i

Creating contexts, characters, and communication:

Foreign language teaching and Process drama

Name of Candidate : Renée Marschke

Grad.dip.Ed., B.Arts, D.A.L.F., A.Mus.A.

Student Number: n01152734

Centre for Innovation in Education

Director of Centre: Associate Professor Roy Ballentyne

Principal Supervisor: Dr Jo Carr

School of Cultural and Language Studies in Education

Faculty of Education

Associate Supervisor: Ms Christine Comans

Performance Studies

Creative Industries Faculty

Course Coordinator: Lyn English

Submitted for the Degree: Master of Education (Research)

Date: June 9, 2004

ii

Abstract

The foundational premise of communicatively-based foreign language teaching approaches

is that the activities used in the classroom are ‘communicative’; that the language learned

is being used to ‘communicate’. Genuine communication however is difficult to establish in

a traditional classroom setting consisting of desks, chairs and textbooks. This project

examines how a specific form of Drama in Education – process drama – can be used to

create more authentic communicative situations and learning experiences in the foreign

language classroom; experiences that are both intellectually and affectively engaging. It

begins with a review of the literature pertaining to the three main areas that provide the

backdrop to the project’s central research proposition, namely second language

acquisition, second language methodology and aesthetic education. The three main

protagonists are then introduced, namely social interactionist theories of language

acquisition, communicative language teaching approaches (the main focus being on task-

based methodology), and process drama. The two supporting characters, change and

motivation, also make their entrance.

The curtain is then raised to reveal a performance of various teaching and learning

experiences of the use of process drama in first and second language settings. This

illustrates how process drama operates on a practical level and explores the offered

potential for more authentic communication when this approach comes into contact with

second language task-based methodology. Literature surrounding unit and lesson planning

frameworks from the fields of both second language acquisition and process drama is then

examined before the spotlight falls on the proposed ‘Foreign language and Process drama’

Unit and Lesson planning Framework. Illustrative models of the innovative framework

together with concrete examples of its use are provided to represent more clearly how it

can facilitate the creation of characters and contexts through which to communicate more

authentically in the FL classroom. The closing curtain falls on a reflection of the entire

project, which includes recommendations and possibilities for further research.

iii

Table of Contents

Chapter 1- ‘Hanging the backdrop’: Premise, introduction of context, main characters

and synopsis p.1

1.1 “Setting the scene” 1

1.2 Statement of the problem situation 5

1.3 Aims and Objectives of the study 7

1.4 Methodology 8

1.5 Importance of the study 9

1.6 Rationale and Theoretical Framework 11

1.6.1 Theories of Second Language Acquisition 11

1.6.2 Second Language methodology 14

1.6.3 Process Drama 17

1.7 Conclusion

18

Chapter 2 – Literature Review: Introducing the protagonists p.19

2.1 Introduction 19

2.2 Change and Education 19

2.2.1 Teaching and learning an L2 in Queensland – scope for change 21

2.3 Aesthetics and the Arts as a way of teaching and learning 23

2.3.1 Artistic processes and cognitive processes 23

2.3.2 Process drama as a form of aesthetic education 26

2.3.3 The aesthetics of language 27

2.4 Communicative Language Teaching and Process Drama 28

2.4.1 Communicative language teaching 28

2.4.2 Social context and social interaction in language learning 31

2.4.3 Social interaction using process drama 35

2.5 Motivation to communicate 39

2.6 Task-based L2 learning and process drama 43

2.7 Conclusion 45

Chapter 3 – An Aside – Telling of the process drama tale p. 46

3.1 Introduction 46

3.2 Recounting of the process drama experience 46

3.3 Teaching of the Seal Wife process drama in an FL context 47

3.3.1 Preparing the students 47

3.3.2 Contextualising the topic area 47

3.3.3 Contextualising the tasks - ‘building belief’ 47

3.3.4 Sequencing of the episodes 48

3.3.5 Sequencing within the episodes 51

iv

3.4 Discoveries 52

3.4.1 The power of role 52

3.4.2 Impact on the development of a framework 53

3.5 Conclusion 54

Appendix A – Journal account of first process drama experiences 56

Appendix B – Tale of the Seal Wife 58

Appendix C - Resources 59

Appendix D – Task Sheet 60

Appendix E – Examples of students assessment tasks 62

Appendix F – Example from student workbook – ‘feelings’ 66

Chapter 4 – Injecting ‘tension of the task’: Planning for the use of process drama in a

second language, task-based learning context p.67

4.1 FlaPd! Unit Planning Framework 68

4.1.1 Introduction 68

4.1.2 Educational Purpose 68

4.1.3 Fictionalising content – the fictional world 70

4.1.4 Pre-text 73

4.1.5 Conclusion 74

4.2 FlaPd! Sequencing Framework 77

4.2.1 Introduction 77

4.2.2 Process drama sequencing models 78

4.2.3 FlaPd! Selection and Sequencing Framework 83

4.2.4 Conclusion 88

4.3 FlaPd! Lesson Planning Framework 90

4.3.1 Introduction 90

4.3.2 Task-based lesson frameworks – FlaPd! lesson framework 90

4.4 Tales of the Sea – The Seal Wife FlaPd! Episode Outline 96

4.5 Conclusion 108

Appendix A – Sample pro forma – ‘developing a new unit’ 109

Chapter 5 – Resolution and Reflection p.110

5.1 Summary 110

5.2 Conclusions 112

5.3 Recommendations 114

5.3.1 Implementation of the FlaPd! framework in the FL classroom 114

5.3.2 Possible applications for the FlaPd! framework in Senior 116

5.3.3 Conclusion 117

Appendix A – Part B from the 2003 Showcase Award Submission 118

Bibliography p.119

v

List of Tables and Figures

Tables

Table 3.1 Outline of episodes for the Seal Wife process drama pp.49-50

Table 4.1 Task outline of Monster Museum unit pp.72-73

Table 4.2 Example of Haseman’s (2003) episode planning grid p.79

Table 4.3 Example of Neelands and Goode’s (2002) episode planning

model

p.80

Table 4.4 Example of Bowell and Heap’s (2001:91) episode planning grid p.81

Table 4.5 Example of Owens and Barber’s (2001:45) episode planning

grid

p.81

Table 4.6 Example of QSCC’s (2002, cd-rom) planning format p.82

Table 4.7 Factors influencing task difficulty (Skehan, 1998: 135) p.84

Table 4.8 Synthesizing Tasks, Lower Secondary Modules, 4-10 LOTE

syllabus (QSCC, 2000)

p.85

Table 4.9 FlaPd! Episode Sequencing Planning Grid p.89

Table 4.10 Willis’ (1996:52 ) task cycle p.91

Figures

Figure 4.1 FlaPd! unit planning proforma p.75

Figure 4.2 FlaPd! unit planning proforma with examples p.76

Figure 4.3 FlaPd! lesson framework p.93

Figure 4.4 FlaPd! lesson planning framework with purposes of each phase p.94

vi

Glossary of Terms and Acronyms

AE Aesthetic Education

CLT Communicative Language Teaching

FL Foreign Language

L1 First language; Language One

L2 Second language; Language Two

(L2 and FL are used interchangeably throughout the thesis as they both signify a language

other than the first language)

LOTE Languages Other Than English

O,E,S Orientating, Enhancing, Synthesising

PD Process Drama

QSCC Queensland Schools Curriculum Council

SLA Second Language Acquisition

SI Strategic Interaction

Ss Students

T Teacher

TBL Task-based learning

TC Target culture

TL Target language

vii

Acknowledgements

I would like to acknowledge the assistance in this project of my principal supervisor Dr Jo

Carr whose prompt and constructive feedback and keen eye for editing detail encouraged

me to be rigorous and thorough; having a ‘kindred spirit’ as a principal supervisor rendered

the experience all the more enjoyable. I would also like to acknowledge the contribution of

my associate supervisor, Ms Christine Comans, for the helpful feedback specifically relating

to process drama.

Dedication

I would like to dedicate this thesis to my current students of French who, over the past

three years, have responded so well to my teaching approach and produced such amazing

and creative work.

Statement of Original Authorship

The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted for a degree or diploma

at any other higher education institution. To the best of my knowledge and belief, the

thesis contains no material previously submitted or written by another person except where

due reference is made.

Signed: __________________________________ Date: ________________

- Chapter 1 -

1

- Chapter 1 –

‘Hanging the backdrop’: Premise, introduction of context, main characters and synopsis

1.1 Introduction and background to problem situation –

“Setting the scene”

First and second language acquisition research evidence over

several decades has demonstrated that learners learn a second

language best when they compose and comprehend it in authentic,

meaningful, communicative situations (Lightbown, 2000; QSCC,

2000). However, these types of communicative situations are

difficult to establish, develop and maintain in a traditional

classroom setting, using traditional second language teaching texts

and methodology. Process drama, by its very nature, provides an

extremely effective medium through which to construct fictional

contexts and life-like communicative situations, requiring continual

negotiation of meaning and belief in the fictional roles. It also

operates on an aesthetic level, engaging both the intellect and the

emotions, and incorporates enactive, iconic and symbolic knowing

(Wagner, 1998). So, what is process drama exactly? Why could it be

an effective teaching and learning tool in the foreign language

classroom? How does one proceed with designing a unit of work to

be taught in this way? This research project presents responses to

these questions.

Process drama is a form of drama in education whose primary purpose is to establish an

imagined world, a dramatic “elsewhere”. Within this, a specific social context is created by

the participants as they discover, articulate and sustain fictional character roles and

situations (O’Neill, 1995). Because process drama shares its dramatic organization and

elements with theatre (Morgan and Saxton, 1987; Haseman, 1991; Bolton, 1986; O’Neill,

1995), it is interactive, communicative, and highly engaging. Learning and knowing are

formulated on an aesthetic level, from a heightened state of consciousness, paving the way

for an education ‘of the highest order’ (Abbs, 1987:55).

As a drama teacher, I have consistently witnessed in my students during process dramas an

overwhelming desire to communicate spontaneously and appropriately in a gamut of

- Chapter 1 -

2

character roles and situations. As a language teacher, I have often desired to bring about

this same effect in my second language (L2) classes, but have been unable to achieve this

level of engagement in the context of the usual syllabus constraints and the traditional

classroom. However, the Queensland Schools Curriculum Council1 (2000) has recently

released the new Languages Other Than English Syllabus, Years 4 to 10, which advocates a

task-based, learner-centred approach, embedded in the broader school curriculum,

underpinned by outcomes-based planning and assessment. It foregrounds a communicative

approach, emphasizing the comprehending and composing of the target language in

authentic communicative situations.

The syllabus presents new possibilities for incorporating process drama (PD) in the foreign

language (FL) classroom as it is based on the use of tasks that engage learners in using real

language for real or lifelike purposes, leading to enhanced communicative outcomes. The

proposed tasks are sequenced in order to achieve some central purpose within a context

that has relevance for students in terms of their social, school and personal lives. ‘Students

become involved themselves and are able to invest personal meanings into what they

comprehend and compose’, the outcome being ‘socioculturally appropriate communication

to achieve real purposes’ (QSCC, 2000: 8-9). Process drama presents itself, therefore, as an

ideal tool to achieve this, as it sits on the extreme ‘open’ end of the communication

continuum and is concerned with the development of a wider context for exploration – a

dramatic world created by the teacher and students working together within the

experience. Furthermore, this type of negotiated approach to learning, in which students

have a direct influence on the curriculum, where they are called upon to cooperatively and

individually solve higher-order problems, where a variety of learning styles and

intelligences are catered for, and where there is a connectedness of the learning to the

world beyond the classroom, correlates with the current proposals and philosophical

underpinnings of the Queensland State Education 2010 reform project (The State of

Queensland, 2000).

This research study then, presents an innovative approach to formulating units and lessons

for the FL classroom by linking two distinct fields, namely second language methodology

(informed by second language acquisition theory) and aesthetic education (in the form of

process drama), with the objective of creating authentic, communicative and interactive

learning situations, through which students can make meaning, and ‘make language’

(Halliday, 1975).

1 In 2003, this curriculum body became the Queensland Studies Authority. The Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus was released in 2000.

- Chapter 1 -

3

The development and implementation of the use of process drama in an L2 context is a

relatively unknown and un-researched area. As Kao and O’Neill (1998: 10) point out, ‘there

is little related literature dealing with either the theorisation or the practice of process

drama in the L2 context’. The same is true for process drama and language learning in

general (Hertzberg, 1999; Wagner, 1998). There is however, a substantial body of work on

other forms of drama in language education that have similarities with process drama from

which one can gain various insights. Anderson (1989), Beyersdorfer & Shauer (1993), Booth

(1994), Byron (1986), Davis (1990), Haggstrom (1992), Hertzberg (1999), Holden (1981),

Maley and Duff (1982), Via (1987), Yau (1992) are examples of texts which argue for the

benefits and uses of common, drama-based activities for language learning.

In relation to more complex forms of drama and its use and benefits in foreign language

learning (as specifically related to the purposes of this project), Barraja-Rohan (1995) has

written of the advantages of incorporating drama in the L2 classroom. She argues that it

presents a holistic methodology, taking into consideration not just the learning process but

also the affective factors and paralinguistic features that are involved in acquiring an L2.

She describes the usefulness of warm-up games, exercises and improvisations and of

scripting and performing plays in the FL classroom. However, she also identifies in this

approach the constraint that drama ‘cannot be used to develop writing beyond dialogues,

plays, narrative and speeches’; nor does it cater for grammar-consciousness raising

(Barraja-Rohan, 1995: 23). The first of these limitations can be overcome by the use of

process drama, as opposed to drama activities, and the second can be overcome by a ‘focus

on form’ (Willis, 1996; QSCC, 2000) phase attached to the end of an activity. These issues

will be addressed further in later chapters.

Makin and Wilmott (1998) have written on the use of socio-dramatic play in L2 situations,

identifying benefits such as changes in the balance of discourse, the catering for learning

differences and the provision of a particular context. They also provide implementation

guidelines such as the use of activity centres, themes, and the creation of a simulated

target language environment. Socio-dramatic play, however, is once again different from

process drama in that it centres on a specific, narrowly defined focus, the emphasis being

primarily on the social situation itself. Furthermore, the role-plays are based on real life

situations and do not allow for elements of myth, fantasy or fairy tale.

‘Simulations’ is another form of drama used in FL classrooms and Stockwell (1998) identifies

its advantages, particularly in terms of motivating students. An example is given describing

how students played the characters in the texts and video series that were part of their

language course and replicated various situations taken directly from the videos (Stockwell,

1998:25). This reported process followed two weeks of a traditional form-based grammar

- Chapter 1 -

4

approach. The goal of the simulations was to practise and ‘act out’ what had previously

been taught and rote-learned. However, if communicative language teaching is based on

the premise that discourse in classrooms should reflect natural interaction, the use of this

form of drama in this way would appear limited in its usefulness.

Di Pietro’s (1987) ‘Strategic interaction’ (SI) scenario approach is closest to the form of

process drama as it goes further than short-term, task-oriented, teacher-dominated drama

activities. Di Pietro (1987) found that engagement in scenarios stimulated L2 learners to

engage in ‘self-regulation’ when interacting - referring to Vygotsky’s (1978) concept of a

speaker feeling free to express personal thoughts, positions and feelings. In Di Pietro’s 1986

study (in Di Pietro, 1987), he also found that engagement in scenarios enhanced the use of

communication strategies and of alternative and more sophisticated language production. It

also increased confidence in interacting in the TL, particularly when carrying out a second

performance of the same scenario. Like process drama, SI recognizes the importance of the

creation of ‘tension’, the motivation brought about by the opportunity to take on diverse

roles in concrete situations, and the effect of the unpredictability of the outcomes of the

communicative transaction. However, SI excludes the notion of teacher-in-role, does not

involve aesthetically charged pre-texts and resources, (two important and distinctive

features of process drama) and, like socio-dramatic play, is essentially based on ‘everyday’

contexts or situations, not essentially requiring complex, imaginative thought processes.

Process drama differentiates itself from these kinds of discrete drama games and activities,

simulations, scenarios and socio-dramatic play outlined above by revolving entirely around

open, genuine communication; it also allows for aesthetic engagement and multiple ways of

learning and knowing (Bolton, 1984). Process drama’s key characteristics are the

participants’ active identification with and exploration of fictional roles (or characters) and

situations within a particular context, and the fact that this process takes place over time,

allowing for the progressive building of belief in the roles and the world created (O’Neill,

1995). It also sanctions the development of the imagination and alternative conceptions of

reality, the chief concern being the development of students’ insight and understanding

about themselves and the world they live in (O’Neill and Lambert, 1982). These can be seen

as potentially powerful features of an L2 learning experience.

The possible application of process drama in an L2 context requires careful formulation and

a solid awareness of how it operates, as I discovered when implementing it in my own

classroom. It is the aim of this research project therefore, to contribute to the

development of knowledge about the use of this particular approach in a foreign language

context, by theorizing and providing a rationale for its use, and by conceptualising and

presenting a pedagogical framework for how it can be operationalised in the classroom. The

- Chapter 1 -

5

remainder of this chapter will identify the problem situation which provided the impetus

for this work and the research questions. The project’s aims and objectives will also be

outlined, including a brief overview of the methodology that will be used. After identifying

the importance of the study, the rationale and the theoretical framework will be

presented, concluding with an overview of the following chapters.

1.2 Statement of the problem situation – “The premise”

Setting up meaningful, authentic communicative situations that are engaging, on both an

intellectual/cognitive level and an emotional/feelings level is difficult to achieve using

conventional foreign language teaching strategies. This is partly because in a traditional

approach, teaching language equates with teaching a linguistic system that the students

learn and then apply in various exercises, sometimes leading to a more authentic task in

which students can practise and also demonstrate the language structures learnt. However,

these tasks are often simplistic in form and content, and decontextualised. For example, a

typical task in the L2 classroom, found in many textbooks, often takes the following form:

‘“Pretend” that you are in the target country and that person A is a tourist and person B a

tourist guide. You are to have a conversation regarding what you’d like to see’; or ‘write an

“imaginary” letter to an “imaginary” pen pal describing what you will do in your upcoming

holidays, using the future tense’. There is generally no enrole-ing in the character or person

to be played, nor a building of belief in the situation, nor a problem to be solved with an

informational gap, nor a specific context. Generally, these prescribed tasks tend not to

lead anywhere, the outcome of the communicative situation or interaction having no

further impact, consequence or follow-up; their objective being solely to practise and

demonstrate what has been taught. The desire or need to communicate, as well as a need

for the communication to be in the target language, have not been established. Neither this

nor the exercises that preceded it can be described as authentic language experience.

Another problem with this approach is that the prescribed communicative situations are

mainly transactional, as in socio-dramatic play for example, not requiring extensive

imagination or critical thought. This is partly due to the fact that the language itself being

learnt, at least in the beginning stages, is simplistic. However, this should not imply that

the themes and the context of the language learning need also to be simplistic. If one looks

at how an L2 is usually taught, or examines a typical FL learning textbook, students at

foundation level begin with learning basic greetings, then numbers, then colours, then

vocabulary for family members, pets, hobbies and so on. In other words, the focus is on

discrete vocabulary items, prescribed language phrases, and on the concrete rather than

the abstract. Admittedly, there is an initial novelty in learning these new words. However,

from my experience, this novelty quickly diminishes, particularly when the learners cannot

perceive any intrinsic value in learning these words just for the sake of it – when there is no

- Chapter 1 -

6

immediate or prospective ‘real’ use of them (Crookes and Schmidt, in Oxford, 1996). What

if the learners were to learn and discover more about themselves and their world, through

ongoing engagement and interaction within fictional roles and a fictional world, as one does

in a process drama, through the use of the second language? The language and forms will

still need to be relatively simple, however the intellect and the affect behind what is

communicated, or the ‘world’ in which this communication takes place, need not be.

The disjunction between learners’ intellectual and emotional level and the level of the

content and tasks negatively affect the degree of motivation to engage and invest in

learning (Oxford and Shearin, 1996). In a traditional L2 learning context, there is no need or

desire created to actively seek out and construct the language required to solve what are

contrived and ultimately ‘close-ended’ tasks. If students are disinterested by the language

and/or the task, if they are unable to perceive the use of the activity as contributing to

personal growth or fulfilment (humanist perspective), or are not required to actively search

for meaning and understanding (cognitive perspective), or to interact socially for real

purposes (social practice perspective), then creating a ‘state’ of motivation to learn is

rendered problematic. This remains the case even if the students already have a well-

developed ‘trait’ to learn and a healthy individual perception (Cook, 1991; Woolfolk, 1998;

Weiten, 1992). Even committed and competent students lose interest if they perceive no

inherent value or use in the tasks that are carried out in the classroom.

Motivation is one of the main determining factors in success in developing second language

proficiency as it determines the extent of active, personal involvement, without which the

possibility of developing communicative competence in the target language is removed

(Oxford & Shearin, 1996:121). Di Pietro (in Alatis, 1993) was acutely aware of this; he

recognized that motivation arises from the opportunity to play diverse characters in

situations that are authentic and dynamic. As O’Neill (1993: 54) argues, ‘in a true dramatic

interaction, there is a need to determine, interpret and respond to the kinds of roles being

played by others and to cope with any potential interactional ambiguity. This ambiguity is a

perfect reinforcer to listen’. If one accepts the notion that communicating in the target

language is the best way to learn the language, then creating interesting, authentic

communicative contexts and situations that motivate students to do this should play the

central and pivotal role in a curriculum design framework and methodological approach.

The central research problem as a question then is:

• How can process drama be used to create authentic, communicative situations in

the foreign language classroom that are intellectually and affectively engaging?

- Chapter 1 -

7

Consequently, the following sub-questions arise:

• What does process drama have the potential to offer, as an organizational

structure, to the teaching and learning of foreign languages?

• How could it operate effectively in a foreign language teaching context?

• What planning framework needs to be in place and what modifications need to be

made?

• What specific knowledge, strategies and structures are required?

• How can a unit of work be formulated, based on this approach?

1.3 Aims and objectives of the study

The aims and objectives of this study are multifaceted and relate to the research questions

above. Essentially, they represent the framing of a design for an innovative teaching

approach in an L2 context which will:

• Identify the significance and provide a rationale for the use of process drama,

aesthetically charged resources, and contextualised communicative situations in

the foreign language classroom.

• Formulate a unit and lesson planning framework to enable engaging and more

meaningful communicative situations to take place in the FL classroom through the

use of process drama.

• Demonstrate how to devise a unit of work using this approach with explicit

examples and guidelines.

The proposed innovation will be designed to accompany or enhance existing communicative

language teaching methods, rather than completely dismissing them. As Richards (1990:37)

indicates, methods present a ‘predetermined, “package deal” for teachers that incorporate

a static view of teaching…when it is a dynamic, interactional process’. Foreign language

teachers have seen a fluctuation of different methods and are experiencing something of a

‘“postmethod” condition’ (Kumaravadivelu, 1994). In fact, Kumaradivelu (1994) suggests

abandoning the concept of method altogether. In line with this paradigm, this research

project represents a theorisation and an application of insights and innovations from the

process drama world to the language learning world; and will adapt these to develop and

describe a teaching approach rather than a method. This fits the contemporary ‘post-

method’ model of pedagogy (Kumaravadivelu, 1994) and is in line with the current

prioritised metaphor of ‘teacher as researcher’ (Özdeniz, 1996: 110).

The purpose of the research also resonates with objectives articulated by Wagner (1998: 1-

10): the desire to understand aesthetic education and how it operates, to learn how to

become more effective teachers, and to explain to those not familiar with drama processes

the reasons behind their use as an educational approach. Through this project, I hope to

- Chapter 1 -

8

research and refine my art in order to bring about better learning outcomes for my

students; and also to communicate this to other teachers. Many teachers are not aware of

the more ‘informal’ drama process strategies: the ‘knowledge of process drama as a tool

for learning has not been widely disseminated and is not known or widely used by other

fields outside that of drama itself’ (Wagner, 1998: 9). Many teachers are, however, aware

of discrete drama games and activities and, on the opposite end of the spectrum, of in-

depth study and performance of scripted plays. Yet, it is the lesser known ‘drama as a

process’ conventions that can potentially offer so much to L2 methodology. Hopefully, this

research project, through its development and application of a unit and lesson planning

framework, its descriptions of the process, and its examples and samples of student work,

will play a part in rectifying this current situation. It therefore has a targeted purpose and

potential practical application for the L2 classroom, its ultimate aim being to inspire and

ignite interest in an alternative teaching and learning approach in order to create more

engaging, motivating and productive learning environments and experiences for students of

a foreign language.

1.4 Methodology

As this project involves the theorisation and development of a new approach to L2

teaching, with practical implications for the classroom, Allwright’s 4 stage, Exploratory

Teaching model, as modified by Özdeniz (1996) will be used as the research methodology

framework. Prior to the stages proper in the Exploratory Teaching model is a ‘preparatory

stage’, i.e. identification of the problem situation. Stage A then involves identifying the

‘innovatory puzzle’, outlining what is to be explored, and the aims and objectives behind

the exploration; as well as a review of existing knowledge about the innovation and of how

it relates to current practice, i.e. how process drama works through the use of the

aesthetic and how it relates to L2 task-based methodology. These elements are addressed

in this first chapter, and then expanded upon in more detail throughout the literature

review in Chapter 2.

Stage B of the Exploratory Teaching model (1996) involves initially identifying ways of

implementing the innovation and subsequently gathering information about the innovation

as it is tried out in the classroom. In relation to the former, this is the development of a

unit and lesson planning framework, using process drama as the ‘philosophical foundation

for designing and organizing classroom activities at the practical level’ (Kao and O’Neill,

1998: 122). In order to do this, it is my intention to draw from a variety of existing

approaches and unit design frameworks from both fields. In relation to L2 teaching and

learning, these will include those presented within the current Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus

(QSCC, 2000), and the Australian Language Levels guidelines (Vale, Scarino and McKay,

1998) as well as task-based learning guidelines and frameworks from Willis (1996), Long

- Chapter 1 -

9

(1990), Skehan (1996, 1998) and Nunan (1998). In relation to PD, planning guidelines

devised by Haseman (2003), Bowell and Heap, (2001), O’Neill (1995), Neelands and Goode

(2002), Owens and Barber (2001) and The Arts Years 1 to 10 Syllabus (QSCC, 2002) will be

examined. I will also refer to, and take insights from, my own experience of using process

drama in the foreign language classroom, as well as from discussions, approaches and

experiences of process drama practitioners working in the field. In addition, I will draw on

the guidelines from Education Queensland’s “Productive Pedagogies” (2002: 4) framework,

sharing its commitment that ‘all the students I teach, regardless of background, are

engaged in intellectually challenging and relevant curriculum in a supportive environment’.

Essentially, the proposed framework will involve reviewing, selecting, and adapting

planning approaches from process drama and interrelating and integrating them with a

task-based, L2 unit and lesson planning design. All of these elements are contained in

Chapters 3 and 4.

The latter part of stage B in the Exploratory Teaching model would normally involve

teaching the unit of work using the identified ways, in this case, the planning framework,

and also the collection of data. Stage C would then involve interpreting the data and

articulating what has been discovered. However, working within the constraints of this

present project, only the Preparatory stage, Stage A and the first part of Stage B will be

developed; the subsequent components of the model possibly being undertaken at a later

date as will be outlined in Chapter 5. Also contained in Chapter 5, will be practical

suggestions for implementation of process drama in a FL teaching context, its possible

application in other areas of L2 study (e.g. use in senior school FL programs), limitations,

and early indications of the success of the approach.

1.5 Importance of the study

This project’s focus is on pedagogical innovation, development and reform; more

specifically, the application of process drama and aesthetic education principles in the

foreign language classroom, with the aim of enhancing learning outcomes for students.

Eisner (1994:126) describes curriculum development as ‘the process of transforming images

and aspirations about education into programs that will effectively realize the visions that

initiated the process.’ The vision that I would like to realize is one where the principles of

effective teaching and learning become lived experiences in the foreign language

classroom, taking the images that are created and the aspirations that have been realized

in the process drama classroom as the springboard. I hope that the development and

eventual implementation and refinement of this approach will lead to students of an L2

being engaged and motivated, and effectively communicating in a spontaneous and active

way. I also envision that through the learning of the L2 in the proposed way, the students

- Chapter 1 -

10

may also have more opportunities to learn about themselves and their place in society,

fostering a desire to be an active ‘participant in a interdependent world’ (QSCC, 2000: 5).

It is my hope that the realisation of this vision can cultivate a more positive outlook on

LOTE teaching and learning, particularly at this point in time where L2 learning in many

Queensland schools is being compromised through students not continuing with the subject

after the compulsory three years undertaken in years 6, 7 and 8. For example, when I came

to teach at my current school, nine students had chosen to continue with the subject in

year 9. The year 10 class had been disbanded due to lack of numbers, and the senior class

was a composite year 11 and 12 with only six students. I believe this general lack of interest

in the subject is related to the way it has been traditionally taught and the failure to

engage and motivate the students.2

This research is also timely as the newly released Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000)

provides unprecedented scope for the proposed alternative way of viewing the foreign

language teaching process and of curriculum organization. Being task-based, it allows for

the teacher to be a curriculum designer, with newly shifted focus on the ‘what’ of the

language (QSCC: 2000). This entitles and requires teachers to make decisions on what will

be taught and learned through the foreign language, namely themes and content, and a re-

conceptualisation of the nature of L2 education itself. This is a welcome and significant

move away from the constraints of teaching to a prescribed textbook, and one which

presents an ideal opportunity to make the proposed connection of L2 teaching and learning

with PD. Consequently, this project can be seen as a response to an ‘urgent concern’, as

there are few available resources and handbooks available to teachers that adequately

reflect a process drama approach, as it is ‘such a pioneering field’ (Kao and O’Neill, 1998:

126).

Finally, this project is significant in that it celebrates and embraces change, with a desire

to create an approach through which real change can potentially occur. Following a three

year implementation process run by Education Queensland, with the Years 4 to 10 LOTE

syllabus (2000) mandated to be fully operational in all state schools by 2003, early

indications suggest that rather than fully embracing the communicative, constructivist

principles and task-based approaches, many teachers are in fact opting to make only slight

modifications to their existing teaching practices and curriculum resources (Carr and

Crawford, unpublished research, QUT). By demonstrating a particular way of organizing

2 Since writing this thesis, my year Middle School LOTE program (years 8 and 9), based on the outcomes of this research project, won an Education Queensland Showcase Award for Excellence in Teaching and Significantly Improving Educational Outcomes for students. Appendix 1 in Chapter 5 contains a copy of the winning submission and outlines the dramatic improvements in retention rates and achievement levels.

- Chapter 1 -

11

tasks from a process drama and aesthetic education perspective, a ‘productive pedagogy’

as it were (Education Queensland, 2002), this project hopes to inspire change - or at least

to generate discussion and reflection on teaching and learning approaches in the second

language teaching community.

1.6 Rationale and Theoretical framework

A complex theoretical backdrop sets the scene for this study. This part of the chapter will

briefly review its three major supporting beams, which are perspectives taken from second

language acquisition (SLA) theory; second language (L2) teaching methodology; and process

drama methodology (PD) linked with aesthetic education (AE).

1.6.1 Theories of Second Language Acquisition

Theories of SLA have many points of connection with those of first language acquisition, in

that they both involve three central theoretical positions which endeavour to provide

explanations of how language is acquired: these are behaviourist, cognitivist, and social

interactionist theories.

Behaviourist views of language learning were predominant in the 1950s and 1960s, and were

first outlined by Skinner in his book Verbal Behaviour (1957). He argued that children learn

language in the same way they learn everything else: through imitation, reinforcement, and

other established principles of conditioning, i.e. correct ‘habit’ formation (Ellis, 1994: 299).

Skinner (1957) described how an association that is already established between a sensory

stimulus (such as a viewed object) and a particular response (such as a name) can come to

be conditioned to a new stimulus and a new response via reinforcement and reward. Being

able to use language is viewed therefore as successfully ‘learned’ behaviour. In regards to

SLA, the same process is seen to be involved (Towell and Hawkins, 1994: 17), but with

interference from prior knowledge, i.e. the ‘habits’ of the first language. This

understanding came to be known as the contrastive analysis hypothesis (CAH) (Lado in Ellis,

1994: 346). This hypothesis predicted that where there are similarities between the first

language (L1) and the second language (L2), the L2 structures will be learnt with ease;

however, where there are differences, the learning will be more difficult (Lightbown and

Spada, 1993: 21). However, as Ellis (1996: 309) indicates, this theory was too simplistic and

restrictive, and research has revealed that many learner errors are not the result of

transfer from the L1 to the L2. Furthermore, it has been shown that first and second

language acquisition is not simply an ‘observable’ formation of habits, but rather a ‘much

more subtle and complex process, particularly in regards to the internalising of complex

grammatical structures’ (Lightbown and Spada, 1993: 23).

- Chapter 1 -

12

The second of the three main language acquisition theories that informs L2 pedagogy and

methodology stems from Noam Chomsky’s (1959) innatist (or cognitivist) theory of language

learning. As a reaction to what was seen to be the simplistic behaviourist view, this theory

focuses on the inborn ability of children to learn a language providing there is some

exposure to language in their surrounding environment. This unique capability and, in

particular, the ability to discover the underlying grammar system of a language, was

referred to by Chomsky as Universal Grammar (UG), previously termed the Language

Acquisition Devise (LAD) (Ellis, 1994). Evidence supporting this theory includes the fact that

children seem to successfully acquire a language system without any directed focus on form

and that they demonstrate a creativity in terms of language development that cannot be

explained by behaviourist theories. Although Chomsky did not discuss the direct

implications of this theory in terms of SLA, other theorists like Stephen Krashen (1982) have

proposed a theory that resonates with that of Chomsky’s, sometimes called the ‘creative

construction’ hypothesis (Lightbown and Spada, 1993: 26). Learners are thought to

‘construct’ internal representations of the L2, which develop in predictable stages until the

full L2 system is acquired. These internal processing strategies are considered to operate on

language input only, the composing elements of language being perceived as outcomes of

the process, rather than as a necessary managed step in learning. The analysis of the

language is thought to take place at a sub-conscious level and thus not be amenable to

direct control by the learner (or the teacher) (Sharwood Smith, 1994: 43-51).

