Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Understanding a network of attributions Edward Russell - the University of Manchester
Puzzle - Why? Why? Why? <ul><li>Why is there so little overt focus on form occurring when learners are given their annotat...
Causal attributions for student achievement <ul><li>Effort </li></ul><ul><li>Aptitude </li></ul><ul><li>Mood </li></ul><ul...
‘ Insights’ and implications <ul><li>Acquisition v learning  </li></ul><ul><li>Teacher / Student Observations  </li></ul><...
Acquired Language <ul><li>Evidence / insight </li></ul><ul><li>Communicative competence </li></ul><ul><li>Learners’ former...
Observing <ul><li>Insight </li></ul><ul><li>My group problem, dealing with them as a group – problematic </li></ul><ul><li...
Dorneyi & Otto's (1998) Process model of motivation –  post-actional phase Illustration from Dorneyi 2000 ‘ Baggage’ carri...
Mind over matter <ul><li>Insight </li></ul><ul><li>Effort is critical, the key </li></ul><ul><li>Hard-work pays off </li><...
References <ul><li>Allport, G. (1954)  The Nature of Prejudice , Reading: Addison-Wesley </li></ul><ul><li>Barkhuizen,G.P ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Enquiry based Learning on a feedback puzzle

778

Published on

my MA presentation on Attribution Theory - download for full version with audio

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
778
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Hook – Welcome to my classroom. Out of the window is Switzerland... Foreshadow – in this presentation I am going to outline my context, my issue and highlight some of the new insights I have. Context – Country, school, HO1, S1-12, individuals....maternity leave...5months
  • Taking this as a failure on my part / their part what I want to know is why…. Some examples of my (causal attribution) questions are – Is it because they don’t associate language learning with this kind of task - perceived efficacy of performing the task ? Is it because my corrections are uninspiring? Being misunderstood? Boring? Unnessacacary? Is it because I used questions / statements / hedged statements? Is it because I used a red pen/wrote in the margins? Is it because I was never meant to be a teacher? Is it because I am not really trying as I am only here for a short while? Is it because I don’t know how to correct very well? Is it because their former teachers didn’t teach writing like this? Is it because they have already used their monitors, and aren’t willing to use it again? Is it because I am eliciting corrections rather than giving them? Is it because NS accuracy isn’t important to them? Some sort of resistance to perfection – happy in their fossilized state? Some of the reasons I put forward are ‘better’ than others, which? why? Which are empowering thoughts? Which put me as the locus of control? Which blame outside my power? Which are constant and which are changing? This thought process is an example of my theory attribution theory. I can use it to attribute responsibility for my failures / successes. By shifting emphasis onto the things I control, I am able to change, this is empowering me. However, attributing my failures to uncontrollable causes such as luck, although maybe true, doesn’t really empower me…
  • Give a couple of examples and how too much uncontrollable / stable things such as aptitude or task difficulty can lead to learned helplessness ... “learners who do not develop mediating cognitive structures that embody the efficacy of effort. Further, they learn that failure is an indication of a lack of ability.” (Weiner 1972|: 412) Interestingly – self-handicapping is, for example, using drugs and alcohol and attributing failure (or success) to there use – I succeeded / failed cause I was up late at the bar....(not because I am stupid) (Dornyei Z 2005: 114) or Wolters 2003 All of these relevant issues in my context where I believe I can observe these behaviours in some degrees or other..
  • Personal reflections coming from theory and also wide reading on feedback treatments and teaching writing.
  • 3.1 Acquisition v Learnt Language My first and most immediate insight was related to how learners have got to where they are today. As established attribute past successes to something….I believe one explanation is that my learners are of a high linguistic competency and got there, I think, by acquiring language. Krashen (1984:21) says “extensive research has confirmed that acquisition is a far more powerful and central process than learning”. 4.1 Implications of learners’ acquitted background When they write they are reliant on naturally acquired and perhaps their monitor isn’t really utilised. The monitor could be re-egnaged to enable ss to operate within my threshold of thought, to learn how I want them to in a cognitive demonstratable way…Input, reading + my cognitive rationale…feedforward (summative / formative)
  • Encouraged to deal with them as a group for this task. Fundamental attribution error (Allport 1954) – as an observer we attribute things to internal rather than contextual factors of group / individuals... They are all stupid, lazy etc.. Hedonic and self serving bias protecting our ego… How there is often a complete difference between what our students think is going on in the classroom and what we think is going on..... the nature of the observer, the students as observers – how they perceive learning...Barkhuizen,G.P (1998) Discovering Learner Perceptions of ESL Classroom Teaching/Learning Activities in a South African Context TESOL Quarterly 32(1)Julian Edge unit .... synergetic thinking, teacher perceptions / judegements of students and how these affect the relationships with we have with students / ss motivation
  • Attribution theory is unique as it links the end of a task to the beginning of next task…motivation not a fixed state…many competing and overlapping motivations… “A theory of student motivation will have to include many concepts and their interchangeability . Any theory based on a single concept ....will be insufficient to deal with classroom activities”. (Weiner 1984:18 as cited in Dornyei 2000:14) Literature – quote …complexity of motivation. This reinforces the belief that motivation is transient and changeable…identity has to be created and recreated on a more active basis than before (Giddens 2000: 65 cited in Lamb 2004) Postmodernity…. Attributions being made all the way through. Even attributions vast interlinked and complex and competing. Opportunity to feedforward (Glover)at end of task cycle
  • 4.4 The apprentice, Darwinism Stuart Biggs v Bambi ….. Despite record breaking effort, best figures Bambi sacked….Biggs has a quality intangible / immeasurable something innate, indefinable. I’m not sure how attribution theory is generally applied….underlying this example I think are a number of questions about how she will attribute blame for her failure, in this instance….how will she feel if she was taught to attribute success to hard-work and this happened…is it always a meritocracy? Cognitive Behavioural Therapy...Atheism... I also suggest that perhaps there are a number of cultural elements at play, a lack of desire to be native like…happiness in being a confident NNS Bit freakish not accepting failure, can control freakishness… Is this part of mind imperialism….think like a westerner too…..Is it culturally insensitive? of socio-biology strong Darwinism] ELF / EIL role of error Pit Corder, error v mistake….mutual intelligibilty Cultural differences in the kinds of Attributions Donyei (2005) chp 4
  • Transcript of "Enquiry based Learning on a feedback puzzle"

