In human interaction feedback plays an instrumental role. It informs the encoder about whether the data conveyed has been comprehended and what kind of reception it happens to have had and also helps to make headway. The aim of the author in this essay is to provide feedback on the 1212 Language Practice Course of József Horváth which was held in the spring session of the year 1996 in the Arizona Room in Szepesy Ignác Street. The primary concern would be to take the syllabus into the scope of the essay and to throw light upon the actual realisation of its contents within the framework of the communication acts.
The syllabus
The syllabus of the 1212 course was printed on an A-4 sized white paper in black ink, the size of the characters approximately being 12. The printed text occupied both sides of the paper and the distance between the lines conveyed an airy impression. All in all, the syllabus was well-laid out and at first glance contained the information generally relevant for course descriptions.
The syllabus contained the following sections: course description, the method and basis of evaluation, the list of required reading and basic information about the essay and the Proficiency Exam. In the following paragraphs all these parts will be subject to further investigation.
The course description informed the participants that during the classes taking place in the Arizona Room the tutor intended to place emphasis on listening and reading comprehension and on speaking and writing skills. The main motive lying behind the development of these areas was the desirability of helping students prepare for, and eventually pass, the Proficiency Exam bound to take place at the end of the term.
Not only did the facilitator set the overall goals but also he clarified them where necessary. He elaborated, among other things, on the heading ‘Speaking.’ In parenthesis notions such as brainstorming, analysing and describing caught the glance of the participants. The author believes that this special clarification and care was due to, and response for, the feedback provided by first year students to rumours of students’ loosing their speaking skills while at university. In the autumnal term first year students were exposed to predictions about deterioration of knowledge and seemed desirous of preventing this. Therefore, the tutor, having realised a need for more speaking practice, proceeded to include it in the course.
The item ‘writing’ also received additional care. In parenthesis appear notions such as group writing, proof-reading and commenting. This extension of the heading is worthy of notice in the sense that the attached expressions convey a change in the original meaning of writing. The author is of opinion that without the additional information the participants could not have got a fair picture of the task awaiting them.
The opinion that this extension was necessary is based on the controversy between the definition of writing in general and in this particular case. In general, writing is an antisocial act. Writing is done at home, in one’s own chamber or in an office. Rarely do we write in public and even if we do we do not go as far as to co-operate with others on our piece of writing (asking a teacher for advice in essay-writing is a different matter and so is writing a test). Therefore, when talking of putting ideas on paper it is more than likely that people will conceive of this act as personal or even intimate.
In the specific case of the course, however, the intention of the tutor rendered this definition untrue. He wanted participants to write in one another’s presence and to subject these pieces to the inspection of the other members. Thus, to define writing in the sense the facilitator imagined it, and would have liked the participants to imagine it as well, was imperative in order that the common theory could be confronted with the new one and in order that awareness of the prospective differences students could be raised. Had the notion not been duly defined and cast into its mould the participants would have stood no real chance of deciding whether this kind of writing suited their purposes or simply whether it was not against their liking.
Having browsed through the course description, the author approached the delicate question of evaluation. As a general rule one can utter that it is of the utmost importance for teachers and students alike to prepare a lucidly-laid out table of requirements and basis of evaluation so that students could become conscious of their obligation and teachers could thwart the flood of complaints at the end of the term about unfair grading. To omit doing so may ruin a whole course since, not knowing the prerequisites, students will engage themselves in inquires and by doing so will not be able to work efficiently on tasks assigned to them. Also, the uncertainty will result in tension which, likely as not, may well spoil the atmosphere of the grading process.
To turn our attention from the general to the particular we can hereby comment on the part of the syllabus concerning evaluation. It consists of 4 main entries which cover the basis of grading in ample detail. It becomes clear that a total of 83 points can be obtained on the basis of one’s performance in the following categories: attendance (13 marks), listening test (15), oral skills (30) and writing skills (25).
Apart from the extension of certain headings in the course description part, the distribution of points scorable also gave a sense of the importance of each domain. It was noticeable that, while only 5 points could be got for each listening assignment, fluent and accurate speakers could score as high as 30 points and good writers 25 points. Thus, not only the clarification of the main and substantial items but also the size of the reward for being good at them indicated what would constitute the framework of the course.
Next on the syllabus was the list of Required Reading. It included copied parts of a book wont to form a basis for the course. It seemed, however, that the availability was largely restricted, there being only one copy in the library and also because participants could not be certain whether enough photocopies would be made in time. Part of the list were the printouts resulting from the labour of the students during the classes and also tape materials.