Furthermore, the ‘unobservable’ processes posited by these cognitive-based theories

suggest that language development is part of a general cognitive development, which

depends on both maturation and experience. For example, when children begin to add the

ed morpheme to a verb to express the past tense, it is because they understand the idea of

the past (Piaget in Weiten, 1992), rather having had “noticed” it in more mature speakers’

behaviour. This explains the phenomenon of over-generalisation, when young children insist

on using ‘ed’ forms incorrectly. For example, “I putted”, even when the correct version –

“put” - is modelled in their environment. If the behavourist theories provided a total

explanation, the child would produce “put”, as this is the form she would have heard and

therefore repeated. The ‘ed’ form is evidence that something more complex and ‘invisible’

is occurring (Cook, 1991). In regards to L2 learning and this theoretical frame, cognitive

psychologists have investigated a phenomenon called ‘restructuring’ – an information-

processing model based on the interaction of new knowledge with already acquired

knowledge, which may result in a restructuring of a learner’s interlanguage – the series of

interlocking systems which characterize acquisition (Ellis, 1994: 711; Lightbown and Spada,

1993: 25). This second body of theories however ignores the interpersonal and

interactionist dimensions of human beings and the impact of these on language acquisition

and development.

- Chapter 1 -

13

Thirdly, there is the Social Interactionist model of L2 acquisition theories, which asserts

that both biology and experience contribute to the effective acquisition of language; that it

is not simply a case of developing habits or ‘computer-like’ cognitive processes, but is a

process of development that is ‘profoundly social’ (Edelsky, in Emmitt and Pollock, 1997:

183). These theories foreground the role of the linguistic and social environment in

interaction with the innate ability to learn a language, as well as the importance of the

language input being comprehensible to the learner. Social exchanges, interpersonal

communication and awareness of the social context in which the communicative situations

are transacted, as well as how meaning is negotiated appropriately within these, are

viewed as being crucial components. Language is defined as a symbolic system of meanings

that are generated and shared within social groups, serving various social functions

(Halliday, 1975). According to Vygotsky (1978), authentic interaction within various

contexts is crucial, because learning occurs first in a social or interpsychological context,

prior to it becoming internalized within an intrapsychological category. Vygostky also

believed that a child is more capable of advancing to a higher level of knowledge and

performance in a supportive, active environment than if they were to learn independently.

Linked with these theories, is the L2 objective of communicative competence, involving the

ability to use language (including the use of paralinguistic and discursive strategies) in an

effective and appropriate manner in order to fulfil social needs (Hymes, 1972).

Furthermore, the ability to be culturally competent and the notion of culture as an

integrated component, embedded in language, and not as a separate, ‘visible’ entity, is

also part of this language acquisition paradigm, stemming from the understanding of

language as social practice. For example, Halliday (in Kramsch, 1996: 8) anchors culture in

the grammar we use, the vocabulary we choose and the metaphors we live by. Indeed,

culture and language are understood to be co-constitutive (Carr, 1999).

Of these various theories that offer contrasting accounts of the nature of language and of

how it is acquired, no one theory has been identified as providing a complete or

comprehensive explanation; rather each contributes various different and complementary

insights into what is a complex, human phenomenon. The theory that most closely supports

the proposition of using process drama as an L2 teaching and learning tool however, and

that has the most relevance to this project, is evidently that of the social interactionist

paradigm. Process drama is predicated on establishing fictional contexts and within these,

taking on roles, establishing relationships, and using genuine language appropriate to the

communicative interaction (O’Neill, 1995; Wagner; 1998, Hertzberg, 1999). Additionally,

the socio-cultural conventions of language are explored not only in spoken form, but also

through gesture and movement – through paralinguistics (Maley and Duff, 1991). Social

- Chapter 1 -

14

interactionist theories will be reviewed in more detail and related more explicitly to

process drama in Chapter 2.

1.6.2 Second language methodology

SLA theories have demonstrated that certain processes and environmental conditions are

vital for effective language learning to take place, and this has affected the development

of second language teaching methodology, as have more general theories on the nature of

teaching and learning. This section of the chapter will briefly review the main approaches

in chronological order, commencing with the Grammar Translation method. However, it is

to be noted that even though new approaches have continued to evolve, they have not

entirely superseded the traditional ones which are still being widely used in L2 classrooms

(Legutke and Thomas, 1991).

Formal second language instruction in educational institutions commenced in the 1940s

with the adoption of the Grammar Translation method, which involves the reading and

translating (in both directions) of literary texts, the learning of grammar rules, and the

memorization of bi-lingual vocabulary lists (Lightbown, 2000: 434). This formal, academic

approach had its beginnings in the Middle Ages with the teaching and learning of Latin,

which was mainly for translation and archival purposes (Krashen, 1983: 8). The role of the

teacher is to provide analysis of the TL, while that of the learners is to study and apply its

grammatical rules, usually in the written form. This approach values what learners know

about the language, rather than what they can comprehend and produce – or what they can

do with the language (Cook, 1991: 134). As there is little or no emphasis on communicative

proficiency, or communication strategies, this method fails to prepare students to

undertake purposeful communication or interaction in the TL outside of the classroom

(Krashen, 1983: 9).

The following method on the chronological L2 methods continuum is audio-lingualism which

was at its peak in the 1960s. This method is based on the behaviourist principle that

language learning involves the mastery of language structures and patterns through

constant repetition. The TL is built up piece by piece, a gradual forming of correct

language ‘habits’ by the learner. Language itself is viewed as a series of structures,

phonemes and vocabulary items and is divided into fours ‘skills’ - listening, speaking,

reading and writing, which have to be taught in that order. Consequently, learning

experiences consist mainly of repetitive drills and dialogues. Concurrent technological

advancements such as the development of language laboratories supported this mechanical,

stimulus-based approach, where for ‘homework’, students were required to practise the

dialogues and drills individually. However, as with the grammar translation method, the

learner has little or no opportunity to communicate authentically. As the aim is the

- Chapter 1 -

15

successful learning of a certain behaviour in a certain situation, it is a ‘reproduction’

approach, not allowing for creative or personalized manipulation of the TL and not

accounting for the spontaneous nature of real communication. Furthermore, the

underpinnings of this approach ignore the cognitive and mental processes a language

learner engages when processing a new language, being almost entirely non-analytical

(Cook, 1991: 135-139; Lightbown, 2000: 435).

Subsequently, in the 70s, came the advent of more ‘natural’ approaches to L2 teaching that

emphasized communication rather than translation exercises or mechanical and repetitive

drills such as the ‘Direct Method’. In this approach, classes were conducted as far as

possible in the TL with concrete objects, paralinguistics, visuals etc providing the additional

components to make the input comprehensible. The focus though, is still on grammar.

Lessons are strictly sequenced according to various grammar structures, requiring students

to inductively work out and then apply the grammatical system (Krashen, 1988: 135-137);

the provision for students to make meaning in real life situations still being overlooked.

Dissatisfaction with these pedagogical approaches that treat language as a set of morpho-

syntactic rules, along with the lack of positive outcomes for language learners, combined

with the explosion of research into SLA in the latter part of 70s and into the 80s, caused the

emergence of ‘Communicative Language Teaching’ (Lightbown, 2000: 434-435). This is an

umbrella term, encompassing a range of current teaching and learning approaches that all

prioritise communication and that view language as a rich system of communicative

interaction involving many additional kinds of competences other than grammatical. More

emphasis is placed on language in context, language in use for a purpose, language to do

something with, and not just language form for its own sake. A key protagonist in this

change was Krashen (1988:1), who argued that the most important aspect of learning a new

language is ‘meaningful interaction in the target language – natural communication – in

which speakers are concerned not with the form of utterances but with the messages they

are conveying and understanding’. In conjunction with the more communicatively-based

learning experiences, there has been the development and implementation of task-based

learning. A task, in this approach and in relation to L2 acquisition, is defined as ‘a goal-

oriented communicative activity with a specific outcome, where the emphasis is on

exchanging meanings, not producing specific language forms’ (Willis, 1996:36). This

emphasis on a task as an organising principle sees language learning needs as arising from

the communicative requirements of the task. This is a complete shift from all previous

pedagogical approaches.

CLT, rather than being a clearly defined method, can be conceived as operating under

certain principles based on social interactionist theories and on the more recent findings on

- Chapter 1 -

16

the nature of second language acquisition. These principles vary slightly according to the

theorist or writer, however, the eight identified by the Curriculum Corporation’s Australian

Language Level Guidelines (Vale et al, 1998:28-30) are now widely recognized. These

principles are as follows:

Learners learn a language best when 1. They are treated as individuals with their own needs and interests

(learner-centred principle). 2. They are provided with opportunities to participate in communicative

use of the target language in a wide range of activities (active involvement principle).

3. They are exposed to communicative data, which is comprehensible and relevant to their own needs and interests (immersion principle).

4. They focus deliberately on various language forms, skills, and strategies (focusing principle).

5. They are exposed to sociocultural data and direct experience of the culture embedded within the target language (sociocultural principle).

6. They become aware of the role and nature of language and culture (awareness principle).

7. They are provided with appropriate feedback about their progress (assessment principle).

8. They are provided with opportunities to manage their own learning (responsibility principle).

These are also the principles that underpin the new QSCC Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus

(2000: 7), together with an additional one, which extends L2 pedagogy further than did the

ALL guidelines, based on providing the learners with multiple opportunities to actively

construct meaning in, and with, the L2. I find this distinction to be an important one, in

that active construction of meaning is also a core component of process drama. Another

important principle as defined by Willis (1996:11) is that of the need to engage motivation.

This resonates with Krashen’s (1982) ‘affective filter’ theory and more general views on

motivation as previously mentioned. This intrapersonal dimension of language learning will

be further discussed in the following chapters.

Most L2 teachers are aware of the principles described above, and of what is theoretically

needed for effective L2 acquisition to take place and, as already stated, in Queensland a

new LOTE syllabus has been released that allows for CLT and TBL to be implemented, at

least from years 4 to 10. However, in many foreign language classrooms, the methodology

remains very traditional, the afore-mentioned principles of effective language learning

being largely ignored; there seems to be a significant ‘gap’ between theoretical and

pedagogical understanding and practical application (Cook, 1991). Process drama, a flexible

and dynamic organizational structure and teaching technique, is a potential vehicle through

which to lessen this gap and to realize these CLT principles. It will now be defined in more

detail.

- Chapter 1 -

17

1.6.3 Process drama

Process drama, the third component of this study’s framework, emerged in North America

and Australia in the late 1980s, and distinguishes itself from the more limited

improvisations, skits, or dramatized stories (O’Neill, xv: 1995). Ironically, even though

these latter approaches align least appropriately with the principles of effective language

learning and CLT approaches outlined above, these are the drama-related techniques L2

teachers are mostly aware of and often employ in the classroom.

For example, in regards to the use of plays or stories, the discourse is scripted and

therefore errors ‘eliminated’, the roles are fixed, the tasks are teacher oriented, with the

focus on linguistic accuracy in performance. For simulations and role-plays, though

providing students with more opportunity to create language and communicate with one

another, they still invariably involve fixed roles and teacher prescribed tasks, with the

focus generally on the practising of certain, previously learnt forms. There is usually no

fictional character role to play, i.e. person A and person B; and the situations, though

‘realistic’ in terms of the culture of the target language, i.e. buying a croissant at the

bakery, or asking how to get to a metro station in Paris, are not ‘authentic’ given that no

time is spent in building belief in either the context or the roles to be played, and that the

outcome of the interaction is prescribed in advance and has no consequence. As a result,

they do not constitute genuine language experience, nor are they essentially

communicative. Furthermore, the students are not required to negotiate or actively

construct meaning in the L2. As such, these drama techniques reflect the more formal and

traditional L2 teaching styles and not current CLT styles.

Process drama does reflect, however, the principles of CLT. It is radically different from

the above-mentioned, discrete drama activities as it creates a representation of reality

‘through negotiated process which the participants’ control’ (Haseman, 1991: 20). Its name

offers further insight: it is based on process, as opposed to product. Often, drama is seen as

being something to write down, rehearse and present. In process drama, the ‘traditional

relationship and notion of performer, text and audience is redrawn as participants

simultaneously make, read and respond to their interactive and open-ended “play”’

(Haseman, 2003). As such, it sits on the extreme ‘open’ end of the communication

continuum: discourse is natural and spontaneous, roles are negotiable, tasks are group

oriented and the focus is on fluency (Kao and O’Neill, 1998). Other key characteristics

include active identification with, and exploration of, fictional roles and situations by the

group. Process drama is also shaped by an educational context which aims to develop

students’ insight and to help them to understand themselves and the world in which they

live (Kao and O’Neill, 1998). The drama is extended over time and is created from the

ideas, input and responses of all the participants in order to foster social, intellectual, and

- Chapter 1 -

18

linguistic development, all stemming from an ‘aesthetically-charged’ pre-text launched by

the leader of the drama (O’Neill, 1995). What then ensues is encapsulated in a series of

frames, or episodes, incorporating various conventions and enrole-ing strategies

(Heathcote, 1984; Neelands, 1992), as a framework within which the various

communicative situations and interactions can operate. Further discussion on the

characteristics and methodology of this form of drama and how it can relate to L2 learning

will be developed in the ensuing chapters.

1.7 Conclusion

To conclude, the supporting beams of the proposed research project’s framework are

informed by social interactionist theory, communicative language teaching approaches and

task-based learning, the current Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000), and the

established CLT principles of effective teaching and learning. These set the stage for

process drama to play its role as a potentially effective second language teaching and

learning tool. It integrates well with all of these, particularly if the pedagogical objective

of L2 programs is to create genuine communication, with learners engaging in listening,

speaking, reading and writing in real or lifelike tasks, where there is a genuine gap in

information, and where they have to create their own meanings for the purposes of

enjoyment, socialization and learning (QSCC, 2000: 22). However, as previously argued,

the development and implementation of process drama in an L2 context requires careful

and sensitive formulation, and a comprehensive knowledge of its conventions and how they

can be used to plan for authentic language experience. This research project, over the

following four chapters, offers such a formulation and explanation. It has a funnel-like

progression from the general to the particular, the conduit producing a distilled, concrete

product of the research: a unit and lesson planning framework that enables the use of

process drama in the L2 classroom, illustrated by examples.

- Chapter 2 -

19

- Chapter 2 –

Literature Review

The plot thickens: introducing the protagonists

2.1 Introduction

As framed in Chapter 1, the supporting beams of the theoretical framework for the

application of process drama in the foreign language classroom are informed by the

teaching and learning principles underpinning the current Years 4 to 10 Queensland LOTE

syllabus (2000), social interactionist theories of language learning, communicative language

teaching principles and task-based learning methodology. The following chapter reviews the

literature in relation to each of these main players and further develops the theoretical

position and the conceptual framework by examining the related concepts of change in

education and aesthetics in education. It also addresses the first sub-research question:

‘what does process drama have the potential to offer, as an organizational structure, to the

teaching and learning of foreign languages?’

This chapter is divided into four main sections. The first section will examine change in

education, the second section will explore the notions of aesthetics and aesthetics in

education, the third section will discuss communicative language teaching and its relation

to process drama, and the chapter will conclude with the fourth section which links task-

based methodology with process drama approaches.

2.2 Change and Education

Having been involved with schools as a student, a student teacher, and currently as a

teacher, I can liken the experience of much in-class learning to what an untamed horse

endures when broken in: it is bridled with rules and procedures and kept under control with

reins; it is assessed and categorised by the holders of those reins; it is fitted with bits, in

the form of structured objectives and academic programs, preventing it from exploring

alternative possibilities, expressing in other forms, and deviating from the norm or the

‘accepted’; it is fixed with blinkers, in the form of the imposed curriculum choices and

practices, dictating what should, and should not, be taught and learned; and it is ‘whipped’

with escalating pressure to ‘win the race’, for the highest marks and scores in

examinations, in order to feel a sense of worth and to gain recognition.

- Chapter 2 -

20

I am not alone in this grim view of what I experienced in the traditional schooling system.

In The Spirit of Learning (1995), Erin Neill depicts schools as “graveyards for the living

dead”. Eisner (1994:361) describes the school as a factory, and teaching and learning as an

assembly line. LePage (1987:202) likens education to industry: ‘A systematic approach

which views education as cause and effect: orderly, conforming and predictable. It deals

mainly with a product, has little interest in process, and holds to the belief that figures and

statistics are more important than children’s development and the development of their

values’. Giroux (1988:6) characterizes schools as ‘instructional sites designed to pass on to

students a “common” culture and set of skills’, the rationality that dominates these sites

being ‘rooted in the narrow concerns for effectiveness…and principles of learning that treat

knowledge as something to be consumed’.

These depictions of schooling would be understandable in relation to education in the

Industrial Age in that they reflect the practices and theories dominant at that time, namely

those of rationalism and behaviourism. However, that they continue to reflect much

schooling still today indicates the challenge and complexity of effecting real change in

large institutional structures such as education, and of transforming received theory into

theory-in-action. Many educators are aware of the important discoveries stemming from the

‘cognitive revolution’ and the alternative learning theories, such as the constructivist and

social models; many are aware of the recent, alternative perceptions of intelligence and

the multiple forms of learning and knowing. However, at the ‘chalkface’, many classrooms,

particularly post-primary, are still operating under a ‘factory line’ approach (Eisner, 1994).

There have been numerous endeavours throughout the last century to reform educational

practices and improve schooling and educational outcomes in general, however real change

and paradigmatic shifts are proving to be on the whole elusive and problematical. As

Woodward (1996: 5-9) points out, new models tend to emerge with difficulty and are

accompanied by much resistance amongst a professional community, because the

community has, for a prolonged period of time, adhered to an established, shared paradigm

that they are comfortable with and know well. This still seems to be the case, even where

there is an awareness that the established, shared paradigm is not being effective or

producing desired outcomes. Fullan (1993a) illustrates that change is also difficult due to

the way teachers are trained, the way schools are organised and the way the educational

hierarchy operates; these in fact all often operate to retain the status quo, even though

schools are expected to engage in continuous renewal.

Most shifts from one paradigm to another occur gradually over time as proponents of the

old model retire and are superseded by new graduates (Fullan, 1993b). However, this

process of generational change is not as straightforward as it seems. Often student

teachers, armed with current ‘best practice’ theories and methodology, on entering into

- Chapter 2 -

21

schools for their practical experience, are mentored by teachers employing a conflicting,

more traditional methodology. This can cause cognitive dissonance and prevent student

teachers from having the opportunity to convert ‘received’ theory into theory-in-action;

rather, recapitulating and reinforcing conventional methods (Wallace, 1997). As Legutke

and Thomas (1991:6) suggest, there is often a ‘striking discrepancy between what is written

and proposed, between what is claimed by gurus descending into conference assemblies of

language teachers – and what actually happens in L2 classrooms’. Nunan (1987) has also

found that experienced teachers, committed to the concept of a communicative approach,

often do not actually teach communicatively, the patterns of their classroom interactions

continuing to reflect the traditional Initiation-Response-Evaluation structure.

2.2.1 Teaching and learning an L2 in Queensland – scope for change

The Queensland LOTE teaching community is currently going through a significant

paradigmatic shift, at least for its members who are teaching students in years 4 to 10 at

Education Queensland schools1. The new Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus released by the

Queensland Schools Curriculum Council (2000) mandates a task-based, interactionist, and

constructivist orientation to program design and methodology and reflects current

approaches to L2 education. It works from the understanding of the core meaning of

‘education’: to ‘draw out’, as the Latin root of education, “educare” means, rather than to

‘break in’. Teachers are now encouraged to create a learning environment and an

appropriate array of experiences whereby students are led to think, to venture, to wonder,

to feel; an environment in which they not controlled by reins, or restricted by bits and

blinkers.

Indeed, learning is conceptualised as ‘the active construction of meaning’, and teaching as

‘the act of guiding and facilitating learning’ in the new Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC,

2000: 11). The importance for learners to construct knowledge for themselves is

recognized: ‘Through engagement in tasks with adequate support through comprehensible

input, learners are exposed to language holistically and will usually draw their own

language information from the learning activities to form their own understanding of how

language works’ (QSCC, 2000: 8). The significance of the social context and student

subjectivity in learning is supported: students are to use ‘real language for real or life like

purposes’… and learning experiences are to have ‘personal relevance for students in terms

of their social, school and personal lives’. They are also encouraged to ‘invest personal

meaning in what they comprehend and compose’ (QSCC, 2000: 8). Language is viewed,

therefore, primarily as social practice, with teachers implementing the ‘use of materials

1 The Senior program, years 11 and 12, given the prescriptive nature of Overall Position scoring, is still operating under a prescribed, assessment/skills based system, with labelling

- Chapter 2 -

22

with which learners become actively involved through manipulation and social

interactions’. Furthermore, the new syllabus espouses the idea of creating meaning from

experience where students are to ‘negotiate meaning in response to input, and to develop

their own creative utterances to meet the communication and problem-solving needs of

tasks that are interesting, challenging and relevant’ (QSCC, 2000: 11).

The new Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus recognizes the importance of integrated learning and

lateral thinking in its embedded approach, involving content based on concepts and topic

areas in other key learning areas and advocating the development of topics that relate to

several identified fields. In relation to ‘what’ should be taught and learned, this is

organized around and evolves from the task (QSCC, 2000: 9), again, an entirely new

organizational process and approach for L2 teachers. The tasks are integrated into modules

of work that are couched in six fields of human endeavour, namely ‘The Built World’, ‘The

International World’, ‘The Imaginative World’, ‘Personal and Community Life’, ‘Leisure and

Recreation’ and ‘The Natural World’, thus broadening considerably the possible range of

topics and content (QSCC, 2000: 8). Importantly, the ‘how’, the linguistic features and

process skills and strategies, is inspired by the ‘what’ - the tasks (QSCC, 2000: 9). As all of

these previous points illustrate, there is a definite aspiration within the syllabus to provide

a learning environment capable of ‘drawing out’ that which is inherent within each student

and to allow them to actively make meaning and ‘make language’ for themselves (Halliday,

1975). This represents a complete paradigmatic shift from previous syllabi and approaches

as outlined in Chapter 1.

Language learning is now allowed to be far less prescriptive, and is required to be more

open-ended. This has been identified as a difficult issue for some teachers, the general

feeling of uncertainty and apprehension summed up in this comment by a primary

Japanese teacher: “Before, we were all on a bus and I was the driver and we were all going

in the one direction and I could control the kids and knew where we were headed. Now, the

kids are all on bikes going in all directions and I’m not sure where they’re going or where

we’ll end up” (unpublished research, Carr and Crawford, 2001). The blinkers are off, the

reins are loosed, the students have more freedom, the teacher has less control - not

directing the journey and imposing where it should go, but rather assisting and

accompanying the students on their way.

Rather than viewing this situation as daunting or unsettling (as the teacher quoted above

appears to do), it can be seen as offering new possibilities and scope for both learners and

teachers, and as encouraging learners to be complex thinkers, creative, active

and rating of students in the four ‘macroskills’ through discrete, end of term examinations. Independent schools are not mandated to implement the syllabus.

- Chapter 2 -

23

investigators, reflective and self-directed, all valued attributes of a ‘lifelong learner’

(QSCC, 2000: 3). It also paves the way for the inclusion of more active and creative

teaching forms, such as the one which is the focus of this project, process drama. Unlike L2

pedagogy, Drama in Education has been operating from a constructivist, humanist, and

socially critical basis for decades (Dunn, 1995). In fact, in terms of my own experience of

schooling, Drama was the only subject in which it didn’t feel as if I was being ‘broken in’.

Teachers of Drama are accustomed to negotiating learning experiences, allowing students

to take control of the learning, working with and among the students, and being flexible.

This does not mean, however, that there is no formal organization or structuring of learning

experiences, but rather a skeletal framework, underpinned by overall objectives, which

sanctions individual input, multiple directions and a range of possibilities. The new Years 4

to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000) guidelines resonate with long-standing Drama in Education

approaches to teaching and learning and create a possible platform on which process drama

can play a central role in the foreign language classroom.

2.3 Aesthetics and the Arts as a way of teaching and learning

This section of the literature review will discuss the following three notions in relation to

aesthetics in education: firstly, the notion of artistic processes involving cognitive processes

and what the Arts can offer to education in general; secondly, the notion of process drama

as an aesthetic form and what it can offer to language learning; thirdly, the notion of the

aesthetics of language.

2.3.1 Artistic processes and cognitive processes

As stated above, new insights stemming from research in various fields have led to the

constructions of different theoretical models in relation to education in general, and to

language learning in particular. This has also been the case for Arts education, or, as it is

also termed, aesthetic education. Previously, the making and perceiving modes of the

aesthetic process were seen to involve only the affective or emotive components of an

individual. However, due to the ‘cognitive revolution’ in the mid 1950s, the notion that

artistic processes also involved cognitive processes was recognized (Davis and Gardner,

1992: 96-97). The Arts and artistic endeavours were now seen as a way of learning, a way of

knowing, and also, as a form of intelligence.

A way of learning through the Arts is brought about through experience rather than

intellect, in terms of the ‘whole self’ rather than only cerebral activity, and in terms of

interaction rather than isolation (Slade in Mallika, 2000). Eisner (1985: 25) expresses it in

these terms: ‘the common function of the aesthetic is to modulate form so that it can, in

turn, modulate our experience’. Drama, as an artistic form, increases the scope of life,

leading to a wider experience (Bolton, 1984). When working within drama, thought is

- Chapter 2 -

24

charged with feeling, while feeling is refined and strengthened by thought (Misson, 1996).

Furthermore, bodies are stimulated as well as minds. Students’ previous stasis is disturbed

and whole organisms are aroused. Learning comes as students give form to experience, as

they construct and negotiate meaning within a social context (Wagner, 1998: 17). These

notions clearly resonate with social interactionist theories of language learning,

constructivist learning theories, and the principles and guidelines of the new Queensland

Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000).

In relation to the aesthetic as a way of knowing, Abbs (1987: 53) describes it as a mode of

‘sensuous’ knowing essential for the life and development of consciousness. In agreement

with this, and advancing the notion further, Eisner (1985:29) explains that

knowledge within the aesthetic mode is knowledge of two kinds. First, it is the knowledge of the world toward which the aesthetic qualities of form point: we understand the emotional meaning of jealousy through the form that Shakespeare conferred upon Othello. Second, it is knowledge of the aesthetic in its own right, for no other purpose than to have or undergo experience. Such motives are often the driving force in the creation of both science and art.

As Carroll (1988) argues, drama expands ‘the parameters of what can be seen as legitimate

knowledge’, giving freedom to ‘experience the issues of human concern and intellectual

inquiry’. Dewey (1958: 290) argued that knowledge transformed in an aesthetic experience

becomes something more than knowledge because it is merged with non-intellectual

elements to form an experience. The possibilities that process drama has for creating

experiential learning environments have obvious benefits for FL learning, particularly when

operating under a communicative, task-based, and constructivist syllabus.

Concerning artistic processes as a form of intelligence, Gardner (1983) does not specifically

identify them as a ‘distinct’ form in his theory of multiple intelligences, which includes

linguistic, logical-mathematical, musical, spatial, bodily kinesthetic, interpersonal and

intrapersonal intelligences. However, most of these intelligences are inherently involved in

artistic endeavours (Wagner, 1998; Abbs, 1987; Eisner, 1985). In Artistic Intelligences,

Implications for Education (Moody, 1990), Moody, Eisner, Vallance, Kantner, and Hoffer all

identify and argue for the recognition of ‘artistic intelligences’ and what this means for

education.

Abbs (1989:3) identifies the aesthetic as a form of intelligence that works ‘not through

concepts but through “percepts”, the structural elements of sensory experience’. He also

contributes further to this understanding by describing the elements involved in artistic

processes as encapsulated within the ‘Aesthetic Field’ (Abbs, 1987: 55). This is a web of

energy where the four essential elements of ‘making, presenting, responding, and

evaluating’ are seen in relationship; in a ‘state of reciprocal flow between tradition and

- Chapter 2 -

25

innovation, between form and impulse, between society and the individual’. This

demonstrates that artistic endeavours do not only involve creating, and performing or

showing works, but also, an apprehending of works and a judgement or an attachment of

value to works – evidently incorporating both affective and cognitive processes. This

‘aesthetic field’ has been embraced and operationalised in Queensland Drama classrooms

through the Queensland Drama syllabi in junior and senior phases of learning (BSSSS, 1993,

2002; QSCC, 2002.) This also further supports its use in an L2 learning context where

cognitive and affective processes have long been recognized as playing an important role in

language acquisition.

These more pragmatic and theoretical benefits aside, the aesthetic can offer much to

education simply in its ability to ignite the imagination and stimulate the spirit.

Psychologists, in describing the aesthetic experience, depict a state of mind where

experiences are ‘more clear and focused than in everyday life’ (Csikszentmihalyi in McLean,

1996:13). Humans have a deep seated need for stimulation and a low toleration for

homeostasis.

We seek to use our capacities, to activate our sensory systems, to vary our experience. When our life is without stimulation, as it is in sensory deprivation experiments, we hallucinate. When we are sated with one type of experience, we seek other kinds. Rather than being a stimulus-reducing organism, the human is stimulus-seeking. The aesthetic is one important source of stimulation’

(Eisner, 1985: 30)

From my experience in the classroom, when students are both intellectually and affectively

engaged in their learning, they are more involved, energized, and eager to learn. The

classroom is ‘alive’ and buoyant. From my experience also, the need for ‘behaviour

management’ and ‘coercion’ is removed. As Collinson (1992:115) indicates, the whole idea

of aesthetic education is to ‘arouse people to become more than passive onlookers, to be

willing to engage’.

Working within the aesthetic mode requires the active use of the imagination – the ability

to enter alternative realities, to bring an ‘as if’ into being, to look at things as if they could

be otherwise (Greene, 1989:10). As the classroom is often the only place for students to

interact in the TL, the imagination is a powerful tool through which to establish, and

engage in, a multitude of communicative contexts and to take on a collection of character

roles. To conclude, ‘all aesthetic activity is simultaneously perceptive, affective and

cognitive; it can offer an education therefore, of the highest order not through the

analytical intellect but through the engaged sensibility’ (Abbs, 1987:55).

- Chapter 2 -

26

2.3.2 Process drama as a form of aesthetic education

The theatre is a well established and recognized form of aesthetic activity dating back to

Ancient Greece, 534 BC (Crawford et al, 2003). ‘The clay of drama is the same for the

teacher, the pupil, the playwright, the director and the actor’ (Ross in Bolton, 1986: 71).

Theatre and process drama employ a similar structure (Morgan and Saxton, 1987: 5-7) - an

exposition, rising action/complication, a climax/crisis and a dénouement (Bolton, 1986:

165); and operate through the same ‘elements of drama’ (Haseman, 1991: 19). There is a

definite human context, containing situations, roles and relationships, the overall context

being defined generally by the use of a pre-text2; the roles and relationships are initiated

and developed by the use of various enrole-ing techniques. The dramatic episodes, or

scenes, and their sequencing, are driven by dramatic tension3, as in the theatre; tension

being a dramatic device that creates a desire to be attentive to the action, and it achieves

this through various forms. These are all directed by a particular focus which is made

explicit in place and time, through language and movement, to create moods and symbols

(O’Toole and Haseman, 2000). All of these elements work together to create dramatic

meaning - for the audience, in the case of theatre, and for the participants in the case of

process drama. Of importance also is the employment of aesthetically charged resources4,

such as the use of materials in the classroom that bring about an aesthetic response,

leading to a heightened state of consciousness, a ‘flow experience’ (Csikszentmihalyi in

McLean, 1996: 13). It is these elements and conventions that work together to enable

aesthetic engagement and experiential learning.

There is one main difference though between the theatre and process drama: rather than

the focus being on performance to a generally passive audience as in the case of theatre,

process drama’s focus is on the educational means of the collectively created experience,

hence its suitability for use in the foreign language classroom. Process drama is essentially

about transforming texts and exploring experience, through a non-linear layering of

episodes that collectively extends and enriches the fictional context. Process drama is also

a mode of interpretive thinking. ‘The drama is generated through a perceived need to

explore a problem or a dilemma and thus serves a heuristic function in the development of

social and rhetorical skill’ (Wagner, 1998: 9). It also requires acts of imagination and sets

2 A pre-text initiates dramatic action and provides a firm base for the process drama. It can be a word, a gesture, a location, a story, an article an idea, an object, an image, a character or play script (O’Neill, 1995). Its potential and use is discussed further in Chapter 4. 3 Dramatic tension describes the different sources of mental or emotional ‘arousal’; it is the driving force of all drama. There are various forms of tension – tension of the task, tension of relationship, surprise and mystery. (Haseman and O’Toole, 2000; Neelands, 2002). 4 Materials that have the ability to excite and engage the students, taken from well-known, traditional sources as well as students’ culture (BSSS, Senior Drama Syllabus, 2001). Further discussion on this in Chapter 4.

