Developing writing with entry level ESOL learners

Rationale

Our ESOL learners have varying levels of literacy, spoken English, and a wide diversity in previous level and experience of education. A significant number have ‘spiky profiles’ regarding reading, writing and speaking. This gap between skills, often between spoken and written language, can widen as learners move through levels, culminating in lower achievement in writing exams at higher levels. In a climate where funding is increasingly dependent on exam success, with restricted opportunities to resit, it is essential to build written skills at an early stage. Beyond exam success, difficulties with writing impact learners as they progress onto Functional Skills, GCSE, vocational courses and higher education.

ESOL staff at the College often develop their own approaches, for example: personalised spellings, use of writing booklets, weekly dictations, or the whole text approach of Language Experience. Practitioners are creative and responsive in the ESOL classroom but there is little sharing and dissemination of strategies on a wider scale between colleagues. We wanted to use this project to share the practices we were developing
A final issue to explore was the gap between learners’ existing literacy practices and assigned classroom tasks often dictated by exam content. We wanted to experiment by starting with learners’ everyday literacy practices.

A significant number of our learners use social media to contact friends and family abroad, navigate job websites and use language apps. We wanted to explore how tutors could balance exam requirements with learners’ existing literacy practices and needs.

Approach

Background

We held a tutor focus group in the initial stages of the project to capture existing practice. Tutors’ comments ranged from the specific, such as work on ‘upgrading’ sentences from ‘I went to Leeds’ to ‘I went to Leeds last Saturday to…’, to broader approaches such as a topic-based local approach:

“learners ask for language when they can see the purpose…I couldn’t stop them when I asked them to complain about the No. 10 bus!”

There were varied views on the use of technology to improve writing and to motivate learners:

“…students need to improve their handwriting…IT skills become a separate issue for some of our students…it’s difficult to predict their level of IT.”

Tutors also acknowledged that the use of technology ‘mirrors a lot of real-life use’.

We then held three focus groups with ESOL learners: one with entry level 1, two with entry level 2 and one with level 1 learners. Entry level learners echoed tutors’ views on the need to improve handwriting and the value of having time to copy in class. The depth of learners’ analysis of the sub-skills of writing was evident with learners identifying specific phoneme/grapheme relationships they found difficult. The common themes were ‘more time’, ‘more practice’ and ‘more use of models to support their writing’.

“to write a text in a short time doesn’t help because it makes us stressed, so lots of mistakes! … we want two hours on writing” (Level 1 learner), echoed by a tutor, “I wished I had started on writing earlier”.

Learners at all levels identified emails and forms as text types they need, whilst existing literacy practices ranged from social media use, text message and emails to helping children with homework. Several entry level learners valued “computer writing … I want this more over paper writing”. We therefore decided to focus on email but to support this with paper-based work to include a focus on punctuation, use of clear models and opportunities to copy words and improve handwriting.

Classroom activities: September – January
• Three email exchanges between two entry level 1 groups
• Follow-up workshops on how to structure an email and how to read and respond to an email
• Review and tweaking of email support materials by instructors
• Evaluation of email activities by learners
• Trial Padlet with an entry level 1 group to encourage learners to post opinions of their house/flat and respond to others’ comments (Figure 11a-2)
• Use of a writing booklet task pre-computer lab to provide a structured approach to writing an absence email to a tutor. This was marked by instructors.
• A final email session in the computer lab with students emailing the tutor to say why they cannot attend class (Figure 11a-3).

Professional Learning: Evidence of changes in teaching, learning and assessment practices

Meaningful changes from this small-scale action research project include a greater recognition of staff’s expertise and having space and time to discuss and develop professional practice. This did not always happen in the more formal, focused space of a meeting, but in snatched conversations before and after class. These increased as new strategies were trialled and evaluated, leading to a richer working environment.

A second change related to this was risk-taking, going beyond what we normally do in entry level 1 classes. Written communication between two entry level groups using email was something we had not trialled before. The logistics of setting this up, the use of the college email system and the need to emphasise to learners the importance of not sharing any personal information with another student presented challenges.

Learners’ difficulties in reading and responding to content were also brought to the fore in this activity. However, learners with varying levels of IT skills and written English gained in confidence and wrote communicative texts; they used the activity to express what they wanted to say; see student N for example in the Padlet post, ‘my flat is dangerous’ (Figure 11a-4). This led to a classroom discussion on high rises and cladding.

Finally, the value of learner feedback and evaluation of classroom activities were key to this project. We experienced the challenge of having to grade language in focus groups to ensure learners could answer questions whilst not leading them to a certain answer. Learners began to really reflect on how they learn and develop the language they need to express this.

Evidence of improved collaboration and changes in organisation practices

Increased collaboration between tutors and instructors was the most significant change. Email exchanges happened in computer lab sessions run by instructors; we discussed activities with instructors who had input into tweaking and improving resources and approaches. Instructors also run and plan workshop sessions with learners; these involve consolidating work done in class. Instructor J fed back on some of the project materials, adapted them and used them in workshops. An honest dialogue developed between staff. In the final lab sessions, a tutor covered an instructor’s role and fed back on and responded to challenges that arose in the session.

Communication between ESOL groups was also something new; classes tend to be self-contained with little sharing of information. For learner D, it was a chance to “talk to somebody [from] a different culture I don’t know” and practise questions she had learnt in class; “email helps me with speaking.” This enthusiasm also came across in an email she wrote to a tutor, “I send an email to M. It was nice. I was happy.”

Learners’ writing had a clear communicative purpose and audience and language practised in class was put to immediate use. This is not something we are always able to manage in an ESOL classroom with some learners seeing a disconnect between the classroom and real-life language needs.

Evidence of improvement in learners’ achievements, retention and progression

A final change was the involvement of learners in evaluating classroom practices and in reflecting on how they learn. Students had a voice and became active participants in the research process. In focus groups, entry level 1 students explained which spellings they found difficult and told tutors and instructors that more time was needed to copy and write in classes. This was echoed in their evaluation of the email exchange in early December when they ask for more time to prepare for emailing.

Written language and personalisation
Learners increasingly began to use the email exchange to say what they wanted to say and to push themselves beyond simple sentences required at entry level 1. The task did not limit their language and seemed to motivate learners to challenge themselves. This can be seen from learner S’s exchange (Figure 11a-5) where he manages to use the natural and persuasive, “you have to try dolma” to encourage and convince his email partner of the merits of Turkish food. In his first email he writes about the “ottoman and rome empire”; learners are not restricted to writing about ‘simple’ topics.

Accuracy and length of emails
As can be seen from learner M’s three emails (Figure 11a-3), learners began both to write more and improve in accuracy. Language accuracy here is linked to IT skills, for example knowing how to capitalise letters on the keyboard. In the first email, there is sporadic capitalisation of I but the final email to a tutor, after work on punctuation and paper-based tasks, is accurate. Focusing on typing seemed to focus students more on punctuation; in the final computer lab sessions, learners were asking specific questions about punctuation before connectives, for example.

IT skills and format of emails
Learners with emerging IT skills became confident in logging on and familiar with the structure and format of an email. Learner M was unable to remember her log-in and struggled initially with the concept of receiving an email from someone else. By the third session, she had logged on independently and written an accurate email to a tutor.