The syllabus also informed the students that meeting the already stated requirements would by no means be enough to earn the credits and a grade for the course. It was the Proficiency Exam that would put an end to their effort - the syllabus contained. Being so decisive in completing the course the exam had been receiving ample attention even as early as the previous term and had been the topic of many a discussion. It was, however, evident that the information had been unprecise and unbiased, therefore the aversion of the students to the exam was not utterly well-founded. Being aware of this fact the tutor strove to present as accurate an account within the limited space as possible in order to dissolve doubts and unfair opinions. Whether he managed we will see later.
What we can see right now is the contents of the paragraph detailing the requirements of the exam. It was to be a written test consisting of listening, reading, multiple choice tests and essay writing. Students were not to be graded but rather would receive a P (pass) or F (fail). The paragraph also informed the students about the possibility of resitting the exam.
In summary, the agenda helped the students explicitly to comprehend the motives of the tutor and his expectations. The extensions were consistently attached throughout the document and the scores were adjusted in accordance with the significance of each domain.
The syllabus helped the participants in an implicit way as well. The facilitator showed, in organising the material he wanted to present, how to follow the principle of not imposing too much order on meetings in advance. He gave a general framework based on time and group size considerations but restrained himself from stating a lesson by lesson agenda. The author believes that it would have bordered on the impossible to do so because factors such as intristic interest, task difficulty and emotional involvement were meeting specific and could not be determined in advance.
The actual realisation of the syllabus
As the term drew to a close a lot of data were at the author’s disposal for the sake of comparing the document with the actual materialisation of its promises and prerequisites. In processing these data and in arriving at conclusions the author wanted to show unbiased behaviour. Therefore, the author did not attempt to create a ranking of events, praises and criticisms. He did not do so not wanting to suggest any order of importance (deeming all examples worthy of notice). Indeed, it would be erroneous to suggest in any way whatsoever the significance of conclusions for fear that the reader might create a ranking not on his own will but rather on that of the author.
To impose, however, some order upon the flow of the essay is inevitable as well as desirable. Therefore, the writer will deal with the events in accordance with the order of entries laid out in the syllabus.
To begin with the author will cast a glance at the realisation of the course description starting out with listening tasks. The listening comprehension tasks were much coveted on account of the uneasiness which sophomores stirred by regarding the listening part of last year’s Proficiency Exam monstrous and incomprehensible. These exercises, however, were long in coming and participants partook in listening exercise only at the near end of the term. Even when the operation got under way they gave an overhasty impression and it seems to the author that the anxiety of the students failed to discharge the principle of letting students have ample time between exercises of the same sort so that they could improve their skills in the task.
Much to the credit of the tutor the choice when it was done, was excellent inasmuch as both the vocabulary and the wording of the stories grabbed hold of the students’ attention being neither too easy nor too dull. The questionnaires were cunning enough to give the members a whiff of the requirements of the Proficiency Exam and, on the other hand, they dissolve misconceptions about the difficulty.
Apart from being interesting, the stories were stored on tapes of good quality. Therefore, background noises did not interfere with the message. This fact pleased the students considerably. Also, the fans of the computer screens were turned off further helping the process. What the students were not hilarious to learn was the lack of an adequate tape recorder. Those sitting farthest from the sound source considered the state of affairs unfair.
From the point of view of communication the computers and background noises created physical noise whereas the inadequacy of the sound transmitting device and the delay of the exercises evoked semantic noise inside the participants.
Having paid attention to the realisation of listening comprehension the author will contemplate the degree to which the aim of developing speaking skills was fulfilled. It seems to the writer that speaking skills were not efficiently developed. It was, however, not because of the tutor. He did everything to make participants speak. He devoted additional care to the heading and thus stressed its significance right from the beginning. Later he proceeded to bombard the groupmembers with questions and situations which provided chance after chance to speak. And yet the members did not try to speak as much as the environment would have made it possible. The reason as the writer sees it, lies in pervasive group norms whereby not only speaking but also active and apparent participation is somewhat embarrassing since other members may regard the speaker an eager beaver. This group norm did not develop within the group but rather was brought in from without and is observable in high school as well.
To the matter of speaking also belongs the acquiring of new words. This the course failed to accomplish. This omission accounts for great semantic noise which made its presence felt only after classes. It did not manifest itself in class since there was semantic noise about the essay choking other voices of discontent. This we will investigate later. All in all, new words were not taught although the extension of vocabulary may have contributed to additional fluency e.g. in describing or convincing.
The notion ‘reading’ is the next to appear in sight. This task seems to have been leniently dealt with inasmuch as no special exercise akin to reading comprehension presented itself. It is objectionable only because in the Proficiency Exam students encountered a reading comprehension part which according to Mrs. Gonzalez was devilish. Being preparatory to this very exam the course could have included assignments of this kind. In favour of the facilitator it can be said it is true that reading is best looked after by reading at home.