- Chapter 2 -

27

up a dual consciousness in which the real and fictional worlds are held together in the

mind, also described as the ‘state of metaxis’ (Haseman, 1991); the ultimate goal being for

participants to ‘reach a level of engagement with the fictional event that forges authentic

and spontaneous oral language’ (O’Neill, 1995: 159).

It is evident from the above discussion that process drama is a highly aesthetic and

engaging form, and also an appropriate one to incorporate into foreign language teaching

helping to captivate and motivate students. From personal experience, learning within a

process drama is extremely deep, because one becomes actively involved with the

situations and characters created and acted out5. It incorporates the intellect and the

emotions simultaneously, as well as using linguistic, interpersonal, intrapersonal and bodily-

kinaesthetic intelligences. It is suited to the complex nature of human beings and how we

come to ‘know’ things through experience. The implications, applications, and benefits of

these notions - affect and cognition, knowledge and action, imagining and being - in foreign

language teaching are evident, as they are for the teaching of any subject at school,

particularly the humanities.

2.3.3 The aesthetics of language

In “A is for Aesthetic”, Abbs (1989) argues for a reconceptualisation of the curriculum area

of English and the possibility of it being viewed as an Arts discipline, of having its own

aesthetic field. He describes this aesthetic field as being created by the ‘complex

interaction between the innate expressive proclivity of the students’ minds and the

symbolic material of the culture’ (Abbs, 1989: 67). Having an aesthetic response, involves

an imaginative – perceptual – bodily response to the qualities of language as they reveal

themselves in action in a particular story or poem, for example. He draws similarities

between language genres and the Arts: many forms of poetry belong with music (ballad,

song), and some with visual arts; documentary soon leads to theatre, film, radio and

photography; autobiography corresponds with visual arts in the self portrait and

photography; while myth shares boundaries with dance and drama. He also writes of the

dynamic, creative nature of the process of forming a written artefact that is ‘performed’ or

shown to an audience.

I see this argument for the inclusion of an aesthetic dimension to the subject of English in

schools as having pertinence to the case of FL teaching and learning for I am of the opinion

that the highly aesthetic and creative nature of language has been overlooked.

Furthermore, the L2 I teach is French – one of the most poetic and expressive of all

5 For a personal account of my initial experience with the form of process drama which correlates with the above discussion, refer to Appendix A of Chapter 3.

- Chapter 2 -

28

languages! Yet it is rare that one opens a textbook and sees a unit involving in-depth study

of poetry, or tales, in both the composing and comprehending modes. It is also unusual for

an FL classroom to study a novel or a literary story in detail, using it as a springboard for

learning activities and as language models. Yet these genres of language are engaging, and

extremely rich in metaphor and symbolism. From my own classroom experience as a

teacher, I have found that a comprehensive study of a poem in the target language

energises students’ creativity and increases their understanding of the expressive nature of

language and how it can be used to create feeling and symbolism. Process drama, through

its use of aesthetic genres of language can also contribute to a reawakening of the immense

symbolic and aesthetic power of language. The new LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000:24)

recognizes this to a certain extent by incorporating The Imaginative World as a content

field of human knowledge and endeavour, thus providing another plank in the springboard

for the use of process drama in the FL classroom.

2.4 Communicative Language Teaching and Process Drama

This part of the chapter will expand on the notions briefly introduced in Chapter 1 and will

interrelate the two fields of communicative language teaching and process drama through

exploring the following topics: firstly, communicative language teaching and the goals of

communicative and cultural competence, and of ‘genuine’ communication, and the

proclivity of the use of process drama towards achieving these; secondly, social contexts

and social interaction in language learning, and alongside this, the capacity of process

drama to create real life social contexts and more authentic communicative interactions;

thirdly, the innovations that process drama can offer to communicative interactions

through the use of role, including the convention of ‘teacher-in-role’, and the use of group

work.

2.4.1 Communicative language teaching

As previously indicated, the new Years 4 to 10 Queensland LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000) is

aligned very closely with the principles of CLT, being framed by a constructivist theory of

learning and a task-based approach to teaching, rather than an objectivist and grammar-

based one. It incorporates a broad range of topic areas and uses of language. The desired

educational outcomes align with the now well-established targeted objective of L2 teaching

and learning, that of ‘communicative competence’ or more specifically, ‘socioculturally

appropriate communication to achieve real purposes’ (QSCC, 2000:9). This shift from

viewing language as linguistic form to considering language in context, and as

communication, requires the use of ‘communicative language teaching’ approaches. As

stated in Chapter 1, this is a broad umbrella term, encompassing a range of teaching and

learning approaches that all view language as a form of social behaviour (Brumfit and

Roberts, 1983), emphasising the semantic and communicative dimensions of language

- Chapter 2 -

29

rather than the grammatical (Richards, 1986: 17). The various approaches are ‘derived in

the first instance from a consideration of purposes to which the language will potentially be

put and the functions it will fulfil’ rather than divorcing language from the contexts and

purposes for its existence in order to implement a certain method (Nunan, 1998: 248). In

this approach, ‘language learning is the same as language using’ (Cook, 1991:138). The

shift away from viewing language learning as learning skills and ‘academic language’ to

acquiring communicative tools and ‘conversational language’ outcomes (Cummins, 1989)

has also redefined pedagogical objectives of communicative competence rather than

linguistic competence (Cook, 1991: 138), for language is successfully acquired only when it

is available for spontaneous, personal use with other people (Lewis, 1996).

2.4.1.1 Communicative and cultural competence

To further expand the notion of communicative competence – the prioritised, targeted

objective of L2 teaching and learning, Savignon (1987: 235) denotes it as the ‘ability to

negotiate meaning – to successfully combine a knowledge of linguistic, sociolinguistic, and

discourse rules in communicative interactions’. It incorporates different components as

outlined by Canale and Swain (1980): Grammatical competence – accurate language use;

sociolinguistic competence – appropriate language use; discourse competence – use of the

language in different language events and manipulation of whole texts to negotiate

meaning; and strategic competence – the employment of various strategies in order to

maintain communication. To this list, several writers have added a fifth component, that of

cultural competence (Johnstone, 1994; Kramsch, 1996), which incorporates cross-cultural

and intercultural understanding (Crozet and Liddicoat, 1997).

In conjunction with this revised notion of communicative competence, is the re-theorisation

of the language-culture relationship. Culture is now viewed as underlying every facet of

human communication, ‘from asking someone to lend you a pen to writing a novel’

(Liddicoat and Crozet, 1997: 2). Not only evident in forms of high art or representative

cultural artefacts, culture is about ways of being in the world, ways of making meaning.

These ways aren’t always visible, concrete and ‘attractive’ (Carr, 1998). This then, has

implications for language teachers and the ‘teaching’ of cultural and communicative

competence. Culture is no longer seen as a colourful ‘add on’ (Carr, 1994) to teach at the

end of the unit or if there is time left over at the end of a lesson - but rather as an element

in language learning that is ‘always in the background…ready to unsettle the good language

learners…making evident the limitations of their hard won communicative competence,

challenging their ability to make sense of the world around them’ (Kramsch, 1996: 1).

The current goal, in the ‘teaching’ of culture in the FL classroom, is to create a third kind

of culture – neither that of the first culture/language, nor that of the target culture/

- Chapter 2 -

30

language, but one ensuing from the struggle that takes place when existing sets of

meanings encounter alternative sets of meanings. As Carr argues (1999), a shift in focus and

position is required. This kind of cultural competence is active, involving practice,

reflection and analysis as well as observation, thus hopefully reducing the “prism effect”

(Kramsch, 1993: 207) and widening our students’ perceptions of how meaning is culturally

mediated through both their own language and that of their L2.

Therefore, it is evident that the development of communicative competence in its richest

sense necessitates engagement in social and cultural interactions, in a variety of situations,

involving the making of different kinds of meaning; as well as reflection and awareness on

how meaning is made and transacted. Process drama, based on episodic, communicative

transactions in a variety of social and cultural contexts that are established in detail, can

aid in developing this competence, particularly if reflective phases are incorporated after

each communicative transaction. These concepts resonate with the third paradigm of SLA

theory as outlined in Chapter 1: that of language as social practice, and of the most recent

L2 teaching and learning approach, ‘communicative language teaching’ which informs

current approaches to L2 teaching and learning.

2.4.1.2 Genuine communication in the classroom/classroom talk

In order to develop communicative competence, students need opportunities to

communicate and the value of creating possibilities for authentic communication to take

place in the classroom needs to be emphasized. CLT is based on the premise that discourse

in classrooms should replicate natural discourse, particularly when the TL is not being

learnt in the target country and the only contact learners have with the language is in the

classroom. Nunan (1987: 137) defines genuine communication thus:

Genuine communication is characterised by the uneven distribution of information, the negotiation of meaning (through, for example, clarification requests and confirmation checks), topic nomination and negotiation by more than one speaker, and the right of interlocutors to decide whether to contribute to an interaction or not. In other words, in genuine communication, the decision about who says what to whom and when are up for grabs.

However, research has clearly demonstrated that teacher-student interaction in a typical

classroom setting does not reflect the complex phases or processes of real-life

communication (Cazden, 1986) and is often contrived (Crawford, 1990). Teachers, through

their interactions with students, generally control the communicative acts in both content

and structure with very little genuine negotiation, in spite of teaching using a CLT approach

(Johnson, 1995).

Studies of classroom interaction, in both L1 and L2 settings, suggest that the classroom is a

discursive world – or speech community - of its own. In this micro-world, teachers and

- Chapter 2 -

31

students communicate according to unique rules and conventions that are quite different

from those used in the outside world (Kao & O’Neill, 1998: 40). For instance, typical

classroom talk and interactions consist of the ‘default’ IRE model: Teacher initiates –

student responds – teacher evaluates (Sinclair and Coulthard, in Johnson, 1995). This mode,

however, does not reflect ‘authentic’ speech, offering only a limited repertoire of speech

acts and roles, such as ‘testing’, questions and prescribed answers, and formulaic phrases.

It is also counter-productive in terms of engaging in authentic tasks and developing

communicative competence; and discourages exploratory talk, risk-taking, negotiation of

meaning, or higher-order thinking (Johnson, 1995). This is of particular concern in a FL

classroom where the language is the content as well as the medium. Task-based learning

represents an attempt to disrupt these traditional patterns of classroom talk and to provide

students with a broader and more ‘authentic’ range of communicative possibilities.

However, as will be demonstrated in following chapters, the tasks, particularly those in the

Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus modules (QSCC, 2000), contain communicative situations which

are often still prescribed, defined and pre-determined by the teacher.

Process drama, however, in its ability to structure open-ended, engaging role-play, is a

medium which can facilitate genuine communication in the foreign language classroom,

that is more learner-centred and learner ‘controlled’. It sits on the extreme ‘open’ end of

the communication continuum: discourse is natural and spontaneous, roles are negotiable,

tasks are group oriented and the focus is on fluency and meaning (Kao and O’Neill, 1998).

In relation to the development of cultural competence and exploration of the ‘third place’,

Carasso (1996:190) points out that drama and education together provide a privileged space

for identity exploration and dialogue: by entering vicariously through process drama into

the unique characteristics of the target language’s social-political contexts, it is possible to

reconsider one’s own sense of identity through exploring different versions of the world and

constructions of reality through and by the TL and the TC. This can result in students seeing

themselves and others in a new light and can contribute to the building of a consensual

understanding of our lives in a contemporary world. Intercultural competence can also be

fostered as students are experiencing and interacting outside the frame of their normative

sense of ‘how things are’ (Carr, 2003).

2.4.2 Social context and social interaction in language learning

The crucial importance of communication and social interaction to language learning was

initially highlighted through the work of Halliday (1975: 65), who argued that language ‘is

acquired in contexts of social interaction, and there is no way it can take place except in

these contexts’. Social Interactionists like Halliday acknowledge the importance of the

cognitive process of language learning, but stress the overarching importance of the

interactive process; of the continual, negotiated exchange of meanings between self and

- Chapter 2 -

32

others and self and the environment – language as action; and between self and self –

language as reflection. Halliday (1975: 139-140) viewed language as essentially being an act

of meaning making, and that act as always being a social act. Learning to communicate is

not simply about developing the ability to correctly employ words and structure sentences,

but is a ‘process of making meaning – a semiotic process’, incorporating the negotiation of

values, meanings, practices and structures in order to achieve specific purposes in specific

social contexts (Halliday, 1993: 93). In fact, a child ‘learns to mean long before he adopts

the lexical mode for the realization of meanings’ and ‘meaning takes place in an

environment, not in solitude’ (Halliday, 1975: 9-65). Vygotsky (in Lightbown and Spada,

1993: 22) also supports this view: language develops primarily from social interaction, with

the provision of scaffolding, or child-directed speech within the learner’s zone of proximal

development; and by communicating with others, both adults and peers, thereby leading to

thought, and then to the production of language.

2.4.2.1 Communication and interaction as a means to learn

The importance of these theories of language as social practice in relation to L2 acquisition

became a major focus more than two decades ago with work by Wagner-Gough and Hatch

(1975). It was further empathised by Gass and Varonis, Long, Pica, and Pica and Doughty,

among others (Gass, 1997). The current orthodoxy among applied linguists and language

teaching theorists is that communication is no longer only a medium for practising

grammatical forms previously taught and “learnt”, but rather it is both the means by which

learning takes place and the avenue through which communicative skills are developed

(Gass, 1997: 104). The claim is not that interaction and negotiation in themselves cause

learning, but more exactly that this facilitates learning (Van Patten, 1991). As with L1

acquisition, modified interaction in the L2 is viewed as being a crucial mechanism through

which linguistic forms can be actively constructed. Through these interactions, the L2

learner can continually hypothesise, test and revise what they have communicated (Emmitt

and Pollock, 1991); interactional modifications such as comprehension checks, clarification

requests and self-repetition or paraphrasing can take place (Long, 1988). These

communicative situations also need to be whole and meaningful, and placed within specific

social contexts (Legutke and Thomas, 1991), if communicative competence in its broadest

sense is to be achieved.

Process drama is predicated upon social interaction and communication within specific

contexts. As Heathcote6 (1984: 70) points out, it is ‘sociologically based, employing

individuals within groups and the interaction of their active processes’. It is also “play”-

based, having a defined area of intention, but still allowing for flexibility and elaboration.

6 Heathcote did not employ the term ‘process drama’, but rather ‘improvisational drama’, a fore-runner of, and very similar form to, process drama.

- Chapter 2 -

33

Through the lived ‘experience’ undertaken by participants in the drama, meaning is jointly

created, articulated, extended and reflected upon (Wagner, 1998; O’Neill, 1995). The

foundation for any drama is the establishing of a specific social context (O’Toole, 1992),

and then, within such a context, the use of genuine language appropriate to the situation.

As the episodes or frames that make up the drama are constructed to be as realistic as

possible, then the language that evolves within and from these is determined and bound by

the situation and the specific purpose of the episode. This in turn defines the appropriate

register (Halliday, 1975). The usual classroom context of student/teacher/school is

temporarily suspended in favour of new roles/characters, new contexts, and new

relationships: as a result, unique possibilities for language use and development are

created. Because the talk that arises in drama is embedded in context, it has the potential

of being ‘precise, purposeful and essentially generative’ (O’Neill, 1993: 58).

2.4.2.2 ‘Building belief’ in the social context

This capacity to construct ‘authentic’ social contexts and communicative interactions

within a plausible world is a unique capability of process drama; something that the use of

‘tasks’ in a TBL approach isn’t guaranteed to achieve. It does this through aesthetic forms

like those used in theatre, as previously outlined, but also through the use of various

specific conventions and structures employed to build belief in the particular context. For

example, this can be realized through physical representations of the fictional world by

defining the space (either through the use of what is in the classroom taking on a different

form, or through simply marking out the space using masking tape); by making

maps/drawing diagrams; by the use of props; by a collective drawing of the place or

environment; by the use of sound-tracking, as in realistic or stylised sound, to accompany

the action or to describe the environment (Neelands and Goode, 2002).

As well as the concrete, visual particulars of a social context, there is the need to build

belief in the characters or roles that will inform and drive the action (Neelands, 1992: 9),

the ‘human context’. Examples of particular conventions for this purpose are: role-on-the-

wall7, use of costume, diary entries, letters, journals and messages, still images or

tableaux. Some of these conventions obviously involve developing both the physical and

human context, while they all contribute to creating atmosphere, drawing attention to

constraints or opportunities. They also aid in identifying possibly different interpretations

of the context as held by the various participants in the group. The other benefit of

establishing the context before taking on roles and negotiating communicative situations is

that there is little threat or personal risk involved as it is a group task (Bolton, 1986).

7 A role is represented in picture form ‘on the wall’ and as the drama progresses and more is created or discovered about the character, this information is ‘attached’ (Neelands and Goode, 2002).

- Chapter 2 -

34

Furthermore, interest is generated, and a sense of collaboration and group ownership over

the context is achieved. ‘Imagined situations in which a shared understanding of place,

time, characters and other contextual information becomes crucial to the quality of

involvement in the experience’ (Neelands, 1992: 6). In relation to L2 learning, when

employing these conventions, students are learning and communicating in the TL, almost

without realising it. As such, it is a natural and organic way of working in the classroom.

Evidently, the successful creation of the social context also requires the participants to

suspend disbelief and to engage in active make-believe with regard to objects, actions, and

situations - as in the theatre, when entire settings and places are created through only

lighting and the placement of a few props. Students in the classroom and audience

members in the theatre enter into the contract of making believe, a ‘voluntary conspiracy’

as it were (O’Neill, 1995: 45). From my experience, students are more than willing to enter

into the fictional world of the drama, particularly if it is set up and introduced effectively,

made explicit through a sense of place, and time, and if the afore-mentioned conventions

are efficiently used. Fleming (1995: 54-56) cites the importance of giving the students some

input and jurisdiction over the content or theme area in bringing about deep and sincere

engagement with the drama. This ownership over what is transpiring in the classroom

invests power within the students, also an effective motivator (Glasser, 1993).

2.4.2.3 Follow-on effects – spatial arrangements

The active creation of another world, incorporating the concrete arrangement of a physical

reality within the classroom and an active working of the students within the created area,

transforms the traditional arrangement of the language learning classroom. In process

dramas, the physical arrangement of the space within the classroom serves the particular

needs and context of the communicative event and is purposefully matched with the type

of interaction anticipated. This is the ideal approach to setting up a classroom space,

however, unfortunately many foreign language classrooms are still operating with desks in

rows, which is only an appropriate arrangement for formal presentations (Ehrman and

Dörnyei, 1998: 294). This traditional arrangement also reflects an individualistic, teacher-

directed, linear ‘factory-line’ and transmission model of learning – incongruent with the

constructivist and task-based principles underpinning the new LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000)

and the general approach of CLT. Furthermore, desks in rows, with the teacher standing at

the front, creates inequality and inhibits interaction, thereby negatively affecting student

engagement and the learning process (Ellis, 1985).

This is further exacerbated in that a traditional classroom situation severely restricts the

teacher’s ‘action zone’; teachers typically have eye contact and interact with less than half

of the class, and are in close proxemics to perhaps only approximately a quarter of the

- Chapter 2 -

35

class under this arrangement. Due to process drama’s use of teacher-in-role (see section

2.4.3.2 below for an explanation of this term) and to the fact that the teacher is an active

member working alongside the participants in the drama, this ‘action zone’ is transformed,

as are the patterns of proxemics and interaction with students (Richards and Lockhart,

1994: 139). In a research project by Adams and Biddle (in Richards and Lockhart, 1994:

139), it was reported that students located within the teacher’s action zone ‘are likely to

participate more actively in a lesson than students who fall outside the action zone’. As the

quality of this interaction is known to have considerable influence on learning, and as

active participation is crucial to the learning process, those students not within the

teacher’s action zone are disadvantaged (Ellis, 1985). As Hall (in Bowers and Flinders,

1990:77) also found:

The distance, which may range from the “social zone” to the “far phase of the personal zone”, enables eye contact to become an important aspect of participant involvement, thus making students feel that they are personally being engaged. It also introduces into the relationship a sense of friendliness and caring. Standing closer to non-participating students can have the effect of involving them, since they will be drawn into the complex information exchanges that characterize the field of meta-communication – eye contact, changes in rhythm of voice and body movement, and so forth. They are also more likely to be drawn into the verbal communication. If nothing else, reducing social space will engage the student’s attention.

Because the physical space is continually changing and evolving in process dramas, the

teacher’s action zones and her physical relationship to the students changes and evolves. A

more friendly, warm and trusting environment can be created and closer relationships can

be formed with students. This also paves the way in creating more confidence in students

to communicate and ‘perform’ in front of peers and the teacher.

2.4.3 Social interaction using process drama

2.4.3.1 Enrole-ing

Process drama presents a myriad of alternative and ‘authentic’ models of interaction that

cannot be achieved through ordinary TBL and CLT methodology. Actively and jointly

creating the physical and social context of the fictional world, which in itself involves

authentic social interactions with both the teacher and fellow students, is an initial step to

paving the way for more involved and open-ended communicative situations and hence the

acquisition, use and internalisation of a wider variety of language forms. However, students

need to believe in the characters, situations and roles they are playing, if the language

formed and sought after is to be appropriate and focused. ‘To make this imaginary world of

drama meaningful and purposeful, it must have aspects of the real world in it. The central,

real-world component of dramatic situations is human relationships’ (Haseman and

O’Toole, 2000: 3). In order to set up relationships, participants in a drama need to take on

roles that are specific. A specific character role has purpose, status and a particular

- Chapter 2 -

36

attitude, which form the character’s motivation. This is negotiated and becomes clear as

the participants and the teacher collaborate with the others in the drama, within the

different situations.

This notion of playing a character is important and needs to be defined. In process dramas,

students are not ‘pretending’ to be someone else, as in a traditional simulation or role play

sometimes used in FL classrooms, with the consequences and outcomes of the

communicative act being in a vacuum. Instead, they are ‘stepping into someone’s shoes’,

experiencing and negotiating meaning within a particular fictional world that is operating

alongside the real world, paralleling it. In addition, their communicative act and its

outcome has an impact on, and consequences for, the characters and the situations. This

allows for more authentic communication as per Nunan’s (1987) definition cited earlier in

this chapter.

This ‘becoming another’ is powerful because of the ‘dual affect’ (Vygotsky in O’Toole,

1992:98) that occurs: the participant ‘weeps in play as a patient, but revels as a player’

(Bolton, 1984). The participants are standing in another’s shoes – “this is happening to me”

(first affect); and, simultaneously, are conscious of the form - “I am making this happen”

(second affect); thus effectively operating within two worlds, the real and the fictional, at

the same time. The implications for this are that the knowledge that emerges from the

interactional experience played out in the drama is neither just ‘propositional

comprehension nor sensuous apprehension, it is a fusion of both’ (O’Toole, 1992: 98). This

is because the ‘sensuous internalization of meaning which is happening in the first can be

observed, externalized and made cognitively explicit in the second’ (O’Toole, 1992: 98). So

through involvement in process dramas in the L2 classroom, the students are affectively

and cognitively engaged in the communicative situation as the fictional character they are

playing. They are gaining experiential knowledge of what it would be like to be in that

situation, not only as themselves, but as someone from the TC (if that is how the drama has

been set-up). The students therefore, are actively using the TL to cognitively and

affectively comprehend, extend and internalize the communicative situation.

As well as enabling students to take on and experience different viewpoints and emotions

than they normally would not have access to, particularly in the TL, communicating in role

is protective and comforting because the participants are aware that they are not being

themselves, but someone else. In process drama terms, this is called ‘role distance’.

Students can at times be participants in the situation or event and, at other times, can be

observers of the event. Teachers, when leading process dramas, need to be sensitive to

the needs and emotional states of the students and utilize where appropriate various role

distancing techniques. ‘Students often feel more protected and work with more conviction

- Chapter 2 -

37

if they are framed at some distance from the naturalistic form’ (Carroll, 1986: 5). Carroll

provides some examples of these various roles: a participant – “I am in the event”; a guide

– “I show you how it was”; a demonstrator – “I reenact so you can understand”; a figure of

authority – “I am responsible because…”; a recorder – “I am interested in the event because

it occurred”; a reporter – “I can tell you of the event”; a researcher - “I need to know of

the event”; a critic – “I interpret the event for you as an event”; and as an artist - “I

transform the event”. These also resonate with the language as action and language as

reflection functions mentioned earlier in this chapter. These varied and expansive roles can

create a myriad of authentic uses of the TL and can be used to focus on particular functions

and notions as required.

2.4.3.2 ‘Teacher-in-role’ convention

As well as students taking on roles, a distinguishing and unique feature of process drama is

the notion of the teacher also taking on roles. The teacher-in-role convention, initially

developed by Dorothy Heathcote8, immediately breaks down the traditional student-

teacher dynamic and the default mode Initiation-Response-Evaluation sequence, the

dominating teacher-student discourse sequence of a typical FL classroom (Johnson, 1995).

It engenders opportunities for new forms and more authentic ways of communicating with

the teacher. By the teacher taking on a role and offering points of view to the students,

they can be placed in a position to find their own point of view. Playing an ‘other’ can be a

gateway to the issues to be explored and ‘gets rid of the teacher power to tell directly’

(Heathcote, 1984: 164). The teacher’s control of the form and content is also removed –

thus allowing students to construct and formulate their own knowledge and understanding,

and for their own frame of reference to emerge. Traditional power relationships are broken

down and this convention can work as an ‘anti-corrosive’ agent (Heathcote, 1984: 162). It

provides the possibility to ‘get out of the expected teacher system of relating to the class’

(Heathcote, 1984: 162). By playing different roles, the teacher can exploit a variety of

status levels – for example: low status – by seeking information; equal status – by sharing

information; and high status – by demanding information (Department of Education, 1991b).

This opens up a wider repertoire of possible roles for all participants than would normally

occur in a CLT and TBL paradigm and in most FL classrooms.

In addition to these cognitive and inter-relationship benefits, the teacher, when in role,

can actively shape the dramatic moment from within, inject new elements, and create

moments of tension as they would naturally occur in the ‘real world’. Perhaps most

pertinently and usefully to a FL context, the teacher can, in role, model appropriate social

8 A fore-runner and leader in the improvisational drama field from the 70s onwards, particularly in the development of the use of drama as a learning medium; a highly respected teacher, lecturer, and writer in England, the USA and Australia.

- Chapter 2 -

38

behaviours (O’Neill, 1995: 61) and also model the language register and language forms

(Department of Education 1991b), thus providing comprehensible input supported by

appropriate paralinguistic features within a particular context. This convention also assists

in awakening interest in the students. What I have personally experienced when working in

role in the FL classroom is an increased attentiveness from the students to what I am

communicating. It establishes a sense of playfulness, a complicity that I, as the teacher, am

‘in on it’ too, validating the construction of the fictional world. I also believe that it can

help to lessen students’ desire or anxiety to please the teacher, and the inhibitions they

may experience when ‘performing’ in front of the teacher. The teacher, when in role, is no

longer seen as an evaluator or a critic.

2.4.3.3 Group work

Changing the physical arrangement of the space and taking on roles by both teacher and

student have global benefits as stated above. They also have benefits that specifically

relate to and resonate with L2 methodology such as the importance of having a multiplicity

of interactions that require different group settings such as pairs, small groups, and whole

class involvement. Interacting within groups is also a tenet of a CLT approach, the benefits

of group work to FL learning having long been recognised. As Long (1990) specifies, group

work is known to:

1) Increase the quantity of language practice opportunities.

2) Improve the quality of student talk by allowing students to converse at length, privately,

face-to-face – which is more typical of ‘real-life’ conversation; attempt coherent sequences

of conversational turns; and engage in exploratory talk.

3) Help individualize instruction – students can work at their own pace, and can receive

tuition and feedback.

4) Help improve the affective climate in the classroom.

5) Help motivation.

Others have identified further benefits of group work in FL learning. McGroarty (1993:26-

32) summarises the benefits of small group activity, which he says are related to ‘three

areas of major theoretical importance for language development: input, interaction, and

contextualisation of knowledge’. In regards to input, group work leads to ‘greater

complexity of language’ and the ‘creation of natural redundancy’, with ‘appropriate levels

of accuracy’. In relation to interaction, cooperative learning activities generate ‘greater,

more varied practice opportunities’, ‘more opportunities for questions’ and ‘increased

production of appropriate units of language’. Lastly, in the cognitive context, ‘better

contextualisation of linguistic and academic knowledge, and ‘more possibilities for natural

correction’ were experienced as a result of group activity. In addition to these specific

language learning benefits, and on a more global level, group work fosters ‘learner

- Chapter 2 -

39

responsibility and independence, improves motivations and contributes to a feeling of

cooperation and warmth in the class’ (Ur, 1996: 232).

Process drama has clear connections here. As previously demonstrated, its structures

provide multiple opportunities for group work and group processes. Participants within a

drama have to construct their meanings collaboratively; without a group, there is only a

monologue (Wagner, 1998: 25-30). Thus, process drama is based on a cooperative and

collaborative learning paradigm, rather than a competitive one. It is important to keep in

mind also, that the group work in a process drama is all of these things, plus it is embedded

within a specific social context where the members within the group have a specific

fictional role to play within a specific communicative situation. As these roles have been

negotiated and developed, often with the students playing ‘people’ from the TC, the tasks

carried out in group work are more socially appropriate and from my experience, almost

entirely negotiated in the TL. When not using a process drama approach, I have found that

the majority of the interactions amongst group members in group work take place in the

first language, with only the ‘product’ of the group work being in the second language.

2.5 Motivation to communicate

Alongside the importance of the use of more intimate, interpersonal communicative

groupings and interactions, the significance of intrapersonal processes and their impact on

language learning is also clearly identified in both CLT approaches and in the new Years 4

to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000). A key theorist in relation to intrapersonal dynamics and

L2 acquisition was Krashen (1982, 1983), who argued that learners have an ‘affective filter’

which influences their ability to comprehend and communicate in the TL. For example, if a

learner’s affective filter is ‘high’, consisting of negative attitudes towards the target

language and/or the content, and elevated anxiety levels, then the acquisitional process

can be negatively affected. If however the learner’s affective filter is ‘low’, due to a

positive outlook on the target language and/or the content, with an adequate level of self-

confidence and low anxiety levels, then the acquisitional process can be enhanced

(Krashen, 1983). This concept also refers to a learner’s state of ‘readiness’ to receive

input. The dynamic of a learning context has a key influence on ‘affect’. The use of role,

teacher-in-role, and role distance in process drama can contribute to creating a low

affective filter. The joint collaboration in creating the fictional world and characters can

create a positive view on the content. If the student is enjoying the language learning

process, and if the aesthetic features of the language are being fore-grounded, this can

bring about an affirmative relationship with the target language and with the learning

process.

- Chapter 2 -

40

Furthermore, process drama is predicated upon the notion of play and most students

naturally like to play! Play in this context is not trivial and “meant” for the playground, but

is seen rather as a specialised and highly developed form of cognitive activity, bounded by

rules and focused by purpose (O’Toole, 1992: 95-99). Along with the general motivational

benefits of the sense of fun that play can engender, Vygotsky (1978) and Piaget (in Wagner,

1998) both emphasise the importance of play for general cognitive and social development,

and also for language development. Vygotsky’s (1978) concept of the Zone of Proximal

Development (ZPD), for example, is relevant here: as students participate in spontaneous

symbolic play, they take on the personae of ‘others’, putting them into a developmental

level, and a language level, above the actual level determined by what they can already do

or say. Piaget viewed play as being an important form of intellectual activity, where a child

uses make-believe as a pretext for learning. These views are both relevant to using a

process drama approach in a Fl classroom. Bruner (1983) saw the functions of play as

minimising the consequences of one’s actions and providing an excellent opportunity to try

combinations of behaviour that would, under functional pressure, never be tried. By

‘playing’ through process drama’s forms that provide focus, purpose, structure and a

concrete social context, students are affectively engaged and can try out, in a safe

environment, their newly acquired knowledge and make new forms of meaning. In a FL

context, expressions and phrases can be enacted in a ‘true to life’ situation; cultural

understandings can be generated and acquired without the embarrassment or potential risk

of offending a native speaker of the language!

This notion of an affective filter is evidently closely linked to the broader concept of

motivation, one of the main determining factors of success in developing second language

proficiency, as it determines the extent of active personal involvement (Oxford and

Shearin, 1996:121). As stated in Chapter 1, motivation is complicated and involves both

personal and environmental factors, as well as intrinsic and extrinsic sources of motivation

(Woolfolk, 1998). Furthermore, there are different categories of motivation which impact

on an L2 learning context: motivation in general, motivation to communicate and

communicate in the target language, and motivation to learn. There is a wealth of

literature on motivation and ways of improving it, and it is not possible within the

framework of this paper to review all of these. However, if one accepts the notion that

communicating and actively making meaning in the target language is the best way to learn

a language, it would appear that the focus should be on creating motivation to

communicate, and to communicate in the target language. By using a process drama

approach, a teacher can have direct access to the use of a ‘form’ which has excellent

potential to bring about positive feelings or behaviours.

