Page 73 - Linguistically Diverse Educational Contexts

Input Process
Output
When we start planning by focusing on the process stage, we first consider the range of activities, exercises, techniques, and working methods that will be chosen. In this approach, methods are more important than subject or content. The learning process is not seen here as the need to master pre- planned content, so it can change, giving scope to be co-created by the learners. This model refers to pragmatic progressivism in education120. It focuses on the learner and the learning process (learner- focused; learning-oriented), which takes place in a specific context and develops through the interaction and participation of the participants in the process, where interaction and communication are more important than linguistic correctness. Examples of language learning approaches In this model are the natural approach121, the silent way122, Task-Based Learning (TBL)123, Dogme124, and negotiated syllabus125.
The language learning process can also be planned from the end, starting with the learning objectives, what learning outcomes we want to achieve and how to verify them (outcomes), using the so-called backward design (Richards, 2013, p. 6).
Outcomes
Input
Process
When planning the language learning process from the end, we take into account the needs of the learners and the goals and outcomes we want to achieve, as well as the ways of achieving them (reaching the goal). This is, in other words, a process that we can use in planning the design of learning experiences to achieve specific outcomes. The goal is both the mastery of the ability to use appropriate language in specific situations, the awareness of correct and appropriate language use, and the development of speaking fluency built through practice and the formation of appropriate habits (Richards, 2013, p. 30). One approach that has been built using backward design and which aims to facilitate the planning of the learning process from the end is Understanding by Design (UbD) (Wiggins & McTighe, 1998), which is a registered trademark of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
120 It became the basis of humanistic, reflective education (Golębniak, 2019, p. 864).
121 Krashen& Terrel, 1983. There is no curriculum nor lesson materials.
122Gategno, 1972.The teacher is silent in the classroom and learners are encouraged to generate as much language as possible.
123 Prabhu (1987). The focus is on meaning, and the approach is based on solving an information gap.
124 Thornbury, 2009. The teaching is based on conversation.
125 Maley (2010). Participants are asked to find materials for lessons and suggest activities that would help them learn.
58