. (1988). Cooperative grouping in the classroom. Social Studies, 79(6), 271-273
dc.identifier.citationVygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
dc.identifier.citationWiddowson, H. G. (1978). Teaching language as communication. Oxford: Oxford University.
dc.identifier.citationWiley, D. (2006). Scalability and sociability in online learning environments. In H. O'Neil & R. S. Perez (Eds.), Web-based learning: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 295-306). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
dc.identifier.citationWillis, D., & Willis, J. (2007). Doing task-based teaching. Oxford: Oxford University press.
dc.identifier.citationWillis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Essex, UK: Longman.
dc.identifier.citationWilson, N., & McLean, S. (1994). Questionnaire design: A practical introduction. UK: University of Ulster.
dc.identifier.citationYager, S., Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1985). Oral discussion, group-to-individual transfer, and achievement in cooperative learning groups. Journal of Educational Pedagogy, 77(1), 60–66
dc.identifier.citationYu, R. (2008). Interaction in EFL classes. Asian social Science school of foreign languages, 4 (4), 48-50. Retrieved from http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ass/article/view/1597/1511
dc.identifier.citationZubber-Skerritt, O. (1996). New directions in action research. London: Falmer Press.
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10818/15767
dc.description121 Páginas.
dc.description.abstractEsta investigación cualitativa fue desarrollada en el Colegio Corazonista en la ciudad de Bogotá. El grupo seleccionado estuvo conformado por 33 estudiantes pertenecientes a grado cuarto . A través de observaciones se identificaron dos situaciones problemáticas las cuales fueron la poca producción oral y el uso constante del español en las clases de inglés. Este grupo de estudiantes mostraron poca comunicación haciendo uso de la lengua extranjera a pesar de haber memorizado estructuras y formas de la lengua inglesa de forma adecuada mediante el desarrollo de las habilidades de lectura y escritura. El objetivo principal de la presente investigación acción fue el de determinar el impacto de la implementación de prácticas de aprendizaje cooperativo y tareas interactivas en el desarrollo de la producción oral. Los objetivos específicos fueron examinar cómo se promueve la producción oral en inglés a través de la implementación de aprendizaje cooperativo y tareas comunicativas interactivas; e identificar como las prácticas de trabajo cooperativo pueden influenciar en la autonomía de los estudiantes. El diseño de investigación para la planeación de las clases fue guiado bajo los principios del enfoque basado en tareas comunicativas donde se fomenta la inclusión de situaciones comunicativas propias de la vida real para preparar a los estudiantes en el alcance de sus objetivos comunicativos (Skehan, 1996).es_CO
dc.language.isoenges_CO
dc.publisherUniversidad de La Sabana
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.sourceUniversidad de La Sabana
dc.sourceIntellectum Repositorio Universidad de La Sabana
dc.subjectInglés -- Enseñanza -- Colombia
dc.subjectEducación primaria -- Inglés
dc.subjectLenguaje y lenguas -- Inglés
dc.titleThe development of oral production in a large fourth grade class through the implementation of cooperative interactional task-based lessonses_CO
dc.typemasterThesis
dc.publisher.programMaestría en Didáctica del Inglés con Énfasis en Ambientes de Aprendizaje Autónomo
dc.publisher.departmentDepartamento de Lenguas y Culturas Extranjeras
dc.type.localTesis de maestría
dc.type.hasVersionpublishedVersion
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccess
dc.creator.degreeMagíster en Didáctica del Inglés con Énfasis en Ambientes de Aprendizaje Autónomo


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Farleys Barraza Botet (tesis)..pdf
Size:
1.658Mb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Ver documento en PDF
View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 InternationalExcept where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International