- Chapter 2 -

41

Motivation to communicate often comes from a genuine informational gap, and a sense of

unpredictability in relation to the outcome of the communicative situation. It also comes

from the opportunity to take on diverse roles that are as authentic and dynamic as possible

(Kao and O’Neill, 1998: 11). Traditional classroom role-playing tasks will not create this

kind of motivation as they offer little real choice to students and are essentially predictable

(Di Pietro, 1987). In a true dramatic interaction, however, like those that take place in

process dramas, there is a need to determine, interpret and respond to the kinds of role

being played by others and to cope with any potential interactional ambiguity. This

ambiguity is often a perfect reinforcement of the need to listen (O’Neill, 1995). Process

dramas are also motivating in that the participants are placed in a quite specific

relationship with the action, often on a caring and urgently involved level, ‘because this

brings with it inevitably the responsibility, and, more particularly, the viewpoint which gets

them into effective involvement’ (Heathcote, 1984: 168). Other factors already cited in this

chapter on creating motivation to communicate are the aesthetic forms of drama and its

potential to be engaging; the state of metaxis; and the fact that the context and characters

are not imposed upon the participants, but jointly constructed.

The use of process drama in the L2 classroom is essentially a ‘form seeking feeling’

approach (Delsarte, in Pavis, 1996) to bringing about intrinsic motivation to communicate

and to learn. Thus, by creating a certain way of working in the classroom through different

conventions, positive and cooperative behaviours are more easily developed. It is important

to take into account the feeling, internal processes of students, particularly if the ‘form’ is

not proving to be successful. It is becoming increasingly difficult in L2 teaching to

intrinsically motivate learners. Contemporary students are less inclined to follow orders and

complete a task simply because they have been ordered to; and current L2 tasks are often

unattractive (Carr, 2003). Coercion and extrinsic motivation in the form of ‘rewards’ is also

becoming less and less effective. Glasser’s (1993) ‘Choice theory’ provides a set of

principles concerning motivation and encouraging a desire to carry out and complete ‘work

of quality’. In Glasser’s model, teachers are required to develop a curriculum that relates

to students’ needs, in which they can recognise value. This motivates them to strive for,

and produce, work of excellence or work of quality.

Glasser (1993: 19) points out that:

All human beings have five basic needs: love and belonging, power, freedom, fun, and survival. These are built into our genetic structure, and from birth we must devote all our behaviour to attempt to satisfy them. Quality, therefore, is anything we experience that is consistently satisfying to one or more of these basic needs.

Glasser (1993) further argues that students will work hard for those they care for

(belonging), for those they respect and who respect them (power), for those with whom

they laugh (fun), for those who allow them to think and act for themselves (freedom), and

- Chapter 2 -

42

for those who help them to make their lives secure (survival). He suggests that ‘the best

question to ask to determine what is need-satisfying is: “Can you use it in your life now or

in the foreseeable future?” (Glasser, 1993: 65). Pedagogical activities and their outcomes

must be enjoyable, be useful now or in the foreseeable future, have a practical, aesthetic,

artistic, intellectual or social use, or students won’t make the effort to learn, no matter

how much they are coerced to do so (Glasser, 1993). This also resonates with Krashen’s

(1988) ‘here and now’ principle.

In an FL teaching context where students aren’t living within the TC, they generally aren’t

going to leave the classroom after their lesson and need to re-use the language in real

contexts. Also, the prospect of travelling to the target country is often not an immediate

possibility. It would seem therefore that a process drama structure, through which an

imaginary world is set up where students need the language to negotiate meaning

appropriately in the communicative situation, is a possible alternative medium through

which to reconcile this problem of engagement and through which to create a ‘here and

now’ need. Glasser’s (1993) five basic needs discussed above aren’t necessarily met within

a TBL structure, but can be met through working within a process drama one: Belonging is

achieved through group work and teacher-in-role; power is shared through collaboration

and valuing input from the participants; fun is provided by the entertaining nature of

dramatic play; freedom is attained through the open-ended structure of the communicative

tasks; survival is realized through the modulation of experience through the ‘symbolic

order’ (Abbs, 1987).

In relation to L2 teaching and learning, when the fictional context and the human

relationships and roles are conjointly constructed and authentically negotiated with

interactional communicative situations, learning/practising/acquisition of the target

language can occur on a deeper level than would be the case through the use of superficial

simulations, role play, or other tasks. My own experience of traveling to France, where I

successfully learnt to communicate in the language in a real context and in a heightened

emotional state of being in a foreign place and communicating with strangers, deepened

my internalizing of language structures. I can still remember in what context and with

whom I learnt particular phrases and structures, even though these experiences occurred

more than 10 years ago. In some ways, my own personal experience of process dramas9 has

been similar to my L2 experience in France: by being in the state of metaxis, I vicariously

experienced events and emotions that would normally not come within my sphere of

experience. It is my objective as a teacher to facilitate this mode of learning for my L2

students through process drama.

9 Detailed accounts of these process drama experiences are included Appendix A of Chapter 3.

- Chapter 2 -

43

Finally, as learning a LOTE, in Queensland at least, is compulsory only in years 6, 7 and 8, it

is crucial for LOTE teachers to motivate students to continue their study of a LOTE. By

allowing for living classrooms that are active, fun and stimulating, students will be more

likely to consider the possibility of becoming proficient in a foreign language.

2.6 Task-based L2 learning and process drama

Chapter 1 contained an outline of task-based methodology in an L2 context and how this is

reflected in the Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000) and how it parallels a process

drama structure being episodic. This section of Chapter 2 will revisit the TBL and PD

connection but will focus on language development and language “concerns”.

When I first had the idea of using process drama as a form through which to teach an L2, I

was concerned with the fact that the students may not have an adequate amount of

language or be proficient enough to communicate and interact within the various activities.

On further investigation of the relevant literature, I discovered that this is the whole point

of TBL: the linguistic features and process skills and strategies taught arise from the nature

and requirements of the task, the tasks being bound by an overall theme or content area. In

fact, it is the task which ‘drives the learner’s system forward by engaging acquisitional

processes’ (Long and Crookes in Skehan, 1996). The major argument in support of this

approach is that learners follow their own unique, developmental, acquisitional sequence,

and not a sequence imposed and pre-determined by a teacher (Long, 1988). Another of my

concerns was factoring in ‘focus on form’ components and “grammar lessons”. However, in

TBL methodology, it is through interaction in the target language within the task that

students have the opportunity to build up their own internal grammars or ‘interlanguage’

(Sharwood Smith, 1994).

As stated in Chapter 1, many L2 teachers find this new way of organising learning in the L2

classroom daunting and destabilizing and are unconvinced of its effectiveness. They are

concerned that ‘language learning through tasks may be more haphazard than coherent’

(Shaw, 2002); that they may leave a grammatical structure out, or ‘flood’ the students with

too much information. However, as Lewis (1996: 11) points out, if learners need to learn

large numbers of lexical items and grammar structures, each of which needs to be ‘taught’,

classroom language learning itself would appear to be an impossible project; indeed the

majority of language acquired by the learner must come form sources other than formal

teaching. Several different functions and structures, and a multitude of lexical items, may

be required in order to fulfil the purposes of a communicative task; however, this does not

mean that each particular one needs to be ‘taught’ and ‘mastered’ at each specific

moment. Esther Shaw (2002), syllabus implementation officer for Education Queensland,

provides a logical response to these concerns: ‘teachers are able to choose which functions

- Chapter 2 -

44

to explicitly teach throughout each particular unit, ensuring that overall, and throughout

the course, all required functions for each year level are patently covered at least once’.

Skehan (1998: 132) suggests another strategy, that of using ‘cycles of accountability’ or

‘regular stock-taking’. This enables a balance to be struck between the ‘inevitable freedom

that is necessary for acquisition arising out of communication, and the need to be able to

track progress and develop plans for the future’. This resonates with the learner-centred

approach of all of the QSA (previously Queensland Schools Curriculum Council) junior

syllabi, whereby each individual student tracks their learning and, with the aid of the

teacher, develops learning plans in order to ‘fill in the gaps’, as it were (QSA, 2003).

Evidently, in a task-based, open-ended communicative approach, it is almost impossible to

predict and pre-teach all of the language items that students will need in any given context

or task. This predetermined competence in fact, goes against the principles of TBL. If the

need to communicate is strongly felt, learners will ‘find a way of getting round words or

forms they do not yet know or cannot remember’ (Willis, 1996: 24), hence generating

motivation for being creative and for problem-solving. In this approach, meaning comes

before form - the emphasis being on communication, not on producing language forms

correctly in the first instance. This does not imply that the approach ignores the need for

explicit attention to form. In fact, communicative tasks can be a means of drawing

attention to areas of needed change and/or consolidation (Gass, 1997:131).

If learners are engaged in communicative situations where they discover that they need

certain forms of language or vocabulary in order to communicate or to understand what is

being communicated, this will then provide them with the impetus to seek out that

knowledge. Instead of giving the learners the vocabulary and the linguistic structures and

asking them to ‘learn’ them before giving them the scope or the motivation to use them,

the learning progresses in a way which allows for the introduction and acquisition of the

language as the learners work through the tasks. This process of development through

authentic, communicative stimulus and need is very similar to what happens in the course

of a child’s L1 development, and to what can happen during a series of process drama

episodes.

The belief that a precise focus on a particular language form leads to learning and

automatization of this form no longer carries much credibility in either linguistics or SLA

theory. Learning is recognized to be constrained by internal processes, which are not

always amenable to teacher or student control (Brumfit and Johnson, 1979; Ellis, 1985).

Exposure through comprehensible input, use of the language to do things, and motivation to

process and use the ‘exposure’ are the essential conditions for successful language

acquisition. Activities aimed at promoting awareness of language form, making students

- Chapter 2 -

45

conscious of particular language features and encouraging them to think about them, are

likely to be more beneficial in the long run than form-focused activities aimed at

automating production of a particular item in a decontextualised way (Nunan, 1987).

Thus, in theoretically-informed TBL, the emphasis is on rich and varied exposure to the TL,

multiple stimuli and opportunities for authentic language use, coupled with a contextual

focus on form. This allows language to develop gradually, purposefully and organically, out

of the learner’s own experience. The key question now engaging researchers is how

participants make meaning through the elements of language. It would appear that

effective language learning ‘experiences’ need to be credible, engaging and authentic; as is

the case when a process drama structure is used to establish a social context and social

interaction. I have taught from the sample modules in the Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus

(QSCC, 2000) and discovered that even though they are a definite improvement from a

typical textbook approach, they don’t necessarily provide for ‘authentic’ communicative

situations, for a strong connection with learning, nor for a real desire to communicate in

the FL. The TBL approach and group learning principles begin the journey towards active

learning, but in order for the journey to include believable contexts, roles and social

interactions as it progresses, a re-conceptualisation of a planning framework incorporating

process drama structures is needed.

2.7 Conclusion This chapter has further developed the theoretical framework and rationale for the use of

process drama in the FL classroom, addressing the question of what it can offer to the

creation of more authentic communicative situations. It has examined the main and

supporting roles involved, such as change and paradigmatical shifts, the cognitive and

affective processes of aesthetic engagement, the importance of social contexts and social

interactions as a means to learn a language, the inclusion of the use of the imagination and

taking on of roles, and the notion of communicative tasks being embedded and

contextualised within a specific context, or a ‘fictional world’. All of these elements are

seen as possible means of enhancing motivation and creating a readiness to communicate

and to learn amongst FL students. The curtain is now ready to be raised on the next two

chapters, revealing the responses to the ensuing two research questions: How can process

drama operate effectively in a task-based FL context? What framework needs to be in place

and what modifications need to be made in the planning of a task-based unit of work using

this approach?

- Chapter 3 -

46

- Chapter 3 -

An aside - Telling of the process drama tale

3.1 Introduction

As previously stated, this project’s central research question is ‘How can process drama be

used to create authentic, communicative situations that are intellectually and affectively

engaging in the foreign language classroom?’ The previous two chapters have begun to

address this by providing a theoretical framework and a rationale for the use of process

drama in the FL classroom as well as illustrating the close links it has with TBL and CLT.

This chapter furthers the response to this question by providing an anecdotal account of

what occurred when I implemented a process drama approach in my own L2 classroom. It

demonstrates how this experience reinforced the need I felt to carry out this project and

how it helped very practically in the formulation of the unit and lesson planning framework

which will be outlined in Chapter 4. It also provides a more explicit and cogent description

of what a process drama experience entails and how it operates.

3.2 Recounting of the process drama experience

My initial encounters with the form of process drama occurred in 1995 as an undergraduate

drama student in the Bachelor of Arts (Drama) program at QUT, where I experienced first-

hand the power of process drama to create believable contexts and characters to bring

about enriching learning experiences1. From these, it became evident to me that process

drama allows for learning ‘through imagined experience’ by providing a vehicle for the

exploration of human nature (Neelands, 1992). This is achieved by taking on roles and

adopting different viewpoints within ‘real experiences’, by generating ‘vocal and active

responses’ to fictional situations that are enacted, rather than just “talked about”

(Neelands, 1992: 6). In process dramas, I found that I was using language to make meaning

through and within these ‘enactments’, reflecting the precepts of social interactionist

language learning theories.

Thus, I had an aspiration and a strong motivation to incorporate PD into my L2 teaching.

However, as previously stated, there were no existing L2 process dramas written or L2 PD

handbooks for me to use as a guide to aid in planning for the use of this approach.

Therefore, I took an existing process drama devised by Cecily O’Neill (1995) The Seal Wife

(also in Taylor (ed.), 1995) and taught it to my year 9 French class with several

1 Refer to Appendix A at the conclusion of this chapter for a personal account of these initial two experiences.

- Chapter 3 -

47

modifications and adaptations. As I had participated in this drama as a tertiary student and

also taught it to year 9 students as a drama teacher in an L1 context, I knew it had the

potential to work extremely well. This process drama also aligned well with the new Years

4 to 10 LOTE syllabus, as its topic areas came within several of the ‘fields of human

endeavour’ – personal and community life, leisure and recreation, the natural world and

the imaginative world, and its episodes incorporated three of the four main task areas of

gathering and exchanging information, extending and creating exchanges of information,

evaluating and predicting information (QSCC, 2000: 24).

3.3 Teaching of the Seal Wife process drama in an FL context

3.3.1 Preparing the students

Before beginning the process drama and presenting the pre-text, I spoke to the students

about the nature of the work that we were going to be doing, in particular about the

notions of role and place. I explained that we would take on various characters and

communicate in different contexts, and that, as all the characters were French speakers

with no knowledge or understanding of the English language, it would be “out of place” to

start using or speaking English while “in role”.

3.3.2 Contextualising the topic area

This process drama has as its pre-text a Celtic folk tale centred around a fisherman called

Patrick and a selkie2, a creature that is part-seal and part-human. However, this was easily

re-contextualised, as Bretons are of Celtic origin, Patrick is also a common French first

name, France’s north-western coastline is on the Atlantic where seals are known to

reproduce, and the themes of the tale are universal – relating to family, identity, human

relationships and emotion. Supplementary resources that I had gathered to provide for

comprehensible input, climate setting and building belief were ‘authentic’ and gave the

unit a distinct Breton-French flavour3. The school at which I taught the unit is also situated

on Moreton Bay, so the students have a close relationship with the sea, thus easily relating

the tale to their own life experiences.

3.3.3 Contextualising the tasks – ‘building belief’

As stated in the previous chapter, a premise of process drama is that students will be in

role and communicate in role. Not playing or acting a part, but rather ‘stepping into

someone else’s shoes’, adopting another person’s point of view (Hertzberg, 1998). In order

for this to take place, the students need to believe in the fictional world and in the

inhabitants of that world (Neelands, 1992). The Seal Wife is characterised by its multiple

2 Refer to Appendix B for a copy of the tale in both French and English.

- Chapter 3 -

48

roles (O’Neill, 1995: 86). Throughout the drama, the students assumed the roles of:

community members of the sea-side village; 10 year old students at the local primary

school; the family of Patrick; Patrick and the Seal wife; and the community of seals. The

teacher, or leader of the drama, assumed the roles of: Mayor of the sea-side village judging

the poetry competition; yoga instructor (both of these were my adaptations); teacher at

the local primary school; head of the community of seals. Belief was actively built into the

roles through community yoga sessions, school classes, creating tableaux of the life of

Patrick’s family, holding a community poetry eisteddfod and so on. Belief was built in the

context and the physical world by use of props - blue sheets to create the ocean, yellow

sheets to create the sand, and buckets and shells for example; by sound scaping - sound

effects of the ocean, of seals; by physically transforming the classroom into the community

hall - re-arranging of chairs, an adjudication desk, a banner advertising the competition

etc; and by transforming the high school classroom into a primary school classroom -

students on the floor on cushions for ‘storytelling time’ etc.

3.3.4 Sequencing of episodes

Process dramas work through a series of episodes, which are essentially communicative

tasks, launched by the use of an aesthetically charged ‘pre-text’ that provides a firm base

for the ensuing dramatic encounters (O’Neill, 1995). These episodes are not essentially

within a narrative, linear structure, but are scenic units of significant encounters, that all

help to create and develop the imagined world. The sequencing of the process drama

episodes for the Seal Wife followed O’Neill’s (1995) original sequencing relatively closely.

However, several additional episodes of my own devising were incorporated: community

yoga ‘on the beach’ to sound effects of the beach and pan flutes at the start of each lesson

in order to settle the students, and to establish and then re-establish in each lesson the

sense of community and place; and an additional ‘poetry competition’ episode, held at the

‘local community hall’. The Alliance Française de Brisbane poetry competition was on at

the time, so this became embedded within the unit of work. I also factored in the

appropriate provision of comprehensible input of the target language, and researched and

found suitable resources in the form of French songs, poems and non-fiction books on the

sea that could be incorporated into the episodes. For example, in the school episode, I

included lessons on vocabulary related to the sea, describing the sea, and what one can do

at the sea-side using video footage, Larousse children’s encyclopaedias etc. This was also

done in role with myself as the primary school teacher and the students as seven year old

primary school students.

3 Refer to Appendix C for a list of resources.

- Chapter 3 -

49

There were also episodes from the original Seal Wife that I did not include, notably episode

4, as the language requirements were too great in order for the students to carry out the

episode effectively and too far removed from the other language elements already being

used. This was replaced with another episode I devised with the same objective in mind,

becoming a community, but that had more relevance to the students’ I was teaching at the

time. Table 3.1 below depicts the outline as per O’Neill’s (1995) version in the left column

and my modifications (in italics) for the L2 version in the right column.

Seal Wife process drama episodes

as per Cecily O’Neill (1995)

L1 Context

My additions and revisions

L2 context

Episode 1 – Launching the pre-text.

Teacher narrates folk-tale. Questions are generated.

Episode 1 – Launching the pre-text.

Teacher narrates folk-tale. Questions are generated.

Episode 2 – Transforming the pre-text Groups create a moment from the seven

years Patrick and the Seal wife were together.

Emerging themes – different interpretations of the same event

Episode 2 – Transforming the pre-text Groups create a moment from the seven

years Patrick and the Seal wife were together.

Table for noting down language Touch and talk Emerging themes – different

interpretations of the same event

Episode 3 – Representations Seal wives, Patricks, Children – removed

from each tableaux and contemplated. Can be played around with.

Episode 3 – Representations Seal wives, Patricks, Children – removed

from each tableaux and contemplated. Can be played around with.

Role-on-the-wall for Patrick and la femme-phoque (the seal wife)

Group devising of their house – the rooms for the children etc/ names of the children/ identity cards for parents and for children

Episode 4 – Becoming a community Part 1 – Share your attitudes, thoughts,

rumours about the seal wife. Something you heard, something you saw, something you made up…

Part 2 – Select a word or phrase – whisper. Choral conducting of whispering (imagine seal wife walking through)

Episode 4 – Becoming a community Yoga ‘on the beach’ Poetry competition/family portrait

competition Present poem at town hall, judging and presentation of prizes

- Chapter 3 -

50

Episode 5 –At home/ at school Part 1 – (before this – divide into children

and parent – parents watch) students as a class, teacher as teacher doing a unit of the sea. Homework is to ask parents what they know about the sea.

Part 2 – Children return to class and relate what they know from their parents.

Episode 5 –At home/ At school Whole class as year 7 students doing

a unit on the sea. Look at books on the sea – do mind maps and posters on the sea – make a book.

Then divide class into parent/child – child to ask parent what they know about the sea to help them with their project

Return to ‘class’, and ‘tell’ what the parents have said.

Episode 6 – private dream world Groups enact a dream that Patrick

could/would have and Seal woman Next step – write song, prayer, letter,

prophesy, indictment, poem from perspective of Patrick, the Seal wife, the children, or someone in the sea community

Find the hands game

Episode 6 – private dream world Students listen to ‘Je suis malade’

and ‘Tout’ – and enact the leaving of the mother to the music.

Students write song, letter, prophesy, poem from perspective of Patrick, femme phoque, enfants or someone in the community

Episode 7 – forum theatre Part 1 - What circumstances – children

wanting to know more about their mother Part 2 Forum theatre – Patrick, and 15 year

old daughter. Group decides on setting and circumstance, dialogue and staging

Part 3 – in groups, each participant writes one line of dialogue between father and daughter. Put altogether to create a script – to be staged.

Episode 8 – Universe of other texts

P1 – share forming pieces P2 – 1000 years on. Trace of the original

story is in a folk dance. Groups create folk dance – shared at Annual Anthropology Conference

Episode 9 – return to home Group assumes role of sea community – Our

sister has returned – should we take her in?

Episode 9 – return to home Group assumes role of sea community

– Our sister has returned – should we take her in?

Table 3.1 Outline of episodes for the Seal Wife process drama

- Chapter 3 -

51

Leaving the sequencing of the tasks, or episodes, as they were and not rearranging them

into a specific ‘orientating, enhancing, synthesising’ order, as per the Years 4 to 10 LOTE

syllabus (QSCC, 2000) TBL design, is an important factor. The sequencing of process drama

episodes is usually done to build belief/insert tension; to create a particular situation and

then to develop that for further exploration (Neelands, 1992; O’Neill, 1995). Furthermore,

this sequencing is not always planned and can change and diverge according to the

responses and desires of the students involved. However, in the TBL framework which

underpins the new Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (2000), the sequencing of tasks is set down

and progresses from orientating tasks to enhancing tasks to a synthesising task (O.E.S

structure), providing learners with the progressively assembled elements of language

needed to do the culminating synthesising task. This will be discussed in more depth in

Chapter 4. I am making reference to it now because in the teaching of this unit I followed

the process drama sequencing structure, rather than an ‘easiest to hardest’ language

developmental structure. This did not seem to hamper the students’ learning in any way,

as they were still able to complete the synthesising task successfully.

When I refer to the ‘synthesising task’, I am referring to one of the episodes of the process

drama in which the students are asked to produce a written piece from the point of view of

one of the characters in the story. Process dramas don’t essentially contain the

development of a ‘product’ as the focus is on the process. However, this episode is

embedded within the process drama and was easily turned into an assessment piece which

the students wrote and performed for each other. This aligns with the assessment

philosophy of the new syllabus – that of assessing throughout the units through the tasks.4

3.3.5 Sequencing within the episodes

I was also aware that I would need to provide for pre-task and post-task language phases

amongst the existing process drama episodes given that a lot of the language functions,

notions and vocabulary would be new to the students. This structure in fact mirrors an

O,E,S structure, however, it is encapsulated within each discrete episode. For example, the

pre-task phase is like an orientating and enhancing phase in that it familiarizes students

with the task and with the possible required language, and the task itself is where the

integration of the generated language elements and their communicative use occurs.

The only episode where a pre-task, task, post-task structure was not developed was in the

first – the launching of the pre-text. Here, the pre-task phase was not used. This was done

purposely so as not to spoil the anticipation and tension created through presenting the

pre-text ‘cold’, as it were. Even though the pre-text itself contained high level language, it

4 See Appendix D for the synthesising task sheet and Appendix E for examples of student assessment.

- Chapter 3 -

52

was presented entirely in French and was rendered easily understandable through the use

of gestures, props and sound effects of the sea. I was in role as a storyteller, the students

as children from the French sea-side community (my adaptation). As this particular tale is

‘characterised by its brevity and lack of illuminating detail’ (Taylor, 1995: 16), it inspired

numerous questions. Due to the fact that the students were ‘almost bursting’ to ask them,

yet had not as yet learnt how to in the TL, it was necessary for the episode to be stopped

and a language focus phase implemented, in this case a “mid-task” phase. A ‘how to ask

questions’ structure in the TL was outlined, discussed, and copied into notebooks. The

students and I then went back into role and continued with the task, with the students

asking the questions in the target language.

The task-based structure adopted consisted of launching each communicative frame or

situation in an innovative way, often in role, thus igniting the students’ interest and

establishing characters and a context. Then a phase occurred where, out of role, discussion

was carried out as to what language we were going to need in that situation; vocabulary

was generated, linguistic structures were highlighted. Then we went back into character

and the context and ‘tried them out’. In some of the episodes, the students wanted to have

a planning phase, where they planned together how they were going to do the task before

carrying out the communicative task. This was particularly evident in the episode involving

the mother and child dialogue on the sea. Some of the students would then volunteer, or be

asked, to show or perform how they did the task. These performances would be followed by

a focus on form component, the emphasis being on whether or not meaning was

communicated successfully and appropriately for the context, and if not, what changes

needed to be made. At times, given the particular nature of the episode, a reflective phase

in the L1 was carried out to discuss the meanings that had been generated, what we had

learnt about the characters, the place, their situation. These phases proved necessary in

that they enhanced belief and deepened understanding about the situations, which in turn,

created more authentic language experience.

3.4 Discoveries

3.4.1 The power of role

The power of building belief and working in role was very clear. Firstly, when in role, the

students used only the target language, and if they didn’t know how to say a word or a

phrase they became very inventive. This evidence reinforced Willis’ (1996:24) assertion

that ‘if the need to communicate is strongly felt, learners will find a way of getting round

words or forms they do not yet know or cannot remember’. When I used this approach,

meaning came before form – indeed, the emphasis was on communication, not on producing

language forms correctly in the first instance. This is a central principle of CLT (Nunan,

1998). After the communicative task had been completed, a language focus phase was used

- Chapter 3 -

53

to discuss what language elements had been needed and how the students had made

meaning. The students themselves then requested they do the task again, this time

incorporating the new language elements. As in a true task-based approach, the language

being used and acquired was arising from the needs of the communicative context and the

characters being played within that context.

A specific example of this was provided during the mother/child dialogue on the sea.

Following the students’ first attempt at the dialogue, it became evident that they were still

using language that reflected a peer to peer conversation, rather than a parent to young

child conversation. The students and I had a ‘mid-task’ discussion on how communication

changes given these communicative roles. I also gave them some specific French phrases

often used by mothers when talking to their children, like terms of endearment for

example: ma puce (literally, my flea, figuratively, littlie), mon choux (literally, my

cabbage/pastry puff, figuratively, my darling). Another discovery was the wealth and

richness of the vocabulary generated through and from the tasks and the depth of emotion

in the students’ composing of the language5.

3.4.2 Impact on the development of a framework

As is possible to glean from the outline of the Seal Wife process drama, there are a

multitude of possible language elements and vocabulary required in each episode. In an L1

drama classroom context, this process drama has taken me 3 to 4 weeks to complete. In the

L2 context, after 6 to 7 weeks, only half of the episodes had been developed as can be seen

from the table of episodes above. Evidently, this was because of the fact that the students

essentially didn’t have the level of language needed to carry out the communicative tasks.

The pre-task and language focus phases are therefore crucial in scaffolding the students’

learning and take considerably more time. Also, the students had never studied themes

relating to the sea/family/feelings before, their previous two units having been the

creation of a tour guidebook of the Outback for French tourists, and producing a video and

profile on themselves, their school and their area. Therefore, I came to the conclusion, an

obvious one in retrospect, that in an L2 context, the frames and the scope or possibilities

for the drama need to be narrowed. They cannot be as wide-reaching or expansive as when

working in the L1. Thus, in planning a PD for an L2 context, it is important to keep the

functions and linguistic elements needed fairly tight and interrelated, and match these

appropriately to the dramatic convention and the communicative purpose. This then, of

course, relates back to the objectives of the learning experience, the desired outcomes,

and the language levels of the students.

5 See Appendix E for examples of student work and Appendix F for example of vocabulary

generated.

- Chapter 3 -

54

As this was the first time that most of the students had taken part in a process drama in

either an L1 or L2 context, (two students had been participants in a PD in a L1 context),

they needed to be familiarized with the various conventions, such as tableaux for instance.

What also became evident was the need to teach the students how to negotiate and create

tableaux, or to carry out the other conventions as mentioned in the outline, in the TL.

Phrases such as ‘I’ll go here. How’s that? Who will you be? What scenes can we do?’ were

needed. This also took some time to teach and acquire. However, once these conventions,

and the language required to carry out the conventions, become familiar to the students,

this time factor should become less significant.

3.5 Conclusion This recounted personal experience in the classroom has illustrated more clearly how

process drama can operate in the L2 classroom and addressed the second sub-research

question of ‘How could it operate effectively in a foreign language teaching context?’. In

addition to the discoveries made in relation to the scope of the work and the time factor,

important elements when using a process drama approach in an FL context were highlighted

such as contextualisation of tasks, sequencing of tasks and sequencing within tasks. These

three fundamentals will be further discussed and developed in Chapter 4 in order to

address the third research sub-question: what planning framework needs to be in place in

order to enable more engaging and meaningful communicative situations and interaction?

This experience of working with process drama in the L2 classroom has also reinforced and

supported the theories highlighted in the previous two chapters. For example, the use of

aesthetic forms and aesthetically charged resources enabled the students to work on both

an intellectual and an affective level. As the students were “being” as well as “doing”, the

potential for the exchange of thought and language grew. They were using “real” language

in “as if” settings (Booth, 1998). This is evident in the student samples of work in Appendix

E. In relation to the notion of cultural competence, students were learning about the

Brittany region of France, not as an ‘add-on’ cultural segment at the end of the unit, but

rather as an embedded, integral ‘character’ within the communicative interactions and

situations.

Genuine communication in the classroom was being achieved because, when in role, there

was uneven distribution of information, negotiation of meaning, choice over contribution to

an interaction, and topic nomination (Nunan, 1987: 137). Students were learning through

social interactions within specific social contexts; through experience to match the register

- Chapter 3 -

55

and vocabulary of their speech to the particular requirements of the situation. As Booth

(1998: 68-71) points out, when interacting in role, students are able to explore the social

functions of the language that would not normally arise in the studied language forms of

the traditional classroom. Students in process dramas are not talking about language and

language forms but are using language to learn, to influence, to persuade to interpret; they

are using and developing all of their linguistic resources.

The classroom dynamics were continually being transformed and renewed. This was due to

the fluidity of the classroom set up and the relationship between student and teacher,

student and student, in and out of role. In relation to motivation and motivation to

communicate, all students at all times throughout the tasks were communicating in the

target language within the social interaction and they also completed all written tasks.

Finally, task-based learning principles and the guidelines of the new Years 4 to 10 LOTE

syllabus (QSCC, 2000) were supported and reflected within the process drama episodic

structure, with the inclusion of some modifications.

Throughout this experience of taking an existing process drama and teaching it in an L2

context, I experienced relief that it appeared to be working, amazement at the language

the students were generating, and first-hand practical knowledge of what was working and

how to go about it. These insights gained through having to ‘just do it’ have proven

invaluable to the development of the planning framework. However, this practical

experience also reinforced the need to research more closely lesson and unit planning

frameworks from the two paradigms of L2, TBL pedagogy and process drama, and the desire

to discuss the form with expert process drama practitioners; particularly given that process

dramas in an L2 context will also need to be planned ‘from scratch’. These personal insights

and the planning approaches taken from the literature will be discussed in Chapter 4, along

with the formulation of my planning framework and illustrative examples.

- Chapter 3 -

56

Appendix A - Journal account of first process drama experiences

Abandoned6, devised by Helen Radvan and Lowana Dunn, and led by Helen Radvan was the

first process drama I was exposed to. This process drama was actually written to introduce,

highlight and deepen awareness of the themes and ideas of Bertolt Brecht’s ‘Caucasian

Chalk Circle’. When I was involved in the process drama, I was unaware of this connection.

The stimulus or pre-text was taken from an article in the Courier Mail, which reported that

helpless patients in a Bosnian hospital had been abandoned by their carers, because of the

escalating dangers of the war. Following is an account of what I experienced, written

directly after being involved in the drama.

Context and location: A hospital in a war-torn country

Character Role: The role I played in the drama was a hospital patient, paraplegic from

the neck down and suffering from chronic depression. To build belief and emphasize the

physical disability, I was bound so that it was impossible for me to move.

The dramatic experience: I became deeply enroled in my character and her state of mind

so that I felt absolute despair and depression, and had lost the will to live. I didn’t feel

like eating anything or doing anything. All of my thoughts were negative. As I was bound

and could not move, I experienced an absolute and degrading helplessness. I could not

effectively communicate my basic needs; the hospital staff were unsympathetic to these

anyway. It felt devastating and frustrating.

Learning outcome: Following the drama, I felt a heightened empathy towards those who

cannot fend for themselves, who can’t even scratch if they need to! I also experienced

what it is like to be completely reliant on a carer, and if that carer has no genuine interest

in providing for your needs, whether physically or emotionally, how sad and terrible it is.

This led me to think of my grandmother, who is in an retirement home and is actually

experiencing and living this nightmare daily, except that her experience isn’t a role in a

drama and she can’t unloose her bindings and walk out into the sunlight. It also made me

realize how neglectful I have been towards her. ‘If drama is a mirror, its purpose is not

merely to provide a flattering reflection that confirms our existing understanding. It must

be used as mirrors often are: as a means of seeing ourselves more clearly and allowing us

to begin to correct what is amiss’ (O’Neill, 1995: 152). I now have a strong desire to help

her. It would be an interesting exercise to carry out this process drama with her carers…

6 For an outline of this process drama, see The Journal of the Queensland Association for Drama in Education Inc, ‘QADIE Says – Reviewing past newsletters 1993-1997, Vol. 21, No.1, February 1999.

