Experience in using Active Learning in the EFL Instruction

There are many relevant experiences in teaching different subjects in a variety of disciplines using active learning approaches. This case is also true in the EFL instruction. As part of this description, the following section surveys the researches in relation to the productive skills in particular, and EFL instruction in general in some parts of the world.

Among the most widely known modern educators who are contributors to constructivism areJohn D. Bransford, Ernst von Glasersfeld, Eleanor Duckworth, George Forman, Roger Schank, Jacqueline Grennon Brooks, and Martin G. Brooks (Educational Broadcasting

Corporation, 2004). These educators have studied, written about and applied the constructivist approach in school environments. As a result, the idea of constructivism became widely known in many school environments all over the world in the last 20 years.

In Canada, the government has introduced a reform in the education sector, which applies constructivism in the school environments (Cobb, 2005). Likewise, the Turkish government introduced constructivism in the education sector to remedy problems observed in the teaching and learning process (Birgin and Baki, 2007: 77).The problems were related with surface approach to learning and poor assessment techniques. However, one major challenge to the implementation of the reform was that teachers did not have the necessary knowledge, skill, and attitude towards constructivism.

As part of a reform in education, language classrooms are also reflecting the constructivist approach in the day-to-day teaching and learning process. This is observed in the instruction, students’ classroom seating, the learning activities and resources, and the assessment techniques. The concepts of the reform were not new ideas to language educators. According to Cobb (2005), language educators in general and applied linguists in particular were already practicing the ideas of constructivism in teaching languages during the late 1970’s when they departed from the behaviourist point of view. Some of the key elements in the language instruction during this time were active use rather than passive use of language, student-centred than teacher-centred approach, and the role of motivation and background knowledge in learning a language (Cobb, 2005).Currently, these are some of the basis for the assumptions in the constructivist approach to instruction.

In New Zealand, the idea of constructivism has influenced the whole curriculum from top to down in the education system (Matthews, 2000:165).In Thailand, cognitive constructivism and social constructivism are practiced in EFL instructions to improve students’ writing skills, and the result was considered to be fruitful (Dueraman, 2012: 260). Although the role of productive skills is strongly emphasised as a desired outcome in an EFL/ESL instruction, the teaching and learning process most often does not encourage this aspiration. There are a number of factors that may affect the realisation of this goal. Among these factors, teaching methods, teachers’ training and experience, student related variables, educational facilities, class size, the purpose of the English language curriculum, and the country’s situations are the major ones.

For instance, Zohrabi, Torabi and Baybourdiani (2012: 9 ) report that students’ oral skill is not given attention in Iranian secondary and tertiary EFL teaching and evaluation, and teachers put less attention on students’ speaking abilities, while they emphasise reading, grammar and writing. The main focus is to help students pass classroom tests and examinations rather than to upgrade their productive skills, i.e. speaking and writing skills. As Zohrabi, Torabi & Baybourdiani, 2012: 9) indicated, students at the university were not effective in using English communicatively and teachers did not use active learning or student-centred approach in their classroom; students were passive receptors of their teachers’ instruction and poor in their use of productive skills. In short, there is no balance between the teaching of productive skills and receptive skills.

According to Dueraman (2012: 266), English in Thailand is considered as a language of education, wealth, and prestige at family level. As a result, many people are working hard to study English so that they can be proficient in their communication although they are not successful for some reasons.

At the secondary and the tertiary levels, the curriculum does not give attention to writing skills and students are not good at producing academic papers (Dueraman, 2012: 267). Since there is scarcity of skilled English language teachers, usually EFL teachers do not give chance to students to practise writing skills; rather they play the role of examiners (Dueraman, 2012: 270).This shows that the classroom condition is not conducive to the learning of writing skills. That is to say, students are not given chances to experience the process approach to writing, and teachers do not teach students study skills to develop their critical-thinking and problem solving skills in relation to writing skill (Dueraman, 2012: 272).

As their culture encourages top-down communication, the students are not motivated to interact freely with their peers and teachers, and teachers use teacher-centred approach in their teaching; this does not encourage the development of critical thinking and problem solving skills (Dueraman, 2012: 268 & 272). Zhao (2009: 3) cites Hu (2002) and Zhong and Shen (2002) in reporting that, in China, EFL instruction has got great attention in that information technology and new methods of teaching are used to teach students to get better results. There is a wide application of information communication technology in teaching English language. By using a lot of multimedia and hypermedia, they have created an innovative learning environment in English classroom (Zhao, 2009: 3).This helps to increase motivation and interaction of students.

However, despite these introductions, the EFL instruction is more of teacher-centred (Yang and Wilson,2006: 364) and test driven, where there is emphasis for grammar, vocabulary, and test-guided writing (Zhao,2008: 3). As a result, the students are not good at communication, as they do not practice the language in speaking and writing to express their idea.

2.5 The Ethiopian Experience in using Active Learning