    1. 1. Understanding a network of attributions Edward Russell - the University of Manchester
    2. 2. Puzzle - Why? Why? Why? <ul><li>Why is there so little overt focus on form occurring when learners are given their annotated written work back and why do I have to hassle them to deal with their mechanics, that have been highlighted by me? </li></ul>
    3. 3. Causal attributions for student achievement <ul><li>Effort </li></ul><ul><li>Aptitude </li></ul><ul><li>Mood </li></ul><ul><li>Teacher </li></ul><ul><li>Task </li></ul><ul><li>Luck </li></ul><ul><li>Are the attributions for failure of success - </li></ul><ul><li>controllable? (can we change them?) </li></ul><ul><li>stable / global? (same in all situations all the time?) </li></ul><ul><li>internal/external? </li></ul>Assumptions are that behaviour is observable and intentional
    4. 4. ‘ Insights’ and implications <ul><li>Acquisition v learning </li></ul><ul><li>Teacher / Student Observations </li></ul><ul><li>Motivation vastly complex </li></ul><ul><li>Mind over matter </li></ul><ul><li>Reading I+1 </li></ul><ul><li>Explicit or implicit teaching lang / AT </li></ul><ul><li>Complex network of attributions </li></ul><ul><li>Cultural appropriateness </li></ul>
    5. 5. Acquired Language <ul><li>Evidence / insight </li></ul><ul><li>Communicative competence </li></ul><ul><li>Learners’ former schooling </li></ul><ul><li>Fossilized error </li></ul><ul><li>New context for me </li></ul><ul><li>Implications </li></ul><ul><li>Role of input in classroom – reading </li></ul><ul><li>Explain my own rationale </li></ul><ul><li>Use the monitor at a summative not formative stage </li></ul>
    6. 6. Observing <ul><li>Insight </li></ul><ul><li>My group problem, dealing with them as a group – problematic </li></ul><ul><li>Student observation and bias at work </li></ul><ul><li>Most behaviors unobservable </li></ul><ul><li>Implications </li></ul><ul><li>Communicate and act rather than observe and guess </li></ul>
    7. 7. Dorneyi & Otto's (1998) Process model of motivation – post-actional phase Illustration from Dorneyi 2000 ‘ Baggage’ carried forward into pre-actional phase. Complexity of Motivation
    8. 8. Mind over matter <ul><li>Insight </li></ul><ul><li>Effort is critical, the key </li></ul><ul><li>Hard-work pays off </li></ul><ul><li>Socio-biology </li></ul><ul><li>Eradicate error! </li></ul><ul><li>Implication </li></ul><ul><li>Aptitude </li></ul><ul><li>Cognitive Behavioural Treatment </li></ul><ul><li>Darwinism </li></ul><ul><li>Control Freakishness </li></ul><ul><li>EIL/ELF NS target? </li></ul>
    9. 9. References <ul><li>Allport, G. (1954) The Nature of Prejudice , Reading: Addison-Wesley </li></ul><ul><li>Barkhuizen,G.P (1998) Discovering Learner Perceptions of ESL Classroom Teaching/Learning Activities in a South African Context TESOL Quarterly 32(1) </li></ul><ul><li>Dornyei, Z. (2005) The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition New Jersey: LEA </li></ul><ul><li>Dornyei, Z. (2000). Motivation in action: Towards a process-oriented conceptualisation of student motivation British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 519-538 </li></ul><ul><li>Glover, C Brown, E (2006) Written Feedback for students: too much, too detaile ot too incomprehensible to be effective? BEE-j Volume 7: May 2006 http://www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/journal/vol7/beej-7-3.aspx </li></ul><ul><li>Hawkey, R Teacher and learner perceptions of language learning activity </li></ul><ul><li>ELT Journal 60(3) 242:252 </li></ul><ul><li>Krashen, S (1984). Writing Research and Applications Torrane: Laredo </li></ul><ul><li>Lamb (2004) Integrative Motivation in a globalizing world </li></ul><ul><li>Weiner, B. (1985). An Attribution Theory of Achievement Motivation and Emotion Psychological Review 92(4) 540-573 </li></ul><ul><li>Weiner, B (1972). Theories of Motivation: from Mechanism to Cognition Chicago: Markham </li></ul><ul><li>Wolters, C (2003( Regulation of Motivation: Evaluating an </li></ul><ul><li>Underemphasized Aspect of Self-Regulated Learning , Educational Psychologist 38(4), 189–205 </li></ul>
    1. A particular slide catching your eye?

      Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

    ×