- Chapter 3 -

57

The second experience with process drama was the Seal Wife devised by Cecily O’Neill7

and led by Helen Radvan.

Context and location: Sea-side, Irish village, once upon a time…

Role: Various – a member of the community, the seal woman, one of Patrick’s and the Seal

woman’s children.

The dramatic experience: This particular drama had a profound effect and created a

strong aesthetic response within me. Following the dream sequence, we were asked to

write either a song, prayer, letter, prophesy, indictment or poem from the perspective of

the fisherman, the seal woman, the children or someone else in the community. These

tasks followed a series of frames in which we played out different roles and situations and

‘lived’ the tale on which the drama is based, first hand. In my case, instead of words

coming into my head, a melody did and I was moved to write a piece of music for violin.

Even though this wasn’t one of the genres, the leader of the drama ‘allowed’ me to do it.

When the responses were created and then shared, the piece of music was played as an

accompaniment. It was a very moving and hauntingly beautiful experience.

Learning outcome: Through this drama, I experienced what it would be like to lose a

parent, to have a multitude of unanswered questions about one’s identity and feelings of

being different, of feeling not ‘at home’. The other revelatory point about this experience

is that I am very rarely moved to write music, yet the experience of this process drama

was so powerful that it led to an impulse to create and transform it into another aesthetic

form. The other participants in the drama also created extremely moving and rich poetry,

prayers, letters and so on.

7 For a full outline of this drama, see Taylor, P. ed (1995) Pre-text and storydrama: the artistry of Cecily O’Neill and David Booth, Brisbane, QLD: NADIE Monograph Series.

- Chapter 3 -

58

Appendix B – Tale of the Seal Wife

Il était une fois, vivait un jeune pêcheur qui s’appellait Patrick

Un jour, il marchait le long de la plage lorsqu’il vit la plus belle femme qu’il n’ait

jamais vue, assise sur un rocher, peignant ses cheveux

Lorsqu’il s’approcha doucement pour la regarder de plus près, elle souleva un vêtement, le

mit sur ses épaules et plongea dans la mer

Elle s’était transformée en phoque

Le jeune pêcheur y retourna le prochain soir et encore, elle peignait ses cheveux, puis elle

s’enroula dans son vêtement et plongea dans la mer

Le prochain soir, il revint, et cette fois-ci, il saisit son vêtement – sa peau de phoque.

Elle perdit toutes ses forces et n’eut qu’à le suivre

Elle devint sa femme, ils virent plusieurs années ensemble et eurent trois enfants

Dans les petites maisons, il n’y a pas beaucoup de cachettes, donc il mit sa peau dans le toit

de chaume. Comme on le sait bien, le chaume doit être remplacé tous les 7 ans

Le chaumeur travaillait sur le toit et jeta par terre le vieux chaume, la peau de phoque

avec.

Les enfants trouvèrent la peau, la ramassèrent, et l’amenèrent à leur mère en voulant

savoir ce que c’était.

Cette nuit, lorsque le mari et les enfants dormirent, elle prit la peau, s’enfuit à la mer et

ne revint plus jamais.

Long ago there lived a young fisherman named Patrick

One day he was walking by the seashore when he saw the most beautiful woman he had ever

seen sitting on a rock, combing her hair

He crept up to watch her, as he did

She picked up a garment, drew it around her body and dived into the sea

She had become a seal

He walked there again the next night and again she combed her hair and covered herself in

the garment and dived into the ocean

He went back again the next night and this time he seized her skin

She was completely powerless and had to follow him

She became his wife, they spent several years together and she bore three children

In a small cottage there are not many places to hide things, so he hid her skin in the

thatching in the roof. As we all know thatching needs to be replaced every seven years

The thatcher was working on the roof and threw down the old thatching and with it her skin

The children found the skin, picked it up and took it to her to ask what it was

That night as the husband and children were sleeping she took the skin and fled to the sea

and never came back again.

- Chapter 3 -

59

Appendix C – Resources

Audio-visual

La Bretagne – J’aime la France series, Editions Atlas

Footage of seals on the Atlantic Coast, ABC, 2002

Visual

Large Poster of Bretagne depicting map, Bretons in traditional costume and other images

from the region.

Audio

Sound effects of the sea – Ocean

Sound effects of the sea coupled with pan flutes – Ocean Whispers

Debussy – La mer (for dream sequence)

Chanson - song

Tout tout, Lara Fabien

Je suis malade, version Lara Fabien

Print – non fiction

Bretagne – Guide Couleurs Delpal, Nathan

La côte d’émeraude – Jean Yves Ruaux, OuestFrance

Guide du jeune robinson à la mer –Nathan

Dans la mer – mon encylo, Larousse

Le monde de la mer – Les jeunes découvreurs, Larrousse

Print – fiction

Poésie - Poetry

Sables Mouvants, Jacques Prévert

Le coquillage, Claude Roy

Comptines et poésies d’eau – www.momes.net/comptineseau.htm

Les contes - Story books

L’arc-en-ciel – le plus beau poisson de tous les océans (The rainbow fish)

Climate setting

Different coloured sheets, shells, buckets and spades.

Banner and announcements regarding competitions.

- Chapter 3 -

60

Appendix D – Task sheet for synthesizing task

WYNNUM NORTH STATE HIGH SCHOOL

ASSESSMENT COVER SHEET Languages Department

Student Name: Roll Group:

Subject Details Subject: French Year: 2002 Semester: 2 Teacher: Ms Marschke Unit: Contes de la mer – la femme-phoque

Conditions You must adhere to the school assessment policy.

This cover sheet must be attached to your assignment. Strand: communication Skill composing Notes/draft checked: Due Date: 6th Dec

Assesment Details

Synthesising Task: You are to write, in French, either a letter, poem or diary entry from the

perspective of either Patrick, the Seal woman, their children, or someone else in the community. You

also have the option of writing a scene of dialogue between either Patrick, the Seal Woman, their

children, members of the sea-side community.

Conditions:

• Class time for discussion

• Own time for writing

• The item must be presented appropriately and authentically

Objective/purpose: You will perform this for the class. Audience: Peers Length: 100-200 words

Criteria: composing criteria on reverse8

Assessment Result: Teacher signature:

Comment:

8 The school at which this unit was taught is not using an outcomes approach when assessing and reporting, hence the use of the criteria sheet.

- Chapter 3 -

61

Composing criteria

Criterion CONVEYING

MEANING A B C D E

Range of

language use

. vocabulary

. structure

. cohesion

The student… * consistently conveys meaning clearly * uses a wide range of vocab & structures * expresses connected thoughts and ideas flexibly

The student… * usually conveys meaning clearly * attempts to use a range of studied vocab & structures * expresses thoughts and ideas effectively

The student… * conveys meaning using familiar studied vocab & structures * attempts to link ideas

The student… * conveys some meaning using familiar vocab & simple structures * uses some simple linking words but meaning is fragmented

The student… * conveys some simple meanings using short, well-rehearsed phrases

Appropriateness

of language use

. register

. grammatical accuracy . sociocultural awareness . relevance to task

* usually modifies register to suit the situation * communicates clearly but some errors may occur * shows some awareness of sociocultural elements * conveys intention & attitude successfully

* generally uses appropriate register * usually communicates clearly but errors occur in more complex language or in attempts at originality * shows some awareness of sociocultural elements * shows some ability to convey intention & attitude

* shows some awareness of register * conveys essential meaning and is reasonably accurate when using a limited range of simple structures

* shows sufficient accuracy to enable some details to be understood

Features of oral

production

. fluency

. pronunciation

. rhythm, stress, intonation

* features are acceptable to a sympathetic background speaker * beautiful, meaningful expression

* features are generally acceptable to a sympathetic background speaker *meaningful expression

* features are generally intelligible to a sympathetic background speaker *adequate expression

* features may be somewhat intelligible to a sympathetic background speaker *lacking in expression

- Chapter 3 -

62

Appendix E – Three examples of student assessment tasks

Qui est ma maman? / Who is my mum ?

Papa, qui est maman? Papa, who is my mum ?

Est-ce qu’elle est une femme de la mer ? Is she a woman of the sea?

Ou est-ce qu’elle est une femme de la

terre ?

Is she a woman of the land?

Est-ce qu’elle joue avec les dauphins ? Does she play with dolphins or

Ou est-ce qu’elle joue avec des loups ? Does she play with wolves?

Est-ce qu’elle nage dans les sept mers Does she swim in the 7 seas or

Ou est-ce qu’elle court dans l’herbe ? Does she run through the grass?

Patricia, ta maman est très belle. Patricia, your mum is very beautiful.

Elle est une femme de la mer. She is a woman of the sea.

Elle joue avec les dauphins She plays with the dolphins and

et nage dans les sept mers. swims in the 7 seas.

Ah, donc ma maman est une femme de la

mer

Mum is a woman of the sea

MAIS BUT

Est-ce qu’elle t’aime ? Does she love you?

Est-ce qu’elle m’aime ? Does she love me?

Est-ce qu’elle est contente dans la vie ? Is she happy in life?

Ou est-ce qu’elle est triste ? Is she sad in life?

Est-ce qu’elle aime ou déteste la vie ? Does she love or hate life?

Patricia, ta maman t’aime. Patricia, your mum loves you.

Elle m’aime aussi. She loves me too.

Elle est triste mais She is sad

Elle aime la vie She loves life

MAIS BUT

Elle cherche quelque chose… She’s searching for something…

Papa, quand est-ce que maman retournera ? Daddy, when will mum come back?

- Chapter 3 -

63

Lettre de la femme-phoque à son âme-sœur de la mer/ Letter from

the Seal wife to her soul mate of the sea

Cher âme-sœur,

Qui aurait pensé qu’un monde avec tellement de choses merveilleuses peuvent me rendre

si triste. Si tu pouvais me voir! J’ai l’air si triste. Je ne peux pas vivre dans cet enfer. Pour

moi, le paradis, c’est la mer. Quand je suis avec Patrick, mon mari, j’ai l’air seule,

déprimée et triste. Patrick est pêcheur. Il est des fois malin, souvent amoureux, de temps

en temps furieux – surtout quand je suis triste.

Tu me manques. J’ai le mal de pays. J’ai envie de la douceur de la mer. Mais j’aime mes

enfants and quand je suis avec mes enfants, je suis contente. Mais, la magique des

animaux me manquent. Les poissons, les dauphins et les dugons étaient mes amis. Flotter

dans les vagues et danser sur le sable me manquent aussi. Maintenant, je danse dans la

main de Patrick et je ne comprends pas pourquoi.

Peux-tu me retrouver et me ramener chez vous, chez moi ? Sinon, je serai coincé dans ce

monde avec Patrick à jamais. Je suis perdu sans mon vêtement. Est-ce que tu sais si je

peux mettre un nouveau vêtement. Patrick a caché le mien. Je ne sais pas où c’est. Est-ce

que je serai un jour libre ?

Trouve-moi. Sauve-moi.

Bisous

La Femme-Phoque

Dear soul mate,

Who would have thought that a world with so many wonderful things could make me so sad.

If you could see me! I look so sad. I can’t live in this hell. For me, paradise, is the sea.

When I’m with Patrick, I am alone, depressed and sad. Patrick is a fisherman. He is at times

crafty, often loving, from time to time furious – particularly when I am sad.

I miss you. I’m homesick. I desire the gentleness of the sea. But I love my children and

when I am with them, I am happy. But I miss the magic of the animals. The fish, the

dolphins, and the dugongs were my friends. I miss floating in the waves and dancing on the

sand too. Now, I dance in the palm of Patrick’s hand and I don’ know why.

Can you come and find me and take me back to your home, to my home? If not, I’ll be stuck

here in this world with Patrick forever. I am lost without my skin. Do you know if I can put

on a new one? Patrick hid mine. I don’t know where it is. Will I be free one day?

Find me! Save me!

Love

The Seal Wife

- Chapter 3 -

64

Conversation entre mère et fille/ Conversation between mother and daughter

Personnages :

La femme phoque – Maman

La fille – Bernadette

M - Bonjour Bernadette! B - Salut maman! …. Maman …. M - Oui chérie …. B - Aujourd’hui, à l’école, Madame Florence nous a demandé de demander a nos

parents ce qu’ils savent sur la mer. Qu’est-ce que tu sais sur la mer, maman? M - La mer est un beau lieu rempli de choses merveilleuses, mystiques, étranges,

et magiques. B - Comme quoi exactement? M - Ben, dans la mer il y a beaucoup d’animaux comme les dauphins enjoués, qui

sautent dans les vagues. B - Ah, oui, les dauphins, ils sont beaux, les dauphins. M - Il y a aussi les récifs de corail. Sur le récif il y a des crustacés, des algues, des

palourdes, des escargots, des étoiles de mer, des crabes, des crevettes, des oursins, des éponges de mer et beaucoup d’espèces de poisons.

B - Oh la la …. il y a vraiment beaucoup d’animaux dans la mer. M - Oui Bernadette il y a des tas d’animaux. Il y a aussi des baleines, des

phoques…, des requins, des tortus, des dugons et beaucoup encore. B - Ahhh … Quelles couleurs sont les coraux ? M - Des coraux sont rouges, bleus, jaunes, oranges, verts, roses, violets – les

couleurs de l’arc-en-ciel. B - Mais comment les coraux ont les différentes couleurs? M - Les poissons prennent une écaille de leur queues de poisson et placent

l’écaille sur les coraux et les couleurs se transmettent. B - C’est vrai, c’est comme de la magie. Moi, je sais quelles activités tu fais à la

mer : marcher, pêcher, plonger, nager et flotter dans les vagues. M - Ahhh … mais il y a aussi la plongée sous-marine ou la plongée au tuba. B - Ahhh … Oui! Maman, tu aimes les phoques. M - Oui! J’adore les phoques. Les phoques sont mon animal favori. B - Pourquoi? M - J’adore les phoques parce que ils sont gentils, mignons, élégants et

intelligents. Aussi je me sens connectée. B - Comment ? Maman ? M - Va jouer dehors maintenant. Tu as bien travaillé, chérie. B - D’accord. Merci maman.

- Chapter 3 -

65

Characters :

The Seal Wife – Mummy

The daughter – Bernadette

M – Hello Bernadette B – Hey Mummy!... Mummy… M – Yes darling B – Today, at school, Ms Florence asked us to ask our parents what they know

about the sea. What do you know about the sea, mummy? M - The sea is a beautiful place full of wonderful, mystical, strange and magical

things B - Like what exactly? M - Well, in the sea, there are lots of animals like joyful dolphins that jump in

the wave. B - Oh, yes, dolphins, they’re beautiful, dolphins. M - There are also coral reefs. On the reef, there are shellfish, algae, clams,

snails, starfish, crabs, prawns, sea urchins, sea sponges and lots of species of fish.

B - Geez, there’s really lots animals in the sea. M - Yes, Bernadette, there’s quite a lot of animals. There’s also whales,

seals…, sharks, turtles, dugongs and still more. B - Ah. What colours are the coral? M - The coral is red, blue, yellow, orange, green, pink and purple – the colours

of the rainbow. B - How come they are all different colours like that? M - The fish take a scale from their tail and place it on the coral and the colour

transferred. B - Really! That’s like magic. I know what activities you can do at the sea:

walking, fishing, diving, swimming, and floating in the waves. M - Ahh, there’s also deep sea diving and snorkeling. B - Ah, yes. Mum, do you like the seals? M - Yes, I adore seals. They’re my favourite animal. B - Why? M - I adore seals because they are nice, cute, elegant and intelligent. Also, I

feel connected to them. B - How? Mum? M - Go and play outside now. You’ve worked well, darling. B - Okay. Thanks mummy

- Chapter 3 -

66

Appendix F – Sample of student workbook vocabulary

on ‘feelings’

le français English

triste

content/e

déprimé/e

effrayé/e

embarrassé/e

honteux/euse

confus/e

seul/e

amoureux/euse

épanoui/e

égoiste

énnervé/e

débordé/e

furieux/euse

en colère

surpris/e

malin/e

déchiré/e

soulagé/e

fier/ière

curieux/euse

fou/folle

sad

happy

depressed

petrified

embarrassed

ashamed

confused

lonely

in love

fulfilled

egotistical

annoyed

overwhelmed

furious

angry

surprised

mischievous

torn

relieved

proud

curious

mad

These were the words generated out of the tableaux episode where students were asked to

describe how they were feeling in role as the character, and the ‘audience’ were asked to

describe how the characters looked like they were feeling.

J’ai l’air… Je suis…

This also led to a grammar explanation depending on whether the role was a masculine one

or a feminine one and the agreement of adjectives.

- Chapter 4 -

67

- Chapter 4 -

Injecting ‘tension of the task1’: Planning for the use of process drama in a second language, task-based

learning context Chapter 4 will specifically address the main research question: that of how to incorporate

process drama in the L2 classroom to create more authentic, communicative situations that

are engaging on both an intellectual and affective level. This connects to the second and

third objective of the study – to formulate a specific framework to facilitate the

implementation of process drama in foreign language classes and to demonstrate how this

can be applied to the devising of a unit of work. As stated in Chapter 1, virtually no

handbooks, guidelines, examples or materials exist for teachers on how to implement

process drama in the L2 classroom. ‘Words into Worlds’ by Kao and O’Neill (1998) does

contain a small chapter on planning a ‘drama-oriented’ second language course, however it

does not explicitly outline how to plan a unit of work, nor does it provide concrete

examples or materials. Furthermore, the general guidelines are not directly related to the

particular context in which Queensland teachers are teaching – that of a task-based,

embedded syllabus. There do exist, however, a number of planning guidelines and

approaches for the use of process drama in an L1 context, as there do for task-based

learning in an L2 context. The aim of this part of the project therefore is to select and

combine elements from these two quite separate planning frameworks in order to create a

foreign language and process drama framework (FlaPd! framework) and then to provide

examples of its use to ‘re-form’ units of work that align with Queensland’s Years 4 to 10

LOTE syllabus (2000). The proposed framework is designed to make its entrance and play its

role at the discrete unit of work and lesson planning stage, within a course overview and an

existing syllabus.

In Chapters 1 and 2 a rationale and a theoretical framework were established, providing a

basis on which to build this proposed FlaPd! approach. Its core component, from which

every other element flows, is the establishing of more ‘authentic’ communicative situations

that are both affectively and intellectually engaging. These communicative situations are

all encapsulated within detailed fictional contexts, involving students playing ‘fleshed out’

characters with communicative purposes within specific social interactions. These notions

were seen ‘in action’ in Chapter 3. This chapter is divided into three sections. Section One

proposes three FlaPd! specific elements to be included at the unit planning stage. Section

Two proposes a FlaPd! model for the sequencing of tasks or ‘episodes’. The chapter

1 Haseman and O’Toole (2000)

- Chapter 4 -

68

concludes with Section Three, which proposes a FlaPd! lesson plan outline for discrete

phases within the tasks themselves.

Section 4.1 – FlaPd! Unit Planning Framework

4.1.1 Introduction

One of the most powerful potential contributions of PD to FL teaching is the collaborative

creation of a fictional world within which the students and the teacher can interact.

Therefore, this element needs to be a key part of the unit planning process. Whichever L2

unit and lesson-planning model is used or preferred, and by whatever means a theme,

topic, or content area is chosen, in a FlaPd! approach the articulation of a specific

educational focus must be included into planning, as well as a fictionalising content

component, and the incorporation of a pre-text. This is, however, an organic process and

may not always evolve in that particular order.

4.1.2 Educational purpose

When planning a process drama unit with a pre-text as the starting point, as with the Seal

Wife drama, the fictional world is already defined and evident. The challenge then is to

decide on the particular thematic and linguistic content that will be focused on2, because,

as stated in Chapter 3, when developing a process drama in an L2 context, the episodes

cannot be as far-reaching, expansive or spontaneous, due to the ‘language barrier’ of the

learners. However, when starting with a theme or topic area within a ‘field of human

endeavour’ (QSCC, 2000), it is necessary to place it within a fictional world, or as Neelands

and Goode (2002) describe it, within a specific area of human experience.3

From my experience, how the content is placed within a fictional world, and how the tasks

are subsequently contextualised, is an organic process and can come about in a variety of

ways. For example, it can arise from the underlying, educational purpose of the unit: how

the unit of work ‘connects’ to the student, the students’ community (Education

Queensland, 2002: 23) and that of the TL community or culture (Kao and O’Neill, 1998).

This overall educational purpose of a unit is in addition to the more L2-specific purpose of

‘communication’. When planning process dramas in an L1 context, a bi-focal purpose is

initially established, in that students are not just learning about the elements of drama and

how to create dramatic meaning, they are also learning about human experience (Fleming,

1995; Morgan and Saxton, 1987; Neelands, 1992; Neelands and Goode, 2002). However, if

2 This process can be negotiated with the students, giving them the power to choose what they would like to explore and communicate about. 3 The emphasis is on the word ‘specific’. The Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000) places modules within fields of human knowledge and endeavour, but this appears to be

- Chapter 4 -

69

one examines the sample modules4 from the new Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000),

the purpose for the module relates only to the cited purposes of communication: to gather

and exchange information; to organize and interpret information; to extend and create

exchanges of information; to evaluate and predict information. These broad purposes of

communication are then more explicitly stated in connection with the purpose of the

synthesizing task for the particular units within that module. For example, the stated

purpose for the Imaginary Creatures middle primary module from the Imaginative world is:

‘Students create and describe imaginary creatures, including their habitat, food

preferences and physical appearance’. There are two units of work within this module,

Crazy Creatures and Monster Museum, the purpose for the latter being ‘to create and

report on a monster’. Seemingly, no explicit educational purpose for a unit of work similar

to that overtly incorporated into process drama planning guidelines is included in the

planning framework in the Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus, or in their sample modules (QSCC,

2000)5.

There is in the sample modules and the planning framework a ‘sociocultural understanding’

component, which in some ways resonates with the notion of an ‘educational’ purpose for

the unit. However, ‘sociocultural understanding’ does not appear to be as far-reaching as

an overall educational purpose. For this same Imaginary Creatures module, the stated

sociocultural understanding is: ‘students become aware of imaginary creatures in stories

from the French culture’ (QSCC cd-rom, 2000). On further investigation of the stated

sociocultural understandings from other sample modules, they too seem to refer to visible

and concrete cultural elements of the TL and the TC. This kind of ‘sociocultural

understanding’ component is not explicitly an element in the FlaPd! planning framework, as

the sociocultural understandings that students develop from operating through a PD

approach are deeper than surface signifiers of culture. Instead, this comes about directly

through the choice of the fictional world and the characters, and indirectly through the

interaction with the TL culture through the communicative situations. The educational

purpose and the contextualisation of the tasks encapsulate this notion and extend it, as can

be seen through the re-formulation of the Monster Museum unit, using a FlaPd! approach.

When I first examined the Imaginary Creatures, Monster Museum unit in 1999, as a possible

one to teach to a year 5 class I had at the time, three things came to mind: firstly, the book

Where the Wild Things Are by Maurice Sendak and the tale of the mythical, medieval,

French monster, ‘Gévaudan’; secondly, two questions, stemming from my training and

more of an organizational, topical tool to ensure a variety of thematic areas are covered and is a broad and general term of reference. 4 The Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC: 2000) comes with a cd-rom resource on which there are sourcebook guidelines and sample modules that sit within the fields of Knowledge and Human Endeavour, and that are appropriate to different age levels. 5 Refer to Appendix A for a copy of the planning proforma from the syllabus.

- Chapter 4 -

70

experience in process drama: “What could be a deeper, more affective purpose, grounded

in the students’ own experience, for this unit, i.e. its educational purpose?” and “How can I

contextualize these tasks to make them more real and authentic for the students?”; thirdly,

a recollection of the existence of two L1 process dramas created by Brisbane-based drama

teachers and lecturers that centred on monsters. Upon further investigation and discussion

with the creators of these dramas, their broader educational purpose - apart from the

‘dramatic’ purpose - became evident. For Jo Wise (telephone conversation, 15th April,

1999), the basic premise for her process drama unit on monsters was to ‘create awareness

by looking at difference, and at how we relate to those who are different’; whether those

different to us can be fully included in our community, or if they should live within their

own community.

For Brad Haseman and Louise Gough, the writers of the other process drama on monsters,

their educational purpose was ‘learning to confront and overcome fears’ (personal

interview with Brad Haseman, 25th March, 1999). Monsters were a metaphor for

new/different/unusual elements encountered in life: Once we become familiar with the

unknown and understand it, our fears are lessened and we can be more open towards it.

When I formulated my planning for this unit, my educational purpose, in addition to the

communicative one as proposed in the module, was to explore how acting “like a monster”

can bring about negative consequences, and how making the right choices can bring about

positive consequences.6 This was inspired by the book Where the Wild Things Are (Max et

les Maximonstres in French) and was particularly pertinent to the ‘difficult’ year 5 class.

4.1.3 Fictionalising content – the fictional world

Explicitly incorporating an educational purpose into a planning framework can pave the way

for a deeper understanding of, and engagement with, the content and the tasks of a unit of

work. As this is also placed within a specific area of human experience by specifying a

fictional world7 that relates both to the students and to the TC, then the understandings

and knowledge constructed can take on a grounded significance; and the language learnt

has the potential to be socially constructed and more appropriate. This is also due to the

follow-on effect of the contextualisation of the tasks within that world. As will be seen,

contextualising tasks within a fictional world in a FlaPd! framework goes a step further than

simply organizing the language learning tasks to lead towards a final synthesizing task, as is

the case with the sample modules in the Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (i.e. writing a report

on a monster, Monster Museum unit, QSCC, 2000); or a topic or theme, as is the case with

most task-based approaches. Willis (1996), whose work on a model of a task-based syllabus

6 I also incorporated elements of Jo Wise’s and Brad Haseman’s educational purposes within the unit as will be shown below. 7 There may be more than one specific fictional world to realize the purposes of the unit – or different contexts within that. This also needs to be specified.

- Chapter 4 -

71

has been influential in L2 pedagogy, gives an example of how different tasks might be used

around the topic of ‘cats’: listing task - list three reasons why people think cats make good

pets; comparing task - compare cats and dogs as pets; problem-solving task - think of three

low budget solutions to the problem of looking after a cat when the family is absent; an

experience sharing or anecdote telling task - share stories about cats (Willis, 1998).

What strikes me about this model, and about the new LOTE syllabus modules (QSCC: 2000),

is that while there is certainly a unifying topic or a definite goal, there is no real fictional

or social context, nor a ‘deeper’ reason to be engaged at a personally significant level in

these tasks. Neither is there an explicit ‘connectedness’ or contextualisation of the tasks to

a specific area of human experience. In a FlaPd! planning framework as previously outlined,

a particular fictional and social context would be incorporated, which would counteract

this. For example, instead of organising tasks around ‘cats’, the students could be enroled

as living together in an orphanage where they have ownership over and emotional

investment in a pet cat that becomes lost. From this, more ‘real’ reasons for engaging in

these tasks would emerge, characters and contexts also arise, and the sequencing and

carrying out of tasks would occur on a more affective and meaningful level. For, as

Donaldson (in Bowell and Heap, 2001) asserts, learning takes place most effectively when it

is contextualised.

As argued previously, how the content is fictionalised is an organic and inspirational process

and is one in which the students can play a key part, giving them ownership over what is to

be transacted in the drama (Haseman, 2003). When deciding on a fictional world or

context, it is necessary to be clear on what the situation is, who is in the situation, when it

is happening, and where it is taking place (Bowell and Heap, 2001; Neelands, 1992;

Neelands and Goode, 2002). To the individuals involved in the activity, the experience

itself may be real, imagined, reported, or historical (Neelands and Goode, 2002: 99), or

even a combination of these. From my experience, I have discovered that there can also be

‘sub’ fictional worlds that can come under the umbrella of the main fictional context as

defined by and through the pre-text. I see these as ‘micro-worlds’ within the unit’s overall

‘macro-world’.

In Table 4.1 below is an outline of how I re-formed the Monster Museum sample unit (QSCC,

2000) using FlaPd! framework components outlined above, by articulating an educative

purpose, by subsequently devising and defining a fictional world, launched by a pre-text,

and by contextualising the tasks within that world.

The particulars of the fictional world of the Maximonstres

What (situation): Monsters escaping from the country of the Maximonstres

- Chapter 4 -

72

Where: Tarn, France (a very ‘mysterious’ looking place with a gorge through which Max

could easily have navigated his boat, and also where the myth of the terrible Gévaudan

comes from – a ferocious animal responsible for killing and eating over 50 people in

medieval times.)

Who: Students – members of the Tarn community, witnesses, police detectives, Max

Teacher – detective in charge of investigation, news reporter

When: Present day

Subsequent contextualising of tasks as related to the fictional world

On the left of the table, are the tasks as per the Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus middle primary

sample module (QSCC, 2000). On the right of the table is my FlaPd! version.

Orientating – Middle Primary module Orientating –FlaPd! unit

Listen to the teacher name parts of the monster and make suggestions for creating a monster collage.

Pre-text 1 - Read the storybook ‘Where the Wild Things Are’ to the students in French. Hold substantive discussion in English on the themes in the book on misbehaving, negative consequences etc., choosing and owning behaviour. Pre-text 2 - News report – “Monsters have escaped”, teacher constructed – outlining how the monsters from the country of Maximonstres in Tarn are roaming the local community. Teacher in-role as police investigator calls a community meeting and has parts of monsters that various people have sighted and together they create a monster collage to depict what one could look like.

Enhancing – Middle Primary module Enhancing – FlaPd! unit

Listen to descriptions of model monster features

Radio interview with Max describing the monsters he saw, students listen and model them out of playdo.

Write a form poem about a monster using descriptive words

Students in the role of Max describe one of the monsters he saw on his journey in a form poem.

Read monster descriptions and paint a mask to match the description.

Discussion in English on why the community do not want the monsters to roam free. Student A - a witness who has seen a monster Student B - a police detective who has to draw the portrait to aid in the investigation. Post portraits on the ‘community noticeboard’ to create awareness.

Classify monsters into families based on common characteristics. Choose a suitable habitat for each family based on this.

As per sample unit, but incorporate exploring of the Tarn region of France on the internet and choosing where in that region each family of Monsters could suitably live.

Make monster menus Make monster menus so members of the community would know what to feed the monster to keep it in good ‘health’.

- Chapter 4 -

73

Describe an imaginary creature from French culture. Write a form based poem on the description

The local newspaper looks back at the Gévaudan era and holds a competition whereby the entries are to draw and describe what the monster may have looked like.

Synthesising – Middle Primary module Synthesising – FlaPd! unit

Create a monster. Prepare a report on the monster including name, appearance, habitat and foods.

Create a monster that has escaped. Prepare a detailed report that will be put in the local newspapers, to aid in finding and understanding the monster, so that it can be returned to its natural habitat – if it so wishes... Table 4.1 Task outline of Monster Museum unit

Table 4.1 clearly demonstrates how an existing sample LOTE syllabus unit and its tasks

(QSCC, 2000) can be placed within a specific area of human experience related both to the

students’ own lives and that of the TL and TC; providing for more ‘real’ reasons to

communicate in the TL and also greater opportunities for developing intercultural

competence. The other point to make here is that because the students are in role as a

French community from a French region, they have to use French when playing out the

situations, as with the Seal Wife unit. This has been one of the most outstanding and

encouraging discoveries when I have used this approach. As most FL teachers know,

motivating students to use the TL, particularly beginners, is usually an arduous task!

It is my observation that students seem to enjoy having a ‘real’ reason for communicating

and doing tasks, particularly boys. Three years after teaching this FlaPd! monster unit, I

met some of my male past-students. They still have the monsters they created and

recounted elements of the learning experiences! These students, through the target

language, constructed another reality and negotiated meaning in an authentic way. An

experience was created through which they could learn about themselves, the TL, and the

TC, and stored in their memory. As Halliday (1975: 9) pointed out, a ‘child learns language

as a system of meanings in functional contexts’; something that a process drama provides

effectively by placing functional contexts within fictional ones.

4.1.4 Pre-text

I have outlined above the importance of incorporating an explicit educational purpose and

of providing a specific fictional world within which to contextualise tasks. I will now discuss

the third essential element to include in a FlaPd! unit planning framework – that of the use

of a pretext. I use the term ‘third’ loosely because these elements are inextricably linked

and do not come about in a linear or numerical way. ‘Pre-text’ is a term coined by Cecily

O’Neill (1993), but is also referred to as ‘source material’ (Neelands and Goode, 2002) and

‘sign’ (Bowel and Heap, 2001). The pre-text may be the springboard or the impetus for a

FlaPd! unit, and can inform how to fictionalise the content and contextualise the tasks. It

isn’t always a tale or a story, as per the Monster Museum unit above or the Seal Wife unit

- Chapter 4 -

74

presented in Chapter 3. A word, a gesture, a location, a story, an article, an idea, an

object, an image, a character or play script are all examples of possible pre-text forms

(O’Neill, 1995). It can be an pre-existing text, as is the case with the Seal Wife and pre-

text 1 of the Monster Museum unit, or a constructed text to suit the needs of a particular

unit, as per the Monster Museum’s second pre-text. As with the fictional world, the pre-

text must be rooted in human experience in order for it to resonate with the students

(Neelands, 1992).

Essentially, the main goal of a pre-text is to initiate the action and provide a firm base for

the process drama. It is more than a ‘stimulus’, in that it goes further than suggesting an

idea for dramatic exploration. It also does more than ‘orientating’ the students as to what

the unit is to be about and introducing new language (QSCC cd-rom, 2000). As well as

serving these important purposes, it defines the nature and limits of the fictional world,

implies roles for the participants, awakens expectations, alights the imagination, and

creates group cohesiveness in anticipation of what is to come (O’Neill, 1995). The

significance of this component to a PD is, therefore, considerable.

