Task based learning

This past Thursday we had our last two presentations on language learning/teaching methods. The first one was on Process Programmes. When I first heard the name, at the beginning of the term, when our teacher introduced the list of methods we were going to study, I thought it would be linked with cognitive psychology and our brain working like a computer. Well, none of that, at least by what was mentioned in class. Our classmates focused on Task Based Learning (TBL), leaving Content Based Learning (CBL) aside.

They started off with Jimmy, who happened to be Charlie's twin brother and, of course, we were a bit put off, thinking that was an easy trick (we have become really picky as the term developed, it seems), but we soon saw that it was nothing like Charlie's activity, so we agreed to give it a try. At least that was the impression I got from our reaction while the presentation started. So, we made our list for a healthy breakfast for Jimmy, who was unfit, just like Charlie. I wonder if it would be wise to carry out such an activity in our schools, bearing in mind the amount of children who are overweight. Would they feel comfortable? Could some of them feel like a line had been crossed? On the other hand, we are talking about Jimmy, not Mikel or Aitor. The alter ego who faces and successfully deals with all kinds of problems (or suffers the painful consequences of not having conquered) is a very useful resource for children's learning. One of my best friend had Krispin, who had been running in the family for long, passed on from mother to daughter. All kinds of things happened to poor Krispin, depending on the child who listened to the stories. Children didn't seem to notice the trick, and seemed amused to find out about this character who happened to have the same problems as them.

Coming back to the presentation, I got a very clear idea: what really matters is the process, not the final outcome or product. Well, that is a big issue in education. It is a very nice thing to say, but are we really willing and prepared to assess the process, forgetting (mostly) the outcome? I don't think so. The final product is so deeply rooted into us, that we would need a huge effort to get rid of it. Still, it would do us so much good, and it would be so beneficial for many children!

I know I mentioned earlier in this diary that sometimes I felt like what we were learning was too far away from pre-primary teaching for me to be able to think how to adapt it. Well, none of that applies to TBL, because it is pure pre-primary teaching, just think of all those schools using project-based programmes in the Basque country.

Another interesting concept linked to TBL was transcending the classroom walls, which will eventually bring us to the learning community. That is a great idea, in my opinion. I love the Reggio Emilia air of TBL.

What I don't like that much is how we tend to choose the topics for the tasks or projects around here. At the end of the day, we somehow fool children to think that they chose the topic, when it was the teacher who had carefully planned it all well beforehand. Last year, we had the opportunity to read a paper on a project in a school inspired by Reggio Emilia, where the project unfolded genuinely following children's proposals. Children and teacher discovered the topic hand in hand, and it was beautiful. If the outcome is not really important, why does the teacher need to know the topic beforehand? I dream of a teacher like a storyteller we read about last year, who had a large gown, with lots of folds, where she hid small papers, and she could recall and re-create hundreds of stories just by reading the few notes on each small piece of paper. Wouldn't it be wonderful to become such a teacher!

Back to Earth, I have to mention that once again when talking on the disadvantages of TBL "too much freedom" came up, as well as the teacher needing to "control" (monitor was also mentioned). I am probably just old fashioned and have connections that give me goosebumps which younger students don't get when hearing those words.

The second presentation was on CLIL. It was also a very god presentation. The experiment to illustrate how different beaks are adapted to certain types of food was brilliant, I loved it. So, the two presentations introduced us to the content-language continuum, with CBL on one end (focus on learning content), TBL on the other end (focus on learning language), and CLIL in the middle. Of course, that is so in some ideal world, and not necessarily around here, and we had a chance to learn about the main problems of applying CLIL in our schools.

Funny to see that when our teacher asked if anybody had experienced CLIL in their education nobody mentioned the Minor we are currently taking. This unit, for instance, is pure CLIL. We have dealt with specific aspects of language, as well as contents on language learning/teaching, and I have the feeling the weight of both have been similar. CLIL is good too (well, good CLIL is good).

And finally, an interesting question our teacher threw when we were just finishing the lesson: what about those activities where children are asked to sit and colour or cut out and can stand for minutes in the English lesson receiving no input whatsoever, not producing and not thinking in English? We really need to think on ways to turn that around. It reminded me of the storytelling video we have just done in another unit. I did the storytelling with my 6 year-old niece, and I had never spoken English with her. I realised she knew quite a lot of vocabulary, but didn't recognise what I thought would be an easy question (how old are you?). Even though I did my in-school training at her school the previous two years, I didn't have the chance to attend their English lessons, but I do know they did colouring almost everyday. Our teacher's comment made me think on the kind of input she could have received.