We have arrived now to the much cited matter of writing. Above the assumption that writing was an antisocial, private and intimate act was made. Despite this the members seemed to be troubled in no way by the presence of the others. To sweep away the seeming paradox arising from the situation and the definition given above the following reasons have been hit upon. The clarification of the heading ‘writing’ in the syllabus helped students to accustom themselves in advance to the idea of writing in the presence of the others. In addition, the fact that they were on rather friendly terms due to the fact that all but one attended to a previous course of the tutor in the autumnal term helped a lot. Therefore, a sense of intimacy developed in the group.
In addition to the question of group writing the preparing of the 15 page essay is also worthy of analysis. The length of the essay excited considerable attention. For first year students to be required to produce 15 pages in one go was frightening at best. With the disquieting length prerequisites was combined the presence of the particular importance which the tutor attached to writing. Nevertheless, these reasons would not have been on their own enough to create the fears that actually presented themselves. The author makes the presumption that these two factors combined with a third namely that there was an anomaly in the estimation of task difficulty between members and facilitator.
The group leader, of course, was aware of the different points of view and took measures to eliminate the division or at least to give every guidance to the participants. This he did by incorporating a brief summary of the main features of the essay into the syllabus leaving open the chance of further negotiations. He, in the course, strove with grace and expertise to present the essay in the light it should have been seen. He devoted classes to collecting and producing material exclusively for the essay. The author firmly believes that due to these unforeseen occasions to be devoted to the essay many a promise could not be carried out, which is by no means the flaw of the tutor.
Despite all these efforts the semantic noise became such that positively endangered the efficiency and motivation of the group. These mounting concerns occurred in steps. At first P1 (participant 1) made comments on the impossibility of preparing the essay successfully. Then P2 declared that she would not have signed up for the course had she known about the turn the course, primarily with the essay, was to take. The silence of the participants which ensued was of significance since it indicated the approval of the group. This case is typical of group communication whereby a member makes a statement and the group enforces it by not contradicting the speaker (there are other interpretations for this event, of course). In the author’s opinion the leader was unduly criticised.
Whether absolutely rightful or not the disquiet had to be done away with. The leader, after the spring break, provided more guidance and devoted even more time to helping students prepare for the essay. By doing so the tutor managed to reduce the dissatisfaction. Unfortunately, it meant the loss of an even larger proportion of the agenda’s actual realisation.
The next item to engage our attention is the list of required reading. About this the writer can write with the utmost satisfaction. The materials were made easily available, turned out to be excellently prepared and provided discussion for the course. The tape materials were at least as good as the written data and the author found them consistent with the Proficiency Exam as far as task difficulty is concerned. On top it all that the facilitator stored most of the material on computer thus making availability even easier. Therefore, fears that materials would not be available dissolved, the more so when it turned out that photocopies in the secretary’s office were in abundance.
Writing about the actual realisation of the syllabus one cannot fail to cover some aspects of the Proficiency Exam. Earlier, the author mentioned irrational emotions towards the exam and analysed the passage covering some facts about the test. Now, he would like to elaborate on what reality came to be like.
The first stage of the realisation of the exam was the course itself where students absorbed the nature of the exercises and had opportunity to practice. In order to help this process the facilitator provided assignments very similar to those in the test . The best examples are the questionnaires of the listening comprehension the questions of which gave an accurate picture of those awaiting the students. Also, the group-leader encouraged everybody to handle in short essays and paragraphs to be graded like the ones in the exam. The observations attached to these drafts were found relevant and straight to the point. This the author bases on his own experience coming from the draft he handed in. More details about the parts of the course preparatory for the exam are found in the passage dealing with the realisation of the course description.
The assignments in the course did not only prepare students for the difficulties objectively. They were instrumental in dissolving the irrational emotions such as fears and uneasiness which feelings were generated by sophomores and were based on biased information. To be confronted with the exercises meant a confrontation with reality as well which differed from the rumours greatly. That at the end of the course students were anxious still can be accounted for by the decisive nature of the exam rather than by previously mentioned exaggeration of task difficulty. This achievement was greatly attributable to the course and to the syllabus which, as if anticipating the misconceptions, provided accurated data right from the beginning.
Here, the actual event of the Proficiency Exam will not be dealt with the topic being but indirectly related to the aim of seeing the syllabus materialise. Let it suffice to say that the procedures were consistent with those stated in the syllabus.
Conclusion
Strange as it seems, no verdict has been reached so far. Neither, for that matter, will any be reached now. Whatever the author has commented upon and whatever conclusions have been arrived at the writer has worked not because some judgement was to be reached but rather because I hoped that by analysing this course our next encounter will be even more fruitful and joyous. Should we not meet under the same circumstances it must be noted that I have enjoyed the course because of its assets and despite its inadequacies.
No comments:
Post a Comment