Neelands and Goode (2002: 100-101) also argue that the pre-text or source material should:

translate a human experience accurately into terms which can be recognized and understood by the students; represent the experience in an accessible combination of words, images and feelings;… give sufficient information about an experience and engage feelings; speak directly to the group’s current preoccupations; trigger the natural need to make sense of clues given in the source through the construction of stories which flesh out the clues; and create an appropriate background of concerns and feeling amongst the group.

Thus when choosing or creating a pre-text as a starting point to a unit, it needs to have the

power to fulfil these functions effectively. The Seal Wife tale does these beautifully, as

does the book, Max et les Maximonstres.

4.1.5 Conclusion

I have now outlined and discussed the three elements that I believe need to be

incorporated into a unit planning framework in order to allow for the use of process drama

in a L2, TBL teaching context. I have provided examples of how this works and related

these back to the existing literature. In order to operationalise these into a planning

framework proforma, I have placed these extra three elements alongside those set down in

the Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000). I have also adapted the visual organization by

using an organic, spider web format rather than the syllabus’ linear table format. This

reflects more appropriately the proposed planning approach for a FlaPd! unit, in particular,

the absence of specific starting points and consecutive steps to follow and the presence of

a reciprocal and organic flow of the planning elements (see Figure 4.1 below). Figure 4.2

that follows is an example of its use in the formulation of the FlaPd! version of the Seal

Wife drama, providing a further illustration of how this model looks ‘in action’.

- Chapter 4 -

75

Unit title: ‘Synthesising task’: Year level: Length:

Educational focus ‘Communicative purpose’ ‘Field of Knowledge and Human Endeavour’:

Linguistic knowledge:

‘Comprehending’: ‘Composing’:

Fictional context: What: Who:T SS: When: Where:

Pre-text

‘Out

com

es’

- ty

pica

lity

Process skills and strategies:

Figure 4.1 FlaPd! unit planning proforma

- Chapter 4 -

76

Unit: Tales of the Sea –The ‘Seal Wife’ ‘Synthesising Task’: To create a fictional, creative text using the themes of sea, family, and feelings Year level: 9 Length: Semester unit

Educational focus: to create awareness of the complex nature

of human beings, emotions, family relationships.

to understand the connection human beings have to nature – how we relate to the natural world

to develop the imagination, to be alerted to cultural products and creativity related to the world of the sea

Communicative purpose: to gather and exchange

information on the sea to extend and create

exchanges of information on a personal level – families, feelings

‘Field of Knowledge and Human Endeavour’: Personal and Community Life Leisure and Recreation The Natural World The Imaginative World

‘Comprehending’ l 3.1: ss understand gist of longer

passages containing repetitive language and in specific info. that reflects own knowledge and experience.

r 3.2: ss understand main ideas on familiar topics and deduce meaning of some unknown words.

s-c 3.3: ss recognise explicit cultural references

‘Composing’: s3.4: ss initiate and respond to speech in

familiar scenarios assisted by visual cues; substitute language items in patterns to vary questions or statements.

w3.5: ss write linked sentences – personal recount or report following a model

4.5 manipulate known structures and linguistic features to generate an original text, displaying some concept of register.

s-c3.6 : ss use TL to describe some culturally specific behaviours and information

Fictional context: What: family, school and community day

to day life rendered out of the ordinary by the ‘seal-woman’

Who: family members, primary school students, community members

When: some time ago… Where: Brittany

Pre-text: Mythological tale of a selkie whose seal skin is stolen by a fisherman, to whom she is subsequently betrothed. They are together 7 years and have 3 children. The selkie returns to the sea after regaining her skin.

‘Out

com

es’

- ty

pica

lity

Linguistic knowledge: identifying and asking about

the sea and surrounding areas expressing feelings describing people, places,

activities and events in the present

Process skills and strategies: plan for a language task,

rehearse locate information draft and redraft, edit take risks

Figure 4.2 FlaPd! unit planning proforma with example

- Chapter 4 -

77

Section 4. 2 – FlaPd! sequencing framework

4.2.1 Introduction

This section will examine the next stage when developing a FlaPd! approach, which involves

a re-conceptualisation of, and an alternative framework for, the selection and sequencing

of tasks within a L2 unit of work. It also provides a further response to the final two

research sub-questions: What specific knowledge, strategies and structures are required?

How can a unit of work be formulated, based on this approach? This section is of particular

importance when wanting to create a FlaPd! unit ‘from scratch’. The challenge is to

reconcile the needs of the dramatic context in the creation of authentic, believable

communicative contexts and characters with the language learning needs and desired

educational outcomes for the students. For example, in order for process dramas to work,

and for students to believe in the fictional world and in their roles, certain aesthetic forms

and dramatic features8 are required; for students to have an impetus to communicate and

solve a problem or further the action of the drama, there need to be forms of tension. By

the same token, for students to be able to communicate effectively within a situation,

there needs to be a scaffolding and building of language functions and of developing

language proficiency. In a FlaPd! approach therefore, the organization of tasks is more

complex and needs to incorporate both process drama and L2 planning guidelines; using the

Orientating, Enhancing, Synthesising framework proposed by the sample modules in the

Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000) is not sufficient.

As mentioned in the previous chapter, the tasks in the sample modules are selected and

sequenced according to a design that allows for progressive development and use of

defined language functions and notions, in order to eventually complete a pre-designated

synthesizing task. The scaffolding is removed gradually throughout the module. In other

words, the tasks become progressively more challenging, both cognitively and linguistically.

In process dramas, on the other hand, the episodes are devised and sequenced to allow for

a deep, experiential understanding of the topic or theme on which the drama is based

(O’Neill, 1995). Each aesthetic form within the episode has a dramatic purpose and

rationale: to deepen belief, to create tension, to add a new element to the story within the

drama, to allow for reflection and so on (Haseman, 2003). These elements draw the

participants into the drama and the experience, motivating them to take part (Bolton,

1984; Neelands, 1992). These forms, by their very nature, are also inherently

8 These features are named in different ways by different practitioners: conventions (Neelands and Goode, 2002), signs (Heathcote, 1984), strategies (Bowell and Heap, 2001), drama elements (O’Neill, 1995), or specific forms (Haseman, 2003).

- Chapter 4 -

78

communicative or interactive, requiring negotiation and the making of meaning by the

participants. Often, the outcome or final point of the drama is unknown.

Using these ‘dramatic’ purposes to select and sequence tasks, rather than a linguistically

‘easiest-to-hardest’ structure, could seem to disadvantage L2 learners. However, when I

taught the Seal Wife process drama in an L2 context as related in the previous chapter, I

essentially left the episodes as they were; I did not re-conceptualise or re-order them into

an O,E,S structure. Instead, each episode needed to be highly scaffolded with various other

language learning tasks; not pedagogical tasks, but real-life ‘authentic’ tasks that built up

the language needed for the episode. This created a learning process whereby each

individual episode of the Seal Wife ended up reflecting an O,E,S structure. Of further

interest, if the episodes are looked at together as a whole unit of work, they reflect an

O,E,S structure in any case, as the synthesising task was complex, abstract and divergent in

nature and required the prior learning experiences - affectively, cognitively and

linguistically. This is an example of how the two planning philosophies can work together.

In a FlaPd! framework, it is important to keep in mind these two dynamics when selecting

and sequencing activities within a unit of work and to be aware of the other possible

structural components as taken from process dramas. Before articulating which of these

will be included in the FlaPd! framework, I will outline various examples of planning

structures devised by leading process drama practitioners - even though O’Neill (1995)

warns that the process cannot be reduced to a series of predictable episodes, fixed

scenarios or sets of formulae, reminding us that if it is truly improvisatory, it will always

take us by surprise9. Other elements important to the planning of any unit of work in any

discipline are also included, such as resources, time frames and so on.

4.2.2 Process drama sequencing models

The first of the process drama planning models to be illustrated is Haseman’s (2003) model

for sequencing process drama episodes. It consists of five planning elements: ‘structural

component, specific form, rationale, resources and time’. The sequence of the structural

components makes up the plan or the steps for the process drama. These are defined as an

‘interconnected set of activities (specific forms) which taken together provide one section

9 Haseman (unpublished draft article, 2003) has in fact pioneered an alternative, ‘unplanned’ form of PDs. These aren’t led or pre-directed as such, but rather, the structure, development and focus of the drama is decided collectively by the participants after having been exposed to the ‘reservoir’ of aesthetic resources previously gathered by the ‘leader’ of the drama. In an L2 situation, this perhaps could be an appropriate approach to planning with senior or university level students of French, but when working within the Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000), I believe it is important to plan at least an outline of the episodes; keeping in mind that the sequencing is not set in concrete and may need to be changed or adapted at any time.

- Chapter 4 -

79

of the scaffolding of the process drama’ (Haseman, 2003). Climate setting, pre-text,

enrole-ing, building belief, building context, injection of tension, building tension,

resolution, reflection inside the action, reflection outside the action, are all examples of

‘structural elements’ and these are realised through the use of ‘specific forms’10. The

‘rationale’ is used to explicitly articulate the purpose of a ‘specific form’. In order to

operationalise these elements into a planning framework, Haseman (2003) proposes the

following in table 4.2 featured below. I have chosen two examples from his ‘Employment

Drama’ to illustrate each element more clearly.

Table 4.2 Example of Haseman’s (2003) episode planning grid

Neelands and Goode (2002: 114) provide a similar framework to Haseman’s (2003), however

structural components seem to be referred to as ‘categories of action’. These come under

four headings: Context building, Narrative, Poetic, and Reflective. The drama is set off by

the ‘source’ (‘pre-text’) and a particular issue – then the action is framed through the

various conventions (‘specific forms’) that come from the four categories of action. The

choice of a particular convention from a particular category of action is based again on the

needs of the story or drama. This is in order for the episodes to be in the ‘here-and-now’,

which results in the transformation of understandings about the area of experience. The

action is given a particular focus that is reflected upon as a final stage. Within the ‘framing

action through convention’ comes the notion of role and the injection of tension. So in this

model, tension is not seen as a structural component in itself but as an element inherent in

certain conventions: tension can be found in a multiplicity of forms, alongside the more

obvious narrative-action/role-based tensions (Neelands and Goode, 2002: 103-104). For

10 Several of these were described in Chapter 2 and have traditionally been called ‘drama conventions’. ‘Structuring Drama Work, a handbook of available forms in theatre and

- Chapter 4 -

80

example, it can arise from poetic-action conventions through ‘counterpointing the use of

space, sounds, movement, by use of contrast, use of symbols that have ambiguous or

contradictory meanings’ (Neelands and Goode, 2002: 104). I am of the opinion that it is

beneficial to incorporate tension as a structural component, as in Haseman’s (2003) model,

because it facilitates and assures its inclusion, particularly given that the use of tension is a

key element driving the momentum of the drama. Below in Table 4.3 is how I see Neelands

and Goode’s (2002) model in a possible table format. (No specific examples of a unit are

given in this text).

Table 4.3 Example of Neelands and Goode (2002) episode planning model

Bowell and Heap (2001), in their planning model, term the structural components/

categories of action and conventions/forms as ‘strategies’. Their model has a strong

‘learning’ focus. The strategies are chosen and sequenced to ‘maximise the learning

opportunities for the children so that they can make meaning for themselves’ (Bowel and

Heap, 2001: 86). Of importance also is stating explicitly the particulars of the fictional

world. The planning for tension in this model comes from the role and the frame: the key

question when deciding on frame is ‘which viewpoint will the roles have in order to create

tension in the drama’ (Bowell and Heap, 2001: 128-131). They also advise that when

deciding on the frame for the drama to remember that the frame creates the dramatic

tension; the ‘communication function of frame creates collective concern and the

imperative for talk’ (Bowell and Heap, 2001: 128-131).

This notion of ‘frame’, also termed ‘role distance’, was flagged in the affective/intra-

personal dynamic of using process drama in a FL context in Chapter 2. A frame is a

particular point of view, with different purposes. For example, a student can be a

participant – “I am in the event”, or a researcher “I need to know of the event”, or an

artist – “I transform the event” and so on (Carroll, 1986). This also relates to role and its

three characteristics: purpose, status, and attitude (Haseman and O’Toole, 2000). These

notions are important in an L2 context as they help facilitate a certain ‘authenticity’ of

language and establish in the students a sense of ‘register’. The Bowell and Heap (2001)

drama’ by Neelands and Goode (2002) is the definitive reference.

Source: Issue:

Category of action: Convention: Focus:

(e.g. Context building)

(e.g. Collective drawing)

Reflection:

- Chapter 4 -

81

planning grid takes the form below, in Table 4.4. Once again, I have chosen a pertinent

example from this text to illustrate the elements.

Theme/learning area Context – where/when?

Role – who ? Frame - why?

Sign - how?

What makes human beings give up what they know and take a long and difficult journey in the hope of something better in the end?

Victorian London, as gold find in Australia is announced.

Pupils- inhabitants of London who… Teacher’s role - ship’s captain

are discontent with their lives in London.

Broadsheet announcing gold strike and a public meeting, large wall map of route between England and Australia, small map of Australia, gold nugget.

Table 4.4 Example of Bowell and Heap’s (2001:91) episode planning grid

It is interesting to note that in their planning grid, there isn’t a column for the specific

forms or conventions. These are listed under the grid. Below are some examples:

1. Brainstorm the theme 2. Individual still image – moment of contentment with life in London 3. Individual still image – same role – moment of discontentment with life in London. 4. Pair conversations – tell why partner is discontent. 5. Teacher in shadowy role – spreading news of gold strike and meeting in town hall about ship going to Australia – pairs discussing this news.

(Bowell and Heap, 2001:91)

Owens and Barber (2001), in their book ‘Mapping Drama’, don’t necessarily provide specific

planning guidelines, but rather planning focus questions with examples from their dramas.

Notably, they incorporate a rationale column as in Haseman’s (2003) model. Their

structural component, or category of action, is included as a ‘step’. Their emphasis column

reflects at certain times attitude, viewpoint and status – elements of role that are akin to

Bowel and Heap’s (2001) ‘frame’ component, or Neelands and Goode’s (2002) ‘focus’.

Table 4.5 below is an example of Owens and Barber’s (2001) table format with two selected

examples from their drama, Dirty Clothes:

Step Reason Convention Emphasis 14. Set up the scene where, as teacher in role, you try and sell furs to the villagers 15. Teacher in role as the uncle, portrayed as a violent, uncompromising man

To provide another set of perspectives on the situation. To establish the hunter’s power and hold over this community To show how difficult it is to challenge such a powerful figure face to face

Narration, teacher-in-role, overheard conversation Hot seating

Emphasise the fear and dependency the villagers feel… The uncle has a different set of values, respects animals for their strength of purpose…

Table 4.5 Example of Owens and Barber’s (2001:45) episode planning grid

The final planning model I will briefly outline is taken from the recently released The Arts,

Years 1 to 10 Syllabus, drama modules (QSCC, 2002). The sequencing for its process drama

episodes come under the headings – Setting the drama context, building beliefs,

- Chapter 4 -

82

complicating the drama, and resolving the drama. These resonate with Haseman’s (2003)

‘structural components’. Table 4.6 below contains the outline for an Outcomes Level 5

process drama called Race Around the Block.

Phase Details

1. Setting the drama context Students consider how young people are represented in the media and relate these representations to their own lives. They agree to create a documentary of a fictional town called Happy Rock.

2. Building beliefs in the narrative

Family groups are established through role-play. The ‘teenager’ in each family attends a party.

3, Complicating the drama

During the party, some school buildings are vandalised and it is suspected that someone from the party is responsible.

4. Resolving the drama The town of Happy Rock deals with the consequences of the event.

The activities within each phase are then listed along with the related outcomes and how to

gather evidence – as this is from an outcomes-based syllabus. See the remainder of the

table below for examples from phase 2 - Building beliefs in the narrative:

Phase 2 — Building beliefs in the narrative Roles from the previous phase are retained throughout Phase 2. The activities explore the dramatic context from a range of perspectives and allow the students to build belief in both the drama and their roles.

Outcomes Drama activities Gathering evidence

DR 5.1 Students structure dramatic action, both individually and in groups, using elements and conventions appropriate to the selected dramatic form, style and purpose.

DR 5.2 Students present selected roles using performance skills appropriate to the selected dramatic form, style and purpose.

Students: • Continue working in established roles and

family groups. Each group creates an at-home improvisation for Saturday afternoon, when the families are together. In each household, the teenager of the family is trying to convince their parents/carers to let them go out to a party (See Teaching considerations). All groups improvise scenes concurrently until the teacher signals them to freeze.

• Participate in a ‘Tap and talk’ activity. As the teacher taps individuals in each frozen group on the shoulder, they speak aloud their thoughts in role at that moment.

• Present the group improvisation to the class. Playing ‘teenager’ roles withdraw from the group and move to a designated space in the room. This space may represent a particular hangout such as somewhere in the school or the local mall. The ‘teenagers’ roleplay with their mates to let them know what happened in each family and whether they are allowed to go to the party. Role-players enter the scene as they wish, while the remainder of the class observes.

DR 5.1 Assessment technique: • teacher observation

See Teacher resource 1 for demonstrations relating to this outcome. DR 5.2 Assessment technique: • focused analysis

See Teacher resource 1 for demonstrations relating to this outcome.

Table 4.6 Example of planning format for the Arts Years 1 to 10 syllabus (QSCC, 2002)

- Chapter 4 -

83

It can be noted that the rationale for the use of each activity and frame or focus is less

explicit, and not a necessary inclusion in the planning framework or the outline as in the

previous models. This is not essentially a negative aspect. In fact, it is more learner-

centred as it leaves it up to the teacher and participants of the drama to decide what

particular emphasis or slant will be given to the interaction and also what attitude, purpose

or status a role may have. The presence of the outcomes in the left-hand column and the

assessment technique are also features of the Arts Years 1 to 10 Syllabus (QSCC, 2002) as

elaborated by the Queensland Schools Curriculum Council.

4.2.3 FlaPd! Selection and Sequencing Framework

Having briefly reviewed these PD models, I will now identify which of these planning

elements will be incorporated into a FlaPd! framework. I will also relate these back to L2

TBL models and guidelines and, in some cases, reformulate them so that they reflect more

closely a L2 language learning context.

4.2.3.1 Language Learning Experiences

This is one of the most important elements within the FlaPd! framework. As previously

stated, it is akin to the O,E,S phases as per the Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus modules (QSCC,

2000). However, in a FlaPd! framework, these phases take on a more complex nature and

aren’t only related to the building of language skills to achieve the final task. For example,

the orientating phase of the LOTE syllabus modules contains ‘awareness’ tasks that

prepare students for the upcoming learning experiences. In this phase, the context,

purpose, nature and extent of the synthesising task are established and language skills that

may be required are demonstrated and developed by the teacher. In a FlaPd! framework,

this may not always be the case as the synthesising task might need to be kept as a

‘surprise’, or its details and form may not be known in advance. The functions of ‘climate

setting’, launching the ‘pre-text’ and ‘enrole-ing’ may also take place in this phase in a

FlaPd! unit.

In the enhancing phase in the LOTE syllabus modules (QSCC, 2000), tasks are designed to

assist students to develop appropriate language skills in ‘controlled ways’. In a FlaPd!

framework, the tasks in this phase would have another underlying purpose: to build belief

in the context and roles, inject tension, develop the narrative, or allow for poetic or

reflective components. Finally, in the synthesising phase, students are challenged to

generate their own language in novel ways, to achieve a real life purpose, known as the

synthesising task. This would have to remain the same under a FlaPd! framework as it is a

requirement of the syllabus, but this phase would also involve a resolving of the drama, or

- Chapter 4 -

84

a reflective component, which could be factored into the synthesising task. Thus, in a

FlaPd! framework, each section of the drama encapsulates an active-learning experience

that not only involves a phase of language learning but also, particular categories of action.

As such, I have decided to call these components that scaffold the learning, Language

Learning Experiences (LLEs).

4.2.3.2 Specific forms

This element is important in that it articulates the form that the communicative act or

situation will take; in other words, it is the task or episode. In addition to the forms known

to process dramas are the more generic forms of tasks from L2, TBL methodology. It is

important to keep in mind that the episode or task needs to serve both the purpose of

drama and the language learning needs of the students. Typical language learning tasks, as

the re-forming of the Monster Museum unit showed, can be rendered more affectively and

intellectually engaging through contextualising them within the fictional world; giving them

a different slant or frame. Some PD specific forms may be inappropriate for beginner or

low-level learners and may need to be modified or highly scaffolded before their

implementation. Thus, knowledge of task topology and of which elements of a task

maximise or minimise their level of difficulty is important. Skehan (1998) has devised a

table that I have found useful to refer to when selecting a specific form to use in a FlaPd!

unit. It summarises the research findings on some of the main influences on task difficulty.

The second condition in italics produces greater task difficulty:

Table 4.7 Factors influencing task difficulty (Skehan, 1998: 135)

The other point I wish to raise here is that when selecting tasks/specific forms or

synthesising tasks for a FlaPd! framework, it is important to keep in mind the level of

negotiation or interaction involved. One of the limitations, I believe, of the Years 4 to 10

LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000) is that the majority of the tasks in the sample modules have

limited interactional activity, as the following table 4.8 indicates:

- Chapter 4 -

85

Table 4.8 Synthesizing Tasks, Lower Secondary Modules (QSCC, 2000)

- Chapter 4 -

86

As is evident from this grid, all of the synthesising tasks are apparently one-way

communication, with the exception of Anyone for sport? which involves a discussion (QSCC,

2000). The enhancing tasks (not shown) are also mostly one-way tasks. This results in very

little, if any, interactional activity. The interactant relationship is one-sided, with no

requirement to request and modify information, rather only to supply it. Consequently, the

opportunities for feedback and interlanguage modification are jeopardised (Pica, Kanagy,

Falodun, 1993: 9-34). This concern is echoed in findings by Long (1990), who argues that

two-way tasks, rather than one-way tasks generate a greater chance of negotiation of

meaning and produce better quality and more finely tuned input for language development.

The inclusion of more PD specific forms can aid in the provision of more interactional task

types. This leads to the next component in the FlaPd! unit sequencing framework, the

rationale.

4.2.3.3 Rationale

I am including this component in the FlaPd! framework because I believe that as a teacher

it is important to articulate why I am doing a certain activity. This is also useful to

communicate to students and, if required, parents and the school administration. In the

FlaPd! framework, the rationale has two dimensions – affective/dramatic and linguistic.

The former involves articulating the reason behind a particular form being used in relation

to the specific aesthetic effect it will have on the drama and/or the participants. The latter

relates to articulating why the specific form is used to enhance the student’s linguistic

knowledge; as well as, where applicable, an identification of Skehan’s (1998) pedagogical

goals of accuracy, complexity and fluency.

This may seem to go against the principles of the Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000)

where the focus is on pragmatic language competence – achieving core learning outcomes

that maintain a focus on the centrality of communicative functions rather than planning or

teaching for accuracy, fluency or complexity. However, Skehan (1998) provides a

comprehensive argument, backed by research, as to the importance of being conscious of

these goals when choosing and sequencing tasks so that balanced development can occur.

Tasks that generate accuracy are structured and familiar tasks, with a clear time-line.

Complexity is fostered through tasks that require more complex decisions, transformation

of elements, and interpretation; and divergent tasks. Tasks that promote fluency are

unplanned structured tasks and familiar tasks. This also relates back to the learner-centred

approach of the new Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000) and focussing on students’

particular needs.

- Chapter 4 -

87

4.2.3.4 Context (where/when) and characters (who)

This is the element around which the drama revolves and is an integral part of the overall

unit planning framework, as discussed in Section One of this chapter. Evidently, it is also

incorporated into the FlaPd! sequencing framework. This is because there may be multiple

roles or sub-roles within those established by the pre-text, as there may be micro-worlds

within the overall macro-world. It is also included at this level in order to factor in Bowell

and Heap’s (2001) element of frame and Haseman and O’Toole’s (2000) role components of

attitude/purpose/status as needed. Sometimes, the frame, or the attitude/purpose/status,

will be left open for the students to decide; sometimes this dynamic may need to be

defined and limited. This is dependent on what the linguistic purpose and/or dramatic

purpose of the task is and whether or not the task needs to be more controlled.

4.2.3.5 Resources

Use of resources is an inherent element in any planning framework. In a FlaPd! framework,

resources can take the form of signs and aesthetically charged resources, as well as

comprehensible input and culturally-specific language resources. These categories aren’t

mutually exclusive. The importance of this element, particularly that of comprehensible

input in an L2 context, should not be overlooked. Indeed one of the criticisms of Strategic

Interaction, a form very close to process drama (briefly examined in Chapter 1), is the lack

of provision for comprehensible input. This is easily overcome in a FlaPd! approach by

ensuring that students are provided with multiple models of the target language. As was

evident in Chapter 3, the resources I gathered to supplement the Seal Wife unit were not

required in the L1 teaching context, simply because the students didn’t need them.

4.2.3.6 Time

Haseman (2003) acknowledges the importance of setting time-frames for students in

process drama; various TBL writers also advocate setting firm time-lines (QSCC, 2000;

Skehan, 1998; Willis, 1996). The learner-centred approach to the Years 4 to 10 LOTE

syllabus (QSCC, 2000) promotes the notion that each student will require different time-

frames to complete a set task. Either way, the notion of delineating a certain time-frame

within which each episode should be completed is part of the FlaPd! framework.

- Chapter 4 -

88

4.2.3.7 L2 specific elements:

Communicative purpose, possible language features, focus on form

The above sequential planning elements were those taken from PD models, with additions

and reformulations to allow for a language learning perspective. The final three

components of ‘communicative purpose’, ‘possible language features’, and ‘focus on form’

are taken from Years 4 to 10 LOTE Syllabus (QSCC, 2000) planning guidelines and are also

incorporated into the FlaPd! framework. This ensures that there is a balance between the

dramatic needs and the linguistic needs of the learning experience.

4.2.4 Conclusion

In order to operationalise these components into a usable, unit sequencing format, I have

placed them in a table format below - table 4.9. Once again, the outcomes approach of the

LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000) has been retained and incorporated into the FlaPd! framework,

with the second row of the table articulating what the students will be doing

(communicative purpose), and what they will need to know (possible language features). In

that same row is the context and characters of the communicative purpose, signifying its

importance within this approach and the need for it to be a foremost planning component

when devising episodes within an LLE. The first and second rows may remain the same for

several specific forms hence their separation from the ‘specific form’ details. The episode

encapsulated within the specific form is divided into four phases and these will be discussed

in the following section, Section 3, of this chapter. This sequencing framework, containing

examples for each component, can also be found at the end of Section 3 furthering

demonstrating how it can be used to formulate a unit of work.

- Chapter 4 -

89

Language Learning Experiences (LLEs)

Communicative purpose Context and characters Possible language features

What students are going to do: When: Where: Who: Frame:

What they may need to know:

Specific form and rationale Pre - Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode

Aesthetic/Dramatic rationale:

Linguistic rationale:

Resources

Linguistic/Aesthetic:

Time

Cognitive: Linguistic: Affective:

Cognitive Linguistic Affective:

This section represents the different phases that occur in a FlaPd! framework. These are discussed in more detail in the following section of the chapter.

Table 4.9 FlaPd! Episode Sequencing Planning Grid

- Chapter 4 -

90

Section 4.3 – FlaPd! lesson planning framework

4.3.1 Introduction

This section of the chapter will describe and illustrate the FlaPd! approach to lesson

planning. The impetus for also devising a planning framework for individual lessons came

about after the experience of teaching the Seal Wife as discussed in Chapter 3. The simple

three-part structure of pre-task, during task, and post-task needed to be slightly modified

to include a ‘mid-task’ episode where needed. In addition, the purpose of each phase

required adjustments and additions due to the multi-layered, ‘aesthetic’ requirements of a

process drama itself. This section, unlike Section 2 of this chapter which centred on process

drama frameworks, will focus mainly on the L2, TBL lesson frameworks as devised by Long

(1988, 1990), Skehan (1996, 1998), and Willis (1996). I will briefly illustrate these, before

articulating which elements will be chosen, modified and combined with certain process

drama notions in order to devise the FlaPd! lesson planning framework.

4.3.2 Task-based lesson frameworks – FlaPd! lesson framework

Tasks in TBL, L2 methodology are usually broken down into three components, each with

specific purposes. For example, Willis (1996: 39 – 51) proposes a TBL framework consisting

of a ‘pre-task’, a ‘task cycle’ and a ‘language focus’; which is similar to Skehan’s (1996:24)

framework of ‘pre-task’, ‘during task’ and ‘post task’. In Willis’ (1996) framework, the pre-

task provides the introduction to the ‘topic’ or theme, where the topic is explored and

discussed. Skehan (1996) terms this as foregrounding, directing attention to the task topic

and activating relevant knowledge that the learner already possesses, thus having a

‘cognitive’ purpose. This phase also has a ‘linguistic’ purpose, as possible useful words and

phrases are highlighted. Willis (1996) suggests this phase could be carried out in English

which in my opinion, can be useful, particularly if the communicative situation that is being

set up is complicated. In a FlaPd! approach, rather than introducing the theme or topic of

the task, I prefer to re-conceptualise this phase as identifying the communicative purpose

of the task. An affective/dramatic purpose is also incorporated into this phase; having an

‘awakening’/‘attention grabbing’ effect on the students, or a deepening of their

understanding of the situation, or a consolidation of the role they will be playing in the

episode. Thus, in a FlaPd! approach, the pre-task phase has a three-fold purpose:

cognitive, linguistic and affective. It could even consist of a PD specific form, all of its

own, using aesthetically charged resources which leads to the ‘during task’ phase in an

organic and ‘real’ way, rather than a pedagogic “we are going to read or listen to this text

this and then do this task” way.

- Chapter 4 -

91

Following the ‘pre-task’ is the ‘task’. Within the task itself, Willis (1996: 52-65) proposes a

particular task cycle, as table 4.10 indicates below:

Table 4.10 Willis’ (1996:52 ) task cycle

However, Willis’ (1996) cycle is not one that I would incorporate into the FlaPd! framework,

as the planning and report phase is seemingly a presenting of how the students did the task

and not a showing of the communicative interaction itself, as per Skehan’s (1996) model. In

addition, it doesn’t allow for a planning phase prior to the task. Long (1990) and Skehan

(1996) argue for the value of incorporating an explicit ‘planning phase’ before beginning a

task, as planned tasks or planned discourse result in more complex language use and a

wider variety of linguistic constructions than unplanned tasks. Studies have shown that

‘learners produce syntactically more complex language when given planning time than

when performing the same tasks without planning or less time’ (Long, 1990:14).

From my experience, particularly with the Seal Wife drama, the students prefer to plan

together what they may want to say, or write, and will search in the dictionary and their

notebooks for words they don’t know or can’t recall, or refer to the teacher for particular,

culturally specific, language constructions. They may or may not keep to this ‘plan’ and

often, new conversational points will arise on actively engaging in the task, allowing for

spontaneous language use in any case. In the FlaPd! framework, the planning phase is

optional and is incorporated according to the needs of the students or goals of the task. If

an episode does incorporate such a phase, it is possible, as Skehan (1996: 26) suggests, to

add an element of surprise, e.g. additional unknown information, again providing for both

planned and spontaneous language. Interestingly, this is an element already inherent in

process dramas, often effected by the teacher in-role injecting a new element, character

or event into the dramatic situation. Thus, Skehan’s (1996) notion and placement of a

planning phase where needed is incorporated into the Flapd! lesson planning framework as

is his notion of a public showing of the task, rather than Willis’ (1996) notion of publicly

reporting on how the task was transacted.

The performance phase of a task, whether it be a public showing to the whole class, to

another student, or to another group (depending on the nature of the task) has obvious

advantages. As tasks are often open-ended, each interpretation can be different, thus

creating varied and interesting performances. This can also lead to discussions in a FlaPd!

- Chapter 4 -

92

approach on the diverse readings of the communicative situation and the actions of the

characters. Knowing that one is to perform and show others what has been transacted in

the task also creates an incentive to carry out the task appropriately and leads learners to

‘switch attention repeatedly between accuracy and restructuring and fluency’ (Skehan,

1996: 27). However, in Skehan’s (1996) model, the public performance of the task is part of

the ‘post-task’ phase. In the FlaPd! framework, I have included this component but as an

option, and as part of the task phase. This is because in process dramas, a ‘performance’ of

the communicative transaction may not always take place, particularly where the following

episode has been constructed in a way to reveal what has been previously transacted, thus

also being more authentic. For example, in the Seal Wife process drama, one of the

episodes involved students in pairs, where one student plays the parent, the other, the

child. The child, for homework, has to ask their parent what they know about the sea. The

next frame then involves the children in school the next day, recounting to the teacher

what their parent had said. This also has another purpose – that of furthering the action of

the drama so that the participants are aware of how to play out the next episode. Because

episodes or tasks in a process drama don’t operate in a vacuum, as tasks in a TBL

framework often do, more authentic communication is created because there is a genuine

information gap. The students need to hear and understand what has transpired in order to

be able to further the communicative act, or to proceed and interact in the following one.

Furthermore, the recycling of language can happen in a more realistic way, within different

contexts. Having the performance component as part of the task phase itself also renders

the post-task phase as purely a ‘reflective’ phase allowing students to de-brief and de-role

(come out of role and ‘be themselves’ again).

In most L2, TBL frameworks, including that of the Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000),

reflection on the language used to carry out the task and consideration of alternative ways

of expressing meanings is an important component. This ‘focus on form’ requires a

willingness to become involved with the language itself and to direct attention to the areas

of need so that emerging structures can be internalised more effectively (Skehan, 1996).

This is echoed in Willis’ (1996) TBL structure as a separate phase in itself called a ‘language

focus’ phase. Long (1990) and Nunan (1998) in their work on TBL, also advocate the use of

consciousness-raising activities and analysis of language forms that arose out of the task,

and on how meaning was made. This is done by using either a native speaker example of

the same task, or the best student example of the task as the stimulus for analysis and

reflection.

Reflection phases are also a part of PD episodes, but with a bi-focal purpose. One of these

is the discussion and analysis of how dramatic meaning was portrayed through the use of

the elements of drama. When process dramas are used in the context of drama as a subject

- Chapter 4 -

93

in itself, one of the aims is to teach about drama and its elements through doing drama. For

example, the students are given a task, or a dramatic situation to enact, or a creative

presentational piece, and they are taught specific dramatic strategies in conjunction with

this that they are expected to incorporate and manipulate effectively. When they present

their pieces or their improvisations, these skills are discussed and feedback is given on their

use of space, language, status, or their manipulation of tension and how effectively these

elements were utilized to create dramatic meaning. This is akin to the language focus

phase in L2, TBL. The other purpose of a reflective phase in process drama is to ‘unpack’

and make meaning of the theme or topics being explored after vicariously experiencing the

fictional situation, and to generate higher-order thinking and reflection on and through the

process work. ‘The goal of educational drama is to create an experience through which

students may come to understand human interactions, empathize with other people, and

internalise other points of view (Wagner, 1998: 9). This reflection on the meanings

generated also helps the student to de-role, a crucial element in a process drama approach

particularly when enacting sensitive issues.

As previously mentioned, I am including a reflection phase in the FlaPd! lesson framework.

However, rather than this phase focusing only on linguistic elements as in a typical TBL

framework, it would also incorporate a second focus as taken from PDs: students would be

encouraged to learn about and make meaning of their world, engaging in higher-order

thinking processes and reflecting on the discourse and new information generated from

their interactions (Education Queensland, 2002). If the TL level of the students is relatively

basic, this phase can be carried out in English. This ‘additional’ focus is also important

because these reflective discussions can deepen belief in and understanding of the roles,

the situation, and the fictional context (particularly if these are taken from the TC),

resulting in the possibility for more authentic use of the TL in subsequent interactions.

Thus, a ‘reflection phase’ in a FlaPd! lesson framework is two-fold: reflection on the

language itself and how it was used to make meaning, as well as reflection on what has

been discovered about the characters and their situation, through the communicative

transaction. The FlaPd! lesson framework therefore contains three main phases, with a

mid-phase where needed as visually represented in Figure 4.3 below:

Figure 4.3 FlaPd! lesson framework

pre-episode

episode

post-episode

mid-episode

- Chapter 4 -

94

An elaboration of the purposes within in each phase, as previously discussed, is also visually

represented below in Figure 4.4:

Figure 4.4 FlaPd! lesson planning framework with purposes of each phase

As can be seen from Figures 4.3 and 4.4, I have employed the word ‘episode’ for the phases

rather than ‘task’. The word ‘task’ conjures up in my mind the notion of a chore, something

undesirable! Indeed, it is defined in the New Oxford Dictionary of English (1998) as a ‘piece

of work to be done or undertaken’. Its origin is the Latin taxare – to censure, to charge.

There is also the phrase – ‘take someone to task’ – that relates to this concept. The term,

‘episode’, aligns more closely with the philosophy of the proposed approach. In fact, the

definition of ‘episode’ in the New Oxford (1998) is ‘an event or a group of events occurring

as part of a sequence’, coming from the Greek epeisodion, ‘coming in besides’ – ‘epi in

pre-episode

foregrounding of communicative

situation – cognitive purpose

generation of possible language elements – linguistic purpose

+ use of pre-text- climate setting – affective purpose

episode – type of task – specific form-

communicative purpose

post-episode

reflection on how meaning was made using language –

linguistic purpose

+ reflection on what transpired –

cognitive purpose

+ de-roling/de-briefing –

affective purpose

focus on form as required

+ mid-episode phase multi-purpose

as needed

planning performance

- Chapter 4 -

95

addition + eisodo ‘entry’. This is, in fact, how I conceptualise the different episodes within

the ‘Language Learning Experience’: as communicative events that all link together and

take place within a contextualised whole.

In the visual representation of the framework, I have represented the ‘mid-episode’ phase

with dotted lines. These indicate that the mid-episode phase can consist of elements from

the other phases as needed and can happen at any time throughout the episode itself. After

teaching the Seal Wife drama in an L2 context, I found that from time to time the

communicative situation needed to be stopped mid-way. If communication had broken

down for whatever reason, it was necessary to return to pre-episode elements, or even to

jump forward to a reflective phase in the middle of an episode to either clarify linguistic

elements, focus on form, or to de-brief if the communicative situation was not being played

out appropriately.

The two-way arrows reflect the fluid and reciprocal nature of the phases, as in the FlaPd!

unit planning framework. For example, the episode can be enacted, and a post-episode

phase be carried out, and then the episode can be re-enacted by going back to the planning

component or continuing straight to the episode phase itself. This all depends on the nature

of the episode, how well the students carried out the episode, and on the teacher’s

objectives.

Figure 4.4 above also shows possible components that can be incorporated within each

phase of the episode planning framework. An aesthetic or affective purpose is included in

the pre-episode, through the use of climate setting forms and/or a source material. This is

a central and vital component. Just as the pre-text sets up the FlaPd! unit’s fictional world,

the source material sets up the communicative act for each FlaPd! episode or LLE. For the

purposes of planning lessons effectively, I have also placed these elements into a table.

This table was first presented at the end of Section Two as part of the sequencing

framework as it also incorporates planning elements discussed in that section, i.e.

Language Learning Experience, Communicative Purpose, Context and Characters and

Possible Language Elements. It is presented again below but with examples of how it looks

in action using my revised FlaPd! version of the Seal Wife unit, entitled Tales of the Sea.

This unit has further evolved and been modified through the application of the FlaPd!

framework. As such, there are several differences and additions to the version outlined in

Chapter 3. Note that O’Neil’s (1995) original tasks are in inverted commas, while everything

not in inverted commas is of my own devising; and where the core learning outcomes are

being assessed appears in bold, after the description of the task. These were first flagged

at the end of Section 1 in the example of the unit planning framework.

- Chapter 4 -

96

Section 4.4 Tales of the Sea – in Brittany - the Seal Wife – FlaPd! Episode Outline

LLE 1 Orientating- Launching of the fictional world Communicative situation/purpose

Context and characters Possible language elements required

To listen to a mythical tale and to ask questions as prompted by the tale.

When: Present day Where: Classroom Who: Teacher/Students Frame: NA

How to ask questions.

Specific form and rationale

Pre - Episode Episode Mid-episode Post - episode

‘Pre-text – telling a tale’ A: To define the fictional world. L: To provide comprehensible input.

Resources

L: Copy of the tale. A: Sound effects of the sea. P: Hand out of how to ask questions from ‘guide de survie’. Time 1 lesson

C: Explain nature of unit, i.e. process drama/roles etc and of task, i.e. Going to hear a tale set near the sea in Brittany, in French – listen and try to understand it. A: Play sound effects of the sea, have Ss seated in a circle. L: Ss to focus on T’s body language as a strategy to aid in expressing story and in understanding unknown words.

T tells tale. Ss listen. What questions are generated by the tale? → Students proffer questions in TL. These are written on the board.

L: Teach how to ask questions in French; Est-ce que … Qui/Quoi/Quand/Comment etc.

L: Write down new language from the tale in parts of speech; raise awareness of verbs. C, A: Discussion on the underlying meaning and themes of the tale, in English. T relates to Ss that they will decide what the answers are to the questions according to their personal view.

- Chapter 4 -

97

LLE 2 Enhancing: Building belief - the world of Patrick and the Seal Wife/ Building language knowledge

Communicative purpose

Context and characters

Possible language features To describe family members/family relationships/moods and emotions/family events/places.

When: as per tableaux, specific form Who: Ss -(themselves) & members of family/community Where: (classroom) & in Brittany

Family names/rooms in a house, places around the house, at the sea etc /verbs – conjugated in present tense/adjectives for feelings/emotions.

Specific form and rationale Pre - Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode

‘Tableaux’ D: To build belief, to be aware of different representations of characters and events. L: To generate vocab, to recycle previous episodes language. Resources

Tableaux instruction handouts and grid for writing down details. Hand-out of regular verbs and conjugations, and irregular verbs. Ss have vocab from LLE 1. Time

2-3 lessons

C: Instructions – to create three tableaux depicting three moments from the 7 years the Seal Wife and Patrick spent together. NB: Ss can also be objects and elements. - To write down who they are, where they are, when it is, what they are doing and how they are feeling. L: Possible language needed – reminder of verb conjugation in present, of family names, of adjectives for feelings, times of day, how to give a location. A: Remind Ss - group interpretation of how their family life was – the tale doesn’t tell us.

1. Planning: Devise and rehearse tableaux. Write down particulars. 2. Present tableaux to class. Touch’n’talk – Ss tell class who they are, where they are etc if it is not evident.

Revise questions: Où es-tu? , Qu’est-ce que tu fais ? Comment tu te sens ?

C and L: Write a mind map – The World of Patrick and the Seal Wife – as taken from the tableaux – under the headings – activities, places, family details. A: Discussion on what was discovered about their family life, what questions were answered. L: Focus on form Verbs/ conjugation

sheet Dictionary awareness ‘Liar liar’ verb game

- Chapter 4 -

98

Specific form and rationale Pre – Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode ‘Continuum of images’ and

Role on the wall D: To build belief- understand character. L: To describe a person’s feelings, personality. Resources

OHT of outline/ OHT pens time: 1 lesson

A: “Ss who played Patrick line up and represent a version of Patrick”. Repeat for Seal wife. L: Recycling language from previous episode, model a Patrick role-on-the-wall on OHT, based on what we interpreted from the ‘line-up’. In head – what he thinks In heart – what he feels In hand – what he does (a fisherman, husband) etc. Raise awareness to the ‘il/elle’ form of verbs.

Ss do ‘The Seal Wife’ role-on-the wall in a think-pair-share format. Ss volunteer their responses that are written up and discussed.

L: Reminder of accuracy of verb conjugation: Il/Elle pense Il/Elle se sent Il/Elle est… and preposition penser à qqch and reflexive verbs : Quand elle est…, elle se sent…

C: This will help Ss in doing the synthesising task. A : Discussion on what this tells us about people and relationships and the impact on feelings and emotions.

Specific form Pre - Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode

Climate setting Viewing of a section of video on Brittany- Les côtes du nord. D: To build belief. L and C: To generate vocab., to describe a place. Resources

La Bretagne video

Time 1 lesson

Hypothesize what we may see, raise awareness of what to look out for.

Watch video – Ss to jot down colours, places, activities in French if they know the words, in English if they don’t.

Collectively, add these new words to the ‘World of Patrick and the Seal Wife’ mind map under the heading of Bretagne – places, activities, people.

L: Adjectives to agree with noun. C: Establish sense of place – life/environment very different to ours in Australia, their cultural festivals – dating back to Celtic times, what festivals are held here at the Bay etc.

- Chapter 4 -

99

LLE 3 Enhancing – Poetic action/Poetic language Pre-text

Large, teacher constructed poster for upcoming community fête day – three competitions will be held: acrostic poem, performance poetry and family portrait, indicating due dates and judging conditions and criteria. (NB: if possible, pre-arrange an at school excursion day where the culmination of these activities can take place along with crepe making, and students dressed in traditional costume – made from recycled materials.) Communicative purpose – Context and characters

Possible language features

What: To describe a place, to give details about a family, to express a poem, employing use of gesture.

When: time of tale Where: at a small coastal township in Brittany Who: Ss – as primary school students, children of Patrick T – as primary school teacher – Mme Pomme Frame: Primary school Ss are well-behaved and adore their teacher.

Describing natural and built features in Brittany, people, events, families. (Agreement of adjectives)

Specific form and rationale Pre - Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode

Acrostic poem – CLO 3.5, 3.6 A: Poetic / to enrol. L: To recycle vocab generated from video and consolidate function of describing a place using a particular model. Resources

Internet site addresses. Students have their mind maps Handout on agreement and placement of adjectives Time 1 lesson +

Homework time

T in role as primary school teacher – Madame Pomme. Ss in role as 6-year-old primary school students. T displays poster – pre-text. Does a model of an acrostic poem on Bretagne. Defines the structure: Belle est la côte rocheuse Roses sont les rochers Elégantes sont les femmes en costume…

Ss write poem on the computer using their notes and access Brittany sites to illustrate each line with a picture.

T reminds students to edit and check the agreement of adjectives, agreement of verbs.

C, L: Generate discussion on how they found the task – finding words that start with a particular letter etc. A:Ss print out poem and hand into Mme Pomme for submission to fête.

- Chapter 4 -

100

Specific form and rationale Pre – Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode Pictorial representation of family

A: To build belief/en-role. L: To describe family member names – oldest, youngest etc and dates of birth and saint days. Resources

Coloured cardboard and pens List of French names and saint days Find-a-word on family names Computer room

Time 1 lesson – homework

C: In role, inform Ss in role that today they’re going to do their family portrait entry. The portrait needs to be labelled – Voici… and to state Birthday and Saint day. L: Generate vocab for family members – on a detailed level. Revise Birthdays and Saint days. Model format: Voici ma soeur cadette. Son anniversaire est le … A: Out of role - Reflect on how the family would look like given that their mother is part seal…, their social status…, their isolation…

Students do task – some by hand, some on computer in paint shop pro.

Remind students about the nature of possessive pronouns in French…

Remind Ss to complete and hand in on time for judging at fête.

Specific form and rationale Pre - Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode

Performance poetry A: Poetic: to enrol, to build belief. L: To work on pronunciation, prosody, memory and expression.

Resources

Copies of poem Les Sables Mouvant

Time 3 lessons

C: In role, introduce poem – Les Sables Mouvants, par Jacques Prévert – the poem that is to be performed at the fête day. L: Highlight words they know, words that look like English. A: T performs poem for Ss.

Out of role, Ss are given a line each and are to work out meaning. They communicate this to the class. In role, they put two movements to their line and practice it. The poem is performed as a whole class. Students get into groups of four and help each other learn and rehearse the poem – devising movements.

Work on various aspects of pronunciation that are proving to be difficult.

C: Remind Ss that this will be performed as part of the fête day and needs to be learnt off by heart. L: Attend to the use of repetition and simile in the poem – effective poetic strategies that Ss can use in their synthesising tasks. A: Discuss how this poem relates to Patrick and the Seal Wife, and how it has different meanings depending on whether we read the poem as Patrick ‘talking’ or the Seal wife ‘talking’.

- Chapter 4 -

101

Specific form and rationale Pre - Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode

Role-Play - judging A: To distance Ss from their own work. L: To express opinions, to interact socially.

Resources

Judging forms and judging boxes. Room set up as gallery with student work on display and numbered.

Time 1 lesson

C: T in role as town mayor welcomes Ss in role as parents to the ‘gallery’ of family portraits and acrostic poems on display. Explains judging procedure. L: Out of role, generate/revise possible vocab and expressions needed – greetings, introductions, attracting attention (Oh la la, regarde-moi ça!) & expressing ownership (C’est à mon fils) and opinion (Ça c’est vraiment joli, non?). A: Remind students they are in role as parents and are to interact with each other like adults.

Mayor opens door to gallery. Interactions and judging take place.

If Ss are interacting inappropriately, refer them back to the purposes of the task.

C: T in role informs parents that Judging forms will be counted and prizes given at prize giving ceremony. L: Discussion on the entries of other Ss that they saw – any new words they came across; expressions they wanted to use in role as parents but didn’t know how. A: Brief discussion on how it felt being a parent and looking at your child’s work and comparing it to others.

Specific form and rationale Pre - Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode

Role-Play/ Performance A: For Ss to experience a mock poetry competition. L: To perform a poem in front of peers. C: To prepare them for the ‘real’ Alliance française comp.

Resources

Banner announcing poetry comp, room set up as a hall – stage area, seats in rows in two aisles, adjudicator’s desk.

Time 1 lesson

C: T in role as mayor and adjudicator welcomes Ss in role as primary school students to the performance poetry comp L: Remind Ss they are in role and if they’d like to comment amongst themselves on the performances – in French. Generate some vocab for expressing opinions on performance – this time as a 6 year old – difference in register.

T in role opens the competition and calls to the stage the first contestant. Ss recite poem.

C, A : T in role makes known that results of comp to be made known at prize giving ceremony and thanks Ss for their participation. L: Reflection on effect of nerves etc on memory.

- Chapter 4 -

102

Specific form and rationale Pre - Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode

Role Play/ Prize giving ceremony

A: To inject tension. L: To express thanks.

Resources

Certificates and prizes

Time 2 lessons

C, A: T in role as mayor welcomes Ss to prize-giving ceremony. L: Language needed for expressing thanks, addressing the mayor, expressing congratulations. A: Remind Ss they are in role, so only French is to be spoken…

Winners are read out and presented with certificates and prizes. They’re congratulated by their peers.

C, A: Thanks Ss for participation and for Mme Pomme for being such a wonderful teacher producing so many winners in the one class… L: Focus on form – examples taken from the student work for students to analyse – agreement of adjectives, articles and verb conjugation.

Note: These previous three episodes involving the role-plays, if possible, should be done over a day. When I taught this unit, I arranged an in-school

excursion day where students were exempt from normal classes. On the day, the students came in a base costume that reflected those on the video of

a Breton festival and added to this the special hats etc made out of doilies and other recycled materials that morning. The French room and

surrounding areas were set up in a festive manner with the student work displayed, and the drama room booked and set up as the town hall. The home

economics room had also been booked and crêpes were cooked for lunch. The prize giving ceremony took place after this. If this cannot be arranged,

each role-play or event can happen within different lesson times in the one week as indicated in the ‘time’ box.

- Chapter 4 -

103

LLE 4 Enhancing – building tension, enrole-ing/ building language Communicative purpose – Context and characters

Possible language features

What: To identify and ask about the sea, to describe the sea.

When: daytime, ‘tale’ time Where: at school and at home Who: children and parents (Seal wife family) Frame: Ss choice

Asking questions about the sea, describing the sea and its flora and fauna, responding to information, describing a sea animal – its diet, its way of eating, moving through water, physical characteristics, how it reproduces.

Specific form and rationale Pre - Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode

Mind map A: To create awareness on significance of sea to our lives. L: To generate vocabulary, recycle vocabulary.

Resources

OHT and pens

Time 1 lesson

C: T in role as Mme Pomme announces to Ss in role as primary school Ss the new unit of study this term – The Sea. A: Play some warm-up games using sea themes and vocab. (See misc)

L: T and Ss generate a mind-map on humans’ connection to the sea under the headings – play/ work/arts- films,books,songs,poetry

A: Our connection to the sea/the Bretons’ connection to the sea/Patrick, the Seal Wife’s connection to the sea C: Homework – find out info on Jacques Cousteau

- Chapter 4 -

104

Specific form and rationale Pre - Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode Identity card on an animal

in the sea – CLO 3.4 A: To build belief in role L: To describe in detail a sea animal – to have language needed to carry out the next episode

Resources

The Rainbow Fish big book in French Larrousse encyclopaedias on the sea. Internet sites list Proforma for identity card posted electronically for Ss to access from computer room. Time 1 lesson

C: Ask Ss what they found out about Jacques Cousteau – discovery about what is in the sea. Leading to our focus on natural world of under the sea. Start by reading – ‘The Rainbow Fish’ in French. L: Ss identify the names of the sea animals and others that aren’t in the storybook and these are written up. Ss identify the body parts of sea animals and these are written down in their books. C: T informs Ss - task is to create a class book on animals of the sea. In pairs, Ss research a sea animal and write an identity card on it. T models this with seals using page of info. from Larrouse children’s encyclopaedias. Basic structure to follow is highlighted for each category. Son alimentation : La phoque mange…/ Sa manière de bouger dans l’eau : La phoque utilise les nageoires/ Ses caractéristiques physiques : La phoque mésure/pèse etc

Ss get into pairs and choose animal. Ss are given the layout and information. They also access internet sites. And type up identity card with pertinent pictures.

Remind Ss to conjugate verbs – in third person. Edit their work.

C: Students print out ID card. T collates into book. L: Remind students of the importance of being grammatically accurate… A: Ask students which of the characteristics of the seal the seal wife’s children may have inherited…

- Chapter 4 -

105

Specific form and rationale Pre - Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode

‘Role-Play’ - on sea - CLO3.4

A: To en-role, naturalistic encounter, Ss free to explore their own ideas and responses. L: To exchange information on the sea, using a specific register and rapport.

Resources

Ss have their notes from prior LLEs and booklet on the sea.

Time 2 lessons

C: T in role as Mme Pomme distributes booklets and Ss peruse. Gives ‘homework’ task: to ask their parents what they know about the sea. L: Generate language needed and resources they have – questions, the booklets on the sea. Language for parent/child relationship – i.e. ma puce, mon choux etc. A: Remind Ss of roles – parent and child – what kind of rapport they may have, how the Seal wife may feel about talking about the sea, what she may or may not reveal...

Planning: students in pairs decide on role and plan the dialogue. Ss then act out role-play to themselves. T circulates. T asks for volunteers to perform their dialogue.

T reminds Ss that the child can also tell the parent what they know from the booklet. T gives students language for responding: vraiment! oh la la! je sais ça déjà ! etc.

C: T en-roles Ss as class members again and asks for them to report back what their parents had said. L: Discussion out of role on how it’s different to have a dialogue on a topic and the exchange of information – rather than just giving information; requirement of different expressions A: Identification of different ways of relating – parent/child in the dialogues – some had a good rapport, some not. Why could this be?

Specific form and rationale Pre - Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode

Reading a diary entry CLO 3.2

A: To be aware of the inner life of the eldest daughter. L: Comprehensible input, structure and model of a diary entry.

Resources

Copies of entry

Time 1 lesson

C: T shows Ss page of a diary of the eldest daughter was found on the beach with words smudged by the water. Ss are to read and work out meaning and suggest possible words. L: Work out what type of word is missing – based on the meaning, work out what word could have been there. Also, raise awareness of writing style of a diary entry.

Ss do the task. Remind students to properly conjugate verbs, agree adjectives etc.

C: Ss volunteer their answers. L: Inform Ss they can use this as a model for their synthesising task. A: Through the entry’s tone, does the daughter seem happy or unhappy?

- Chapter 4 -

106

Specific form and rationale Pre - Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode Dream sequence A: To deepen tension, inner life of the characters L: To use language poetically, in fragments, to recycle

Resources

Drama room Music Sheets – blue and yellow

Time 1 lesson

C: T explains that in 2 large groups Ss are to create a dream sequence – one group – Patrick’s dream; the other group – the Seal Wife’s dream. L: Ss are to use the TL to create atmosphere and mood, and sound. T gives an example. A: Explain to Ss that this helps them to understand the character and their emotions.

Ss prepare the dream sequence. Ss perform for each other.

C: Alert Ss to the next task – the synthesising task. L: Use of language to create mood. A: De-brief on what was portrayed in the sequences.

Misc games/ extra activities to use throughout the enhancing LLEs where needed

Fruit salad game with appropriate vocab; – Starboard game using characters and places from the pre-text; clumps and emotions; body part to body part; ‘liar liar’; find-a-words and crosswords on emotions, verbs, the sea; yoga

- Chapter 4 -

107

LLE 5 Synthesising - Revision and Reflection

Communicative purpose – Context and characters

Possible language features

What: To express current emotional state, life state, event, activity in a personalised and poetic way.

When: tale time Where: Brittany Who: Ss choice Frame: Ss choice

As per previous episodes depending on what the Ss want to write.

Specific form and rationale Pre - Episode Episode Mid- episode Post - episode

Writing in role - Diary entry/ Poem/letter – CLO 4.5

A: To reflect on one of the characters L: To express, in role, how they are feeling, what they are doing, what their life is like at the present time. Resources

Teacher and student examples Handout on hints, things to remember Task sheet (appendix in Chapter 3) Time:

2 lessons, teacher consultation and home time.

C: Distribute task sheet to Ss. Explain that this is to synthesize everything in the unit. L: Review journal entry. Ask students to identify the elements and demonstrate how this model can be modified. Show Ss example of poem and of letter from past students. A: Remind Ss they are writing ‘in role’.

Ss individually reflect and decide upon who, when, where and what form their writing will take. Ss begin the task in class, consulting with the T.

Remind students to conjugate verbs, agree adjectives and use the right personal pronoun!! To write it in the here and now – i.e. in the present.

Students hand in their work and it is assessed and returned. Ss correct their work where needed. This is shared amongst the class members. A: Discussion in English on what could become of the family without the Seal Wife and what could become of the Seal Wife once she is back in the sea.

Note: O’Neil’s (1995) process drama doesn’t end at this point. However, the episodes that follow, as can be seen in Chapter 3, contain language

functions and communicative demands of a Beyond level 6 Outcomes level (QSCC, 2000). As such, if one wanted to incorporate the proceeding

episodes, I would suggest that it would be more appropriate to implement this unit at the end of year 10, rather than year 9.

- Chapter 4 -

108

4.5 Conclusion This chapter has addressed the central research question of this project: how can process

drama be used in the L2 classroom to create more authentic, communicative situations that

are engaging on both an intellectual and affective level? It has also fulfilled the second and

third objective of the study – to formulate a specific framework with which to implement

process drama and to demonstrate how this can be applied to a unit of work. This FlaPd!

approach’s planning framework was presented in three sections: the first, a framework to

aid in overall unit planning; the second, a framework to assist in selecting and sequencing

of tasks in a FlaPd! approach; the third, a framework for reconceptualizing and planning the

discrete phases within particular episodes. Examples from two units of work – the Monster

Museum and the Seal Wife were devised to illustrate how the framework can be used to

plan for more authentic and communicative learning experiences.

This three-fold FlaPd! framework represents the culmination of readings of the literature on

aesthetic education and process drama, L2 learning theories and methodology, the new

Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000), and personal experience as a student, and also as

a teacher, of both Drama and LOTE. It has been formulated and presented as a planning

tool to enable a process drama approach to take place within a second language learning

context, subsequently enabling more authentic, interactive and communicative situations

through which students can endeavour to achieve and demonstrate their language learning

outcomes.

- Chapter 4 -

109

Appendix A SAMPLE PRO FORMA Developing a new unit (QSCC, 2000)

YEAR LEVEL: FIELD: MODULE:

CORE LEARNING OUTCOMES:

PURPOSE:

SOCIOCULTURAL UNDERSTANDING:

TEACHING CONSIDERATIONS:

Orientating task/s Prior learnings Language features Resources

Set the context by linking with prior learning and introducing the intention of this module.

What do students already know with respect to language and structure?

What specific language will be modelled in this task?

List resources.

Enhancing tasks Language features Focus on form Resources

1. These tasks model and develop 2. the language required to carry 3. out the synthesising task. 4. 5. etc.

What specific language will students produce in these tasks?

What specific language — for example language functions and grammar do students need to practise in order to carry out the tasks? Which process skills and strategies can be used?

List resources. Include equipment and materials as well as language resources.

Synthesising task/s Language features Outcomes Resources

These tasks reflect the purpose of the module and require students to use the language in a creative and purposeful way.

What specific language will students use for the task?

How will students compose and comprehend language?

List resources.

ASSESSMENT: Mark with an asterisk those tasks that could provide information about how

students comprehend and compose language.

© The State of Queensland (The Office of the Queensland School Curriculum Council) 2000

© The State of Queensland (The Office of the Queensland School Curriculum Council) 2000

- Chapter 5 -

110

- Chapter 5 -

Resolution and Reflection

5.1 Summary

The main objective of this research project was to find an answer to the question: ‘How

can process drama be used to create more authentic, communicative situations in the

foreign language classroom, that are intellectually and affectively engaging?’ This question

initially came to mind 5 years ago, during my first year experience as a teacher of Drama

and of a LOTE in a primary school context: witnessing the engaged and energised students

in my drama classes communicating spontaneously in a range of roles, and wanting to

create this same dynamic in my LOTE classes. I intuitively felt that PD had the potential to

be used in a FL teaching context however, I was uncertain about how to implement it

effectively. Furthermore, the mandated program and textbook for primary LOTE at the

time, ‘Stage A/B French’ (Department of Education, 1991a), did not connect well with a PD

approach as it was not task-based, nor very ‘communicative’. However, the following year,

several sample modules from the new Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000) were

disseminated for trial in schools. When I saw the Monster Museum module, ideas

immediately came to mind of how process drama techniques could be used to teach this

unit. So, I ‘took the plunge’ and re-formed and taught the Monster Museum unit as was

outlined in Chapter 4. This unit had very successful language outcomes for the students and

for their level of involvement and enthusiasm in class. However, I still had a desire to

properly research the form, support its use with relevant literature, formally articulate

what I was trying to achieve, and how it could be done.

This aspiration had to be postponed, as following these 18 months of primary teaching

experience, I went to France on a scholarship as an English ‘assistante’ for a year. During

this time, I was still able to incorporate drama into my teaching but only in the form of

discrete drama games and role-plays as an adjunct to the students’ learning experiences in

their regular English as a Foreign Language classes. On returning to a LOTE and Drama

teaching position in Queensland, this time in a secondary context, and on familiarising

myself with the newly released Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC: 2000), I became further

convinced that PD had the potential to be used as an effective approach to FL teaching and

decided to undertake this research project. Its result is a unit and lesson planning

framework entitled FlaPd!, formulated with the objective of enabling more engaging and

more meaningful communicative situations to take place in the FL classroom.

- Chapter 5 -

111

The research framework I used in order to achieve this was Allwright’s 4 stage, Exploratory

Teaching model, with modifications by Özdeniz (1996). Prior to the stages proper, was the

preparatory stage which was discussed in Chapter 1. This involved the identification of the

problem situation and the difficulty of setting up meaningful, authentic communicative

situations that are engaging on both an intellectual/cognitive level and an

emotional/feelings level, particularly when operating under conventional foreign language

teaching strategies and resources. Stage A of the model was also examined in Chapter 1.

This involved identifying the ‘innovatory puzzle’, planning for the use of process drama in a

FL context; and outlining what was to be explored and the objective behind the

exploration, the formulation of a lesson and unit planning framework. In addition, this

stage involved a review of existing knowledge about the innovation and of how it relates to

current practice, i.e. how process drama works through the use of the ‘aesthetic’ and what

might be its possible connection with L2 task-based methodology and the new Years 4 to 10

LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000). Key language learning theories and the historical development

and progression of language teaching methods were also reviewed.

The theories and methodologies most relevant to this project, such as social interactionist

language learning theories and communicative language teaching, were then further

developed in the literature review in Chapter 2. This chapter reviewed, linked and

synthesised the fields of aesthetic education with communicative language teaching, and

process drama with task-based learning methodology. References were also made to

changes in education, to the recently released Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000)

and the Years 1 to 10 Arts syllabus (QSCC, 2003), and to the key role of inter and intra-

personal dynamics in relation to learner motivation.

Stage B of the ‘Exploratory Teaching’ model (Allwright in Özdeniz, 1996), identifying ways

of implementing the innovation, was presented in Chapters 3 and 4. In Chapter 3, I

recounted what occurred when I implemented PD in the FL classroom prior to beginning this

research project, as well as other significant experiences I had with this particular form of

drama. These demonstrated more cogently what process drama is and how it operates.

Samples of student work were included in this chapter, as well as an outline of the Seal

Wife unit and its modifications. This was followed by a discussion of what I discovered

through the experience and how this impacted on the development of the unit and lesson

planning framework.

The FlaPd! planning framework was introduced in detail in Chapter 4. Prior to its

formulation and presentation, I reviewed a variety of existing process drama approaches

and unit design frameworks as it was also from these that I drew inspiration. In relation to

- Chapter 5 -

112

the L2 teaching context, these were the current Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000),

and TBL guidelines and frameworks from Willis (1996), Long (1990), Skehan (1996) and

Nunan (1998). In relation to PD, these were planning guidelines devised by Bowell and Heap

(2001), Haseman (2003), Neelands and Goode (2002), Owens and Barber, (2002) and O’Neill

(1995).

Thus, the FlaPd! framework was formulated from various elements from these different

models and from insights gained from my own personal teaching and learning experiences.

It was presented in three main sections: 1) a unit planning framework, 2) an episode

sequencing framework, 3) a lesson planning framework. Examples of how the framework

can be used to adapt and re-formulate existing units were provided to illustrate more

clearly the nature of the innovation.

5.2 Conclusions Now that the FlaPd! unit and lesson planning framework has been developed and is

operational, the next challenge is to use it to devise original units of work and to test and

analyse not only its effectiveness as a planning tool, but also its effectiveness in terms of

improving learning outcomes for FL students. This would then complete the final phase of

Stage B and Stage C of the ‘Exploratory Teaching’ model (Allwright in Özdeniz, 1996). I

have begun devising original units and testing their effectiveness on an informal ‘school’

level. This has provided early and positive indications of how a FlaPd! approach can benefit

students and improve language learning outcomes.

Throughout the duration of this research project, I have been working full-time as a Drama

and French teacher, firstly at a Brisbane metropolitan private school and then for the past

18 months at an Education Queensland secondary school. In this current position, it was my

responsibility to write a new years 8 to 10 LOTE program based on the new Years 4 to 10

LOTE syllabus (QSCC, 2000). Even though my FlaPd! framework had not yet been fully

developed, I was able to use parts of it in devising some of the units of work for the new

program. For example, I developed a year 8 FlaPd! unit involving a ‘language conference’.

The pre-text is a press release I invented that warns of the imminent possibility of English

becoming the one, ‘world language’. This sets up the fictional context for a language

conference organized by ‘Sophie Nicolas’ (teacher-in-role) who issues invitations to

delegates from francophone countries around the world (students-in-role) to attend in

order to discuss the situation and the possible implications for Francophones and speakers

of a LOTE. In order to build belief, the students choose a francophone country they are

interested in, research it, and develop an identity for themselves as a citizen of that

country. They all then attend ‘the conference’, held in ‘Paris’, introduce each other and

their country, and devise slogans and design posters on the importance of retaining

- Chapter 5 -

113

languages in general and of preserving the French language in particular. Throughout the

unit, substantive discussions are held in English on the political and social implications of

French colonialism, the power of language and how it can be used as a ‘weapon’, and the

language/culture connection.

Another FlaPd! unit I devised for a year 9 class involves putting on a puppet play for the

local, feeder primary school students studying French. The teacher is ‘in-role’ as a master

marionette maker and the students as ‘marionettistes’ from France. The fictional context is

the French marionette theatre troupe putting on a play based on a French fairytale that

they are going to tour. Last year, the students chose Cendrillon (Cinderella). The unit

involves the students learning to make the fully articulated puppets, and endowing them

with certain qualities and character traits; adapting the story, rehearsing and directing

their scenes; making sets, costumes and programs. This culminates in ‘touring’ the play to

the primary schools where after the performance has taken place, the primary school

students meet and introduce themselves to the ‘marionettistes’ and their marionettes.

These activities are all done in the TL.

On viewing these and other units written for and implemented in the junior program and

how well they were working in the classroom, the school’s Deputy Principal suggested that

it be entered into Education Queensland’s Showcase awards for 2003. These annual awards

recognize excellence in teaching and in improving educational outcomes for students. A

submission was put together and entered into the competition and it won the Brisbane

metropolitan area award, ‘educational excellence in a large secondary school’ category.

(Refer to Appendix A for relevant parts of the submission.)

In relation to the FlaPd! framework allowing for more authentic and communicative

situations in the L2 classroom, I would argue from the two unit examples from Chapters 3

and 4 and those units outlined above that this is certainly the case. If one examines the

Years 4 to 10 LOTE syllabus units (QSCC, 2000) and the various commercial text-book units

of work and compares them with the FlaPd! units, the communicative situations are more

interactive and ‘real’. My L2 students are more engaged and active in the classroom and

more motivated as a result. A key indicator of this is the improvement in retention rates in

the study of LOTE at the school. For example, over the past 5 years in a school of

approximately 650 students where French is the only LOTE, the maximum number of

students in the composite year 11 and 12 class was 7. The year prior to my being appointed

at the school saw the year 10 class of 2 students being combined with the senior class so

that they could continue with the subject. Within 18 months of my position in the school

and the implementation of the new junior program of FlaPd! units, there are now 26

- Chapter 5 -

114

students in the subject in year 9, and 21 students in year 10. An additional French teacher

has subsequently been employed at the school in order to cover the classes.

As stated in Chapter 1, another aim of carrying out this research was to devise an approach,

and unit and lesson planning framework that could be shared with other FL teachers so that

they might then be encouraged to work with this approach themselves. However, for this to

occur, more than a FlaPd! planning framework is required. The findings of this research and

the nature of this approach need to be presented at language teacher conferences and

published in language teaching journals. Then, teachers interested in this way of working in

the classroom and with a desire to incorporate it into their teaching would also need to

attend in-services on the approach. Depending on the teachers’ familiarity with and prior

knowledge of drama, the in-services may need to involve active, teacher participation in a

process drama, video footage of a process drama being used in a FL context with students,

or direct teacher observation of it in the classroom. Familiarization with process drama

references such as those I have cited throughout this paper, scaffolded unit and lesson

planning workshops, and the provision of other factors that will be outlined in the next

section of this chapter would also need to be included.

5.3 Recommendations

5.3.1 Implementation of the FlaPd! framework in the FL classroom

In order for a FlaPd! approach to work in a FL classroom, certain elements need to be

considered and provided for. Firstly, the resources. A FlaPd! teacher’s resources cannot

only consist of texts and pages of exercises. In order to help create a fictional world

successfully, props, sounds effects, costume items, paper, pens, and realia are needed.

This also correlates with the latest trend in resources in FL teaching – the use of a real

item, such as a real métro map and not just a picture of it from a textbook. If one cannot

access any realia, it is possible to make it. For example, I am currently doing a Scavenger

Hunt to Paris, a FlaPd! revised version of the sample module of the same name from the

lower secondary sample modules (QSCC, 2000). I wanted to simulate the plane trip to Paris

(this task is not in the original module), so I re-created, from an old plane ticket of mine, a

class set of AirFrance plane tickets and menus in Microsoft Word and printed them in colour

onto card; took in a red scarf and wore an ‘air hostess’-like outfit to school the day of the

trip; ‘trained’ 2 higher-level students as air hostesses and also gave them matching scarves;

used masking tape on the floor to mark out the corridors, doors of the plane etc; and

rearranged the chairs to resemble the formation in an airplane etc. These resources and

the teacher ‘in-role’ and in costume, help to create the ‘experience’, making it more ‘real’

for the students.

- Chapter 5 -

115

The next important element to reconsider is the use of the classroom space, or indeed

other possible spaces around the school. It is important to be able to set-up language

learning experiences according to the needs of the fictional world and of the various

episodes. My students and I are continually moving desks and chairs around, taking them

out of the room, putting them in different formations, and using them for different

purposes. I sit on the floor with the students in a circle, I interact with them in role, in

costume. Some teachers may not be used to working with students in this way. Indeed,

students may not be used to working in a FL classroom in this way, which brings me to the

third element, attitudes. All stakeholders in the learning process, students, parents,

colleagues, administration, need to be made aware of, and understand the rationale

behind, the new approach. This has already been the case for the new Years 4 to 10 LOTE

syllabus (QSCC, 2000) in itself: making students and parents aware that there won’t be a

textbook used; that students will be engaged in tasks that will constitute their assessment

rather than ‘exams’; that their learning will be articulated in terms of ‘outcomes’. A FlaPd!

approach won’t appeal to all teachers and may not appeal to all students. Some students

may prefer a more academic, traditional approach, particularly analytical learners or

learners who are shy and introverted. A FlaPd! approach may not suit a particular school;

it may not be congruent with how the administration of the school views learning. Like any

innovation or new approach, these issues need to be reflected upon, debated and

considered.

The final and most important element is the function of the teacher, or rather how a

teacher functions or prefers to function in the classroom. A FlaPd! teacher needs to be able

to work artistically, to let go of the reins, to ‘draw out’ knowledge rather than instruct,

and to play. For as Eisner (1994: 162) points out:

artistry is important because teachers who function artistically in the classroom not only provide children with important sources of artistic experience, but they also provide a climate that welcomes exploration and risk-taking and cultivates the disposition to play… To be able to play with ideas is to feel free to throw them into new combinations, to experiment, and even to “fail”. It is to be able to deliteralize perception so that fantasy, metaphor, and constructive foolishness may emerge.

I believe this way of functioning as a teacher is important for every subject taught at

school; but it becomes crucial when teaching a foreign language through process

drama.

5.3.2 Possible applications of the FlaPd! Framework in Senior

Even though this project has focused on the use of drama in a LOTE, middle years of

schooling context, it also has the potential to be used effectively in a senior secondary

- Chapter 5 -

116

context. Two out of four units in my year 11 program are FlaPd! units. Feedback on an

informal level from the students indicates that they enjoy learning in this way and their

results from these units have either improved or remained at the same level. Even though

the senior syllabus is not a task-based one, it still centres on functions and notions and its

planning is focused around themes (BSSS, 2001). As such, implementing a process drama

approach is still possible. For example, the second unit in my year 11 program is a FlaPd!

unit and its theme is Escapism. It follows on from a more ‘traditional’ unit on the theme of

Holistic Health, where the four aspects of health were explored: physical, emotional,

mental and spiritual. For the FlaPd! Escapism unit, I began by discussing with students

different forms of escapism that are employed by young people. The issue of drug use at

parties came up quite often. As this is a sensitive issue, a process drama approach seemed

ideal, particularly for facilitating role distance and frame.

I wrote a pre-text for the unit, a journal entry by a 17 year old girl called Stacy who was

taking ecstasy every weekend1. As a class, we posited on Stacy’s state of emotional,

mental, physical and spiritual health and events or factors in her life that could have led to

her taking drugs. We listed possible viewpoints and stakeholders in connection to the

situation (Byron, 1991): those of Stacy herself, her parents and family, her teachers, her

friends, the school chaplain/counselor, the law, the media, medical and health

organizations. Students then chose which ones they wanted to explore. From this and

further research into the topic, specific fictional contexts and roles that we could ‘play

out’ in order to ‘actively imagine’ these topics came to mind (Neelands, 1992). For

example, the students took on roles as ‘Médecins du Monde’ volunteers. This world-wide

French agency actually have medical teams of volunteers present at raves to educate and

risk minimize the taking of drugs by young people. In role as the ‘leader’ of the ‘team of

volunteers’, I asked the students to research a particular drug and to present that

information to the other ‘members’ of the team in order to ‘prepare them for their work in

the field’. This information was presented at an ‘official’ meeting and students compiled a

table of the particulars and the dangers of each drug.

Other learning experiences involved students in roles as a school counselor and a student-

at-risk in a counseling session, writing journal entries in role as Stacey describing the

various pressures in her life and her thoughts and emotions, and role-playing conversations

with Stacey and her parents. Students were communicating authentically and effectively

about issues that were relevant to them and part of their reality. However, through the use

of process drama, the communicative tasks became contextualised and authentic; and

1 The inspiration for this actually came from the Margaret Forde (1999) play X-Stacy. The pre-text was written after viewing other text examples taken from the net, and after doing research.

- Chapter 5 -

117

carrying these out in French became more ‘realistic’ because of the building of belief in the

role and in the context. This use of role also distanced the students from the situations

involved, enabling them to consider and experience them with different viewpoints and

attitudes.

5.3.3 Conclusion

If the premise of Communicative Language Teaching is to have students communicating and

interacting with each other on an authentic level in a particular social context, then

process drama is an excellent medium through which to achieve this. However, knowledge

of how PD works and why it could be a teaching and learning tool, an efficient and

effective planning framework, and a conducive learning and teaching environment is also

required for this medium to be implemented successfully and for positive outcomes to

come about. This research project has achieved the first two steps in exploring the

possibilities of solving the ‘innovatory puzzle’ of using PD to teach a FL: it has provided a

solid theoretical rationale and framework justifying its inception and development, as well

as reviewing and linking the theory and practice of its two fields of aesthetic education and

second language education; and it has developed a planning framework to enable its

implementation in a task-based learning and outcomes-based syllabus.

For the impact or value of this approach to be fully realized, further research needs to be

undertaken on the effectiveness of the framework and the effectiveness of the approach.

The dissemination of findings of the research, as well as the examples and planning

frameworks, may then possibly inspire other teachers to think about using process drama in

their foreign language classrooms. The provision of in-services for these teachers may then

possibly de-mystify the form of process drama and demonstrate how it can be implemented

effectively in the classroom, providing the possibility for more authentic communicative

situations in the FL classroom within which students can make meaning and make language.

- Chapter 5 -

118

Appendix A – Part B from the 2003 Showcase Submission for

Wynnum North State High School – winner of the Metropolitan

East area award for ‘Educational Excellence in a Large

Secondary School’

- Bibliography -

119

- Bibliography -

Abbs, P. (ed.) (1987) Living Powers: The Arts in Education, London: Falmer Press

Abbs, P. (1987) ‘Towards a Coherent Arts Aesthetic’ in Abbs, P. (ed.) Living Powers: The Arts

in Education, London: Falmer Press, pp. 9-66

Abbs, P. (ed) (1989) The Symbolic Order, London: Falmer Press

Abbs, P. (1989) Aa is for Aesthetic: Essays of Creative and Aesthetic Education, Sussex: The

Falmer Press

Abbs, P (1994) The Educational Imperative: A Defence of Socratic and Aesthetic Learning,

London: Falmer Press

Alatis, J. (ed.) (1993) Strategic Interaction and Language Acquisition, Washington, D.C.:

Georgetown University Press

Anderson, M.L. (1989) Theatre techniques for language learning: Assumptions and suggested

progression activities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 321571)

Barraja-Rohan, A. (1995) “PracTESOL: The Inclusion of Drama in the Syllabus to Facilitate the

Development of Language Skills in the ESL class”, TESOL in Context, vol. 5, no.2,

November, pp. 23 - 26

Beyersdorfer, J.M and Shauer, D.K. (1993) “All work and no play? Add play production to

literacy learning”, Journal of Reading, vol. 37, issue 1, September, pp. 4 – 11

Bialystock, E. (1991) Foreign/Second Language Pedagogy Research: A Commemorative Volume

for Claus Faerch, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters

Board of Senior Schools Secondary Studies Queensland (2001) Senior French, Brisbane: BSSS

Board of Senior Schools Secondary Studies Queensland (1993) Senior Drama, Brisbane: BSSS

Board of Senior Schools Secondary Studies Queensland (2002) Senior Drama, Brisbane: BSSS

- Bibliography -

120

Bolton, G. (1984) Drama as Education, London: Longman

Bolton, G. (1986) Selected Writings on Drama in Education, New York: Longman

Booth, D. (1994) Story Drama: Reading, writing and roleplaying across the curriculum,

Markham: Pembroke Publishers

Booth, D. (1998) ‘Language Power Through Working in Role’, in Wagner, B. (1998) (ed.)

Educational Drama and Language Arts: What Research Shows, Portsmouth, NH:

Heinemann

Bowell, P. and Heap, B. (2001) Planning Process Drama, London: David Fulton Publishers Ltd

Brown, H.D (2001) Teaching by Principles, An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy, 2nd

edition, New York: Addison Wesley Longman Inc

Brumfit, C. and Johnson K. (1979) The Communicative Approach to Language Teaching,

Oxford: Oxford University Press

Brumfit, C and Roberts, J. (1983) A Short Introductory to Language and Language Teaching,

London: Batsford Academic and Educational

Bruner, J. (1983) Child’s Talk: Learning to Use Language, New York: W W Norton and

Company

Bruner, J. (1986) Actual Minds, Possible Worlds, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Byron, K. (1986) Drama in the English classroom, London: Methuen

Byron, K. (1991) ‘Indians and Pioneers – the American West’ in Unfinished Materials…2D

Resource Pack No.1, Leicestershire: 2D Publications

Canale, M. and Swain, M. (1980) "Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second

language teaching and testing", Applied Linguistics vol. 1, no.1, pp. 1-47.

Candlin, C.N. (1987) Language learning tasks, London: Prentice Hall

Carasso, J.G. (1996) ‘Identity and Dialogue’ in J.O’Toole and K.Donelan (ed.) Drama, Culture

and Empowerment, Brisbane: IDEA publications pp.190-193

- Bibliography -

121

Carr, J. (1994) “Culture’ in the language classroom: a critical language awareness approach”

Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 151-158

Carr, J. (1998) “Rethinking culture in the context of LOTE teaching and learning”, MLTAQ

Quarterly, no. 114

Carr, J. (1999) ‘From ‘sympathetic’ to ‘dialogic’ imagination: Cultural study in the foreign

language classroom’ in LoBianco, J., Liddicoat, A. and Crozet, C. (ed.) Striving for

the Third Place: Intercultural Competence through Language Education, Canberra:

NLLIA, chapter 7

Carr, J. and Crawford, J. (2001) Unpublished research – Implementation Reports of Years 4 to

10 LOTE syllabus, Brisbane: Queensland Schools Curriculum Council

Carr, J. (2003) ‘Culture through the looking glass: in intercultural experiment in

sociolinguistics’, in Liddicoat AJ, S. Eisenchlass, S. Trevaskes Australian Perspectives

on Internationalising Education, Melbourne: Language Australia, pp. 75 to 86

Carroll, J. (1986). “Framing Drama: some classroom strategies”, National Association for

Drama in Education, vol. 10, no. 2, pp.5-7

Carroll, J. (1988) ‘Terra incognita: mapping drama talk, NADIE, March, pp. 13-21

Cassell, J. (1982) ‘Does Risk-Benefit Analysis Apply to Moral Evaluation of Social Research?’ in

Beauchamp, T., Faden, R., Wallace, J., and Walters, L. (ed.) Ethical Issues in Social

Research, Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press

Cazden, C. (1986) ‘Classroom discourse’ in Wittrock, M. (ed.) Handbook of research on

teaching, New York: Macmillan.

Chambers, F. (1991) “Promoting use of the target language in the classroom”, Language

Learning Journal, September, pp. 27-31

Chomsky, N. (1959) “A review of B.F. Skinner’s ‘Verbal Behaviour’”, Language, vol. 35, pp.

26-58

- Bibliography -

122

Collinson, D. (1992) ‘Aesthetic Experience’, in O.Hanfling (ed.) Philosophical Aesthetics,

London: Open University/Blackwell

Cook, V. (1991) Second Language Learning and Second Language Teaching, Great Britain:

Edward Arnold

Crawford, J. (1990) “How Authentic is the language in our classrooms”, Prospect, vol. 6,

no.1, September, pp. 47-54

Crawford, J.L., Hurst, C., Lugering, M., Wimmer, C., (2003) Acting in Person and in Style, in

Australia, NSW: McGraw Hill Australia

Crookes, G. and Gass, S. (ed.) (1993) Tasks and Language Learning, Integrating Theory and

Practice, Avon: Multilingual Matters

Crozet, C. and Liddicoat, A. (1997) “Teaching culture as an integral part of language

teaching: An introduction”, Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, Series S, no. 14,

pp. 1-22

Csikszentmihalyi, M (1990) Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, New York: Harper

Perrenial.

Davis, P. (1990) “The Use of Drama in English Language Teaching”, TESL Canada, vol. 8,no.1,

pp. 87-99.

Department of Education (1991a) Stage A French, Brisbane: Queensland Government

Department of Education (1991b) Drama makes meaning, Years 1-10 Drama Curriculum

Guide, Brisbane: Queensland Government

Dewey, J. (1958) Art as Experience, New York: Capricorn Books

Di Pietro R. J. (1987) Strategic Interaction - Learning Languages Through Scenarios,

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dunn, L. (1995) “A Voice From The Ground”, National Association of Drama in Education

Journal, vol. 19, no,2, pp. 3-13

- Bibliography -

123

Education Queensland (2000) 2010 Queensland State Education, Brisbane, QLD: Office of

Strategic Planning and Portfolio Services

Education Queensland (2002) Productive Pedagogies Classroom Reflection Manual, Brisbane:

Teaching and Learning Branch, Curriculum Implementation Unit

Egan, K. (1997) The Educated Mind: How cognitive tools shape our understanding, Chicago:

University of Chicago Press

Ehrman, M. and Döryei Z. (1998) Interpersonal Dynamics in Second Language Education,

Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.

Eisner, E. (1985) Learning and Teaching the Ways of Knowing, Chicago: National Society for

the Study of Education

Eisner, E. (1990) “Implications of Artistic Intelligences for Education”, in Moody, W. (ed.)

Artistic Intelligences, Implications for Education, New York, NY: Teachers College

Press

Eisner, E. (1994) The Educational Imagination: On the Design and Evaluation of School

Programs, New York: Macmillan Publishing Company

Ellis, R. (1994) The Study of Second Language Acquisition, Oxford: Oxford University Press

Emmit, M. and Pollock, J. (1997) Language and Learning, Melbourne: Oxford University Press

Australia

Fleming, M. (1995) Starting Drama Teaching, London: David Fulton Publishers

Forde, M. (1999) X-Stacey, Sydney: Currency Press

Fullan, M. (1993a) “Why teachers must become change agents”, Educational Leadership, vol.

50, no. 6, pp. 12-16

Fullan, M. (1993b) Change Forces: Probing the Depths of Educational Reform,

London: Falmer Press.

- Bibliography -

124

Gass. S. (1997) Input, interaction, and the Second Language Learner, New Jersey: Laurence

Erlbaum Associates

Gill, C. (2000) “Getting language learners to ‘open up’”, Australian Language Matters,

April/May/June, pp. 7-8

Giroux, H. (1988) Teachers as Intellectuals, Toward a critical pedagogy of learning, Granby,

Massachusetts: Bergin and Garvey Publishers, Inc.

Glasser, W. (1993) The Quality School Teacher, New York: Harper Collins

Graves, K. (2000) Designing Language Courses, A Guide for Teachers, Ontario, Canada: Heinle

and Heinle Publishers

Greene, M. (1989) ‘Art Works in Schools’, in Abbs, P. (ed.) The Symbolic Order, London:

Falmer Press, pp. 213-224

Haggstrom, M. A. (1992) “A Performative Approach to the Study of Theater: Bridging the Gap

Between Language and Literature Courses”, The French Review, vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 7-

19.

Halliday, M. (1975) Learning How to Mean, Explorations in the Development of Language,

New York: Elsevier North-Holland, Inc

Halliday, M. (1978) Language as a social semiotic, London: Arnold

Halliday, M. (1993) “Towards a language-based theory of learning”, Linguistics and Education,

vol. 5, no.2, pp.93-116

Haseman, B. (1991) “Improvisation, Process drama and Dramatic Art”, The Drama Magazine,

July, pp. 19-21

Haseman, B. and O’Toole, J. (2000) Dramawise, Victoria: Heinemann

Haseman, B. (2003) KTB214 Process Drama, Queensland University of Technology, Online

Learning and Teaching Web site: https://olt.qut.edu.au/CI/KTB214/sec/index.cfm?

(accessed June, 15, 2003)

- Bibliography -

125

Heathcote, D. (1984) ‘The Authentic Teacher: Signs and Portents’ in Johnson, L. and O’Neill,

C, (ed.) Dorothy Heathcote, collected writings of drama and education, London:

Hutchinson, pp. 160 – 169

Heathcote, D. (1984) ‘The nature of educational drama: subject or system? in Johnson, L. and

O’Neill, C. (ed.) Dorothy Heathcote, collected writings of drama and education,

London: Hutchinson, pp. 41-110

Hertzberg, M. (1998) “Theory into practice: using drama to enhance literacy development”

Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, vol. 2, no.2, June, pp. 159 – 176

Hertzberg, M. (1999) “There's lots of rhyme and reason for using drama in reading programs”,

Primary Educator incorporating the Primary Update, vol.2 no.5 pp. 26-28

Holden, S. (1981) Drama in language teaching, London: Longman

Hymes, D. (1972) ‘On communicative competence’ in Pride, B. and Holmes, J. (Eds)

Sociolinguistics, Selected Readings, Harmondsworth: Penguin

Johnson, L. and O’Neill, C. (1984) Dorothy Heathcote, Collected Writings of Drama and

Education, London: Hutchinson

Johnstone, R. (1994) Teaching Modern Languages at Primary School: Approaches and

Implications, Edinburgh: The Scottish Council for Research in Education

Jones, K. (1982) Simulations in Language Teaching, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jones. K. (1995) Understanding Communication in Second Language Classrooms, Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press

Kao, S and O’Neill, C. (1998) Words into Worlds: Learning a second language through process

drama, Stamford: Ablex Publishing Corporation

Kramsch, C. (1996) Context and Culture in Language Teaching, Oxford: Oxford University

Press

Krashen, S. (1982) Principals and Practice in Second Language Acquisition, Oxford: Pergamon

- Bibliography -

126

Krashen, S. (1983) The Natural Approach, Language Acquisition in the Classroom, Oxford:

Pergamon

Krashen, S. (1988) Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning, 2nd edition,

Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd

Kumaravadivelu, B. (1994) “The Postmethod Condition: Emerging Strategies for

Second/Foreign Language Teaching”, TESOL Quarterly, vol.28, no.1, pp. 27-48

Legutke, M. and Thomas, H. (1991) Process and Experience in the Language Classroom,

London: Longman

LePage, A (1987) Transforming Education: The New Three R’s, California: Oakmore House

Press

Lewis, M. (1996) ‘Implications for a lexical view of language’ in Willis J. and Willis, D. (ed.)

Challenge and Change in Language Teaching, Oxford: Macmillan Heinemann, pp.10-17

Lightbown, P. (2000) “Anniversary Article: Classroom SLA Research and Second Language

Teaching”, Applied Linguistics, vol.21, no.4, pp. 431-462

Lightbown, P. and Spada, N. (1993) How Languages Are Learned, Oxford: Oxford University

Long, M. (1988) ‘Instructed Interlanguage Development’ in Beebe, L. (Ed.) Issues in Second

Language Acquisition: Mulitiple Perspectives, New York: Harper and Row

Long, M. (1990) ‘Task, group and task-group interactions’ in Anivan, S. (ed.) Language

Teaching Methodology for the Nineties, Singapore: Semeo Regional Language Centre,

pp. 1-26

Makin, L. & Willmott, G. (1998) “Sociodramatic Play – A language teaching strategy for K-6

and beyond” in Babel, Journal of the Australian Federation of Modern Language

Teachers’ Association, vol.33, no.2, pp. 20-23

Maley, A. and A. Duff. (1982) Drama Techniques in Language Teaching, Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

- Bibliography -

127

Malika, H. (2000) “Drama's Ways of Learning”, Research in Drama Education, vol. 5, issue 1,

March, pp. 45 - 63

McGroarty, M. (1993) ‘Cooperative Learning and Second Language Acquisition’, in Holt, D.D.

(ed.) Cooperative Learning, A Response to Linguistic and Cultural Diversity, McHenry,

IL, US: Centre for Applied Linguistics and Delta System, Inc.

McLean, J. (1996) “An Aesthetic Framework in Drama: Issues and Implications”, NADIE

Research Monograph Series, No. 2

Misson, R. (1996) “Dangerous lessons: sexuality issues in the drama classroom”, NADIE

Journal, 20, pp.11-21

Moody, W. (ed.) (1990) Artistic Intelligences, Implications for Education, New York, NY:

Teachers College Press

Morgan, N. and Saxton, J. (1987) Teaching drama – A Mind of Many Wonders, London:

Hutchinson

Neelands, J. and Goode, T. (2002) Structuring Drama Work, Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press

Neelands, J. (1992) Learning Through Imagined Experience, London: Hodder and Stoughton

Neill, E. (1995) The Spirit of Learning, Brisbane: Bolda-Lok Publishing.

Nunan, D. (1985) Language Teaching Course Design: Trends and Issues, Adelaide, SA: National

Curriculum Resource Centre

Nunan, D. (1987) “Communicative language teaching: ‘Making it work’”, ELT Journal, vol. 41

no. 2, pp. 136-145

Nunan, D. (1998) Designing tasks for the communicative classroom, Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press

O’Neill, C. (1993) ‘From words to worlds: Language learning through process drama’ in Alatis,

J. (ed.) Strategic Interaction and Language Acquisition, Washington, D.C.:

Georgetown University Press, pp.52-60

- Bibliography -

128

O’Neill, C. (1995) Drama Worlds, Portsmouth: Heinemann

O’Neill, C and Lambert, A. (1982) Drama Structures, London: Hutchinson

O’Toole, J. (1992) The Process of Drama: Negotiating Art and Meaning, London: Routledge

Owens, A. and Barber, K. (2001) Mapping Drama, Carlisle, UK: Carel Press Ltd

Oxford, R. (ed.) (1996) Language Learning Motivation: Pathways to the New Century, Hawaii:

University of Hawaii Press

Oxford, R and Shearin, J. (1996) ‘Language Learning Motivation in a New Key’ in Oxford, R.

(ed.) Language Learning Motivation: Pathways to the New Century, Hawaii:

University of Hawaii Press

Özdeniz, D. (1996) ‘Introducing innovations into your teaching’ in Willis J. and Willis, D. (ed.)

Challenge and Change in Language Teaching, Oxford: Macmillan Heinemann, pp.110-

126

Pavis, P. (1996) Dictionnaire du théâtre, Paris : Dunod

Pearsall, J. (ed.) (1998) The New Oxford Dictionary of English, Oxford: Oxford University

Press

Pica, T., Kanagy, R., and Falodun, J. (1993) ‘Choosing and Using Communication Tasks for

Second Language Instruction and Research’ in Crookes, G and Gass, S. (ed.) Tasks and

Language Learning, Integrating Theory and Practice, Avon: Multilingual Matters

Pross, E. (1986) “Using Theatre Games To Enhance Second Language Acquisition In Bilingual

Education”, Bilingual Review/La Revista Bilingue, vol. 13,no. 3, pp. 35-40

Queensland Schools Curriculum Council (2000) Languages Other Than English Years 4 to 10

French syllabus, Brisbane:QSCC

Queensland Schools Curriculum Council (2000) Languages Other Than English Years 4 to 10

Sourcebook Guidelines cd-rom, Brisbane: QCSS

- Bibliography -

129

Queensland School Curriculum Council (2002) The Arts, Years 1-10 Syllabus, Brisbane: QSCC

Queensland School Curriculum Council (2002) The Arts, Years 1-10 Sourcebook Guidelines cd-

rom, Brisbane: QSCC

Queensland Studies Authority (2003) Outcomes in Action Conference, Brisbane: QSA

Richards, J. (1986) Approaches and methods in Language Teaching, Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press

Richards, J. (1990) The Language Teaching Matrix, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Sendak, M. (1963) Max et Les Maximontres, Paris : L’école des loisirs

Schunk, D. (2000) Learning Theories, An Educational Perspective, New Jersey: Prentice Hall

Sharwood Smith, M. (1994) Second Language Learning: Theoretical Foundations, Essex:

Longman Group UK Limited

Shaw, E. (2002) Education Queensland Lotelist, lotelist@qed.qld.gov.au (accessed 18th March)

Skehan, P. (1996) ‘Second Language Acquisition Research and task-based instruction’ in Willis

J. and Willis, D. (ed.) Challenge and Change in Language Teaching, Oxford: Macmillan

Heinemann, pp.17-30

Skehan, P. (1998) A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning, Oxford: Oxford University

Press

Skinner, B. (1957) Verbal Behaviour, New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts

Smith, F. (1983) Essays into Literacy, Exeter: Heinemann Educational

Smith S. M., (1984) The Theater Arts and the Teaching of Second Language, Reading, Mass:

Addison Wesley Publishing Co.

Stern, S. (1980) “Drama In Second Language Learning From a Psycholinguistic Perspective”,

Language Learning, vol. 30, no.1, pp. 77-100.

- Bibliography -

130

Stern, S. L. (1983) “Drama In Second Language Learning From a Psycholinguistic Perspective

(Part 11)”, English Teachers' Joumal (Israel), vol. 28, pp. 43-46.

Stockwell, G. (1998) “Simulations in language learning”, Babel, vol. 33, no.2, pp. 24 – 27

Taylor, P. (ed) (1995) Pre-text and storydrama: the artistry of Cecily O’Neill and David

Booth, Brisbane, QLD: NADIE Monograph Series

Towell, R. and Hawkins, R. (1994) Approaches to Second Language Acquisition, Avon:

Multilingual Matters Ltd

Ur, P. (1996) A Course in Language Teaching, Practice and Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press

Vale, D., Scarino, A. and McKay, P. (1998) Pocket Australian Language Level Guidelines,

Carlton, Victoria: Curriculum Corporation

Van Patten, B. (1991) ‘The foreign language classroom as a place to communicate’ in B.F.

Freed, (ed.) Foreign Language Acquisition Research and the Classroom, Lexington,

Mass.:C.C. Heath and Co., pp. 54-73

Via, R. (1987) ‘“The magic if” of theater: Enhancing language learning through drama’ in W.

Rivers (ed.), Interactive language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press,

pp.110-123

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978) Mind in Society, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Wagner, B. (ed.) (1998) Educational Drama and Language Arts: What Research Shows,

Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann

Wallace, M. (1997) Action Research for Language Teachers, New York: Cambridge University

Press

Weiten, W. (1992) Psychology: Themes and Variations, 2nd edition, Pacific Grove, California:

Brooks/Cole Publishing Company

Wilburn, D. (1992) ‘Learning through drama in the immersion classroom’ in E.B. Bernhardt

(Ed.) Life in language immersion classrooms. Philadelphia, PA: Multilingual Matters,

pp. 67-83

- Bibliography -

131

Willis, J. (1996) A Framework for Task-Based Learning, Essex: Longman

Willis J. and Willis, D. (ed.) (1996) Challenge and Change in Language Teaching, Oxford:

Macmillan Heinemann

Willis, J. (1998) Task-based Learning: What kind of adventure? http//langue.hyper.

chubu.ac.jp/jalt/pub/tlt/98/jul/willis.html (accessed January 10, 2003)

Willoquet-Maricondi, P. (1991) “Drama And ESL: Toward an English Speaking Persona”, The

English Record, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 4 - 10

Woodwood, T. (1996) ‘Paradigm shift and the language teaching profession’ in Willis, J and

Willis, D. (ed.) Challenge and Change in Language Teaching, Oxford: Macmillan

Heinemann

Woodwood, T. (2001) Planning lessons and courses, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Woolfolk, A. (1998) Educational Psychology, Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon

Yau, M. (1992) Drama: Its Potential as a Teaching and Learning Tool, Toronto,

Ontario:Toronto Board of Education, Research Dept.