2014 ing carla álvarez

Running Head: EXPLORING LEARNER’S PERCEPTION OF THE IMPACT OF USING REALIA IN L2 CLASSROOMS
UNIVERSIDAD DE LAS AMÉRICAS
FACULTAD DE EDUCACIÓN
Exploring Learner’s Perception Of The Impact Of Using Realia In Pre-
Communicative Activities In L2 Classrooms: A Case Study
Trabajo de titulación presentado en conformidad a los requisitos para optar al título de
Profesor de Inglés y al grado de Licenciado en Educación
Profesor guía: Angélica Inostroza
CARLA ESTRELLA M. ALVAREZ ALFARO
2014

EXPLORING LEARNER’S PERCEPTION OF THE IMPACT OF USING REALIA IN L2 CLASSROOMS. 2

Acknowledgments
I would like to thank God, in the first place, for giving me life, strength and a beautiful
family… also, for this opportunity to fight every day for a better future for me and my
loved ones and for allowing me to get to this instances…
I also want to thank Mrs. Angélica Inostroza for making this possible and helping me every
step of the way despite the little time we had. Thank you so much.
I would like to dedicate this Study to my family, specially my husband, Marco. He has been
my best friend, the best shoulder to cry on and the best cheerleader ever when it came to
take this risk of going back to study... my love, you helped me get through here by
sacrificing time, money, and for being such a long time away from us. I love you. Thank
you… you rock.
I also want to thank my parents, Carlos and Estrella, and sister Estefanía for putting up with
me during this whole year of hard work and study. Thank you for you love and support and
specially for taking care of my most precious treasure, my daughter Josefa Isabella, who
inspires me every day to go further, fight and laugh harder and wonder of the world’s little
miracles... you are my life’s engine.

Table of contents
Abstract 10
Resumen 11
Introduction 12
Chapter I 15
1.1 Purpose of the Investigation 16
1.2 Identifying the Problem 17
1.3 General Objective 18
1.4 Specific Objectives 18
1.5 Reflective Questions 19
Chapter II 21
2.1 Introduction to the general concepts 22
2.2 Constructivist Paradigm 22
2.2.1 Role of the teacher 23
2.3 Meaningful learning 24
2.4 Language acquisition theories 25
2.4.1 Affective filter theory 26
2.4.2 Comprehensive Input Theory 29
2.5 Multiple intelligences by Gardner 30

2.5.1 Type of Students based on Gardner’s M.I. 31
2.6 Communicative approach 33
2.7 Realia 35
2.7.1 Benefits of Realia 36
Chapter III 38
3.1 Design 39
3.2 Subjects and Context 41
3.3 Description of Methodology used in Class 43
3.4 Instruments 43
3.4.1 Learning Styles Questionnaire 44
3.4.2 Plenary Observation Report 46
3.4.3 Vocabulary Knowledge Test 46
3.4.4 Students’ Perception Questionnaire 48
3.4.5 Teacher’s Questionnaire 48
3.5 Procedure 49
Chapter IV 53
4.1 Findings 54
4.1.1 Learning styles questionnaire 54
4.1.2 Plenary Observation Report 56

4.1.3 Vocabulary knowledge Test – 1st
and 2nd
application. 57
4.1.4 Students’ perception questionnaire 61
4.1.5 Guide teacher’s questionnaire 63
4.2 Discussion 66
4.2.1 Perception of using Realia 66
4.2.2 Recording benefits of the use of Realia 67
4.2.3 Suggesting the use of Realia 68
4.3 Limitations and suggestions of the Investigation 68
4.4 Conclusion 70
References 72
Appendix 74

List of Images
Image 1 25
Image 2 28
Image 3 32
Image 4 54
Image 5 55
Image 6 60
Image 7 63
List of Tables
Table 1 45
Table 2 47
Table 3 57
Table 4 57
Table 5 58
Table 6 58
Table 7 58
Table 8 58
Table 9 59

Table 10 59
Table 11 59
Table 12 59
Table 13 60

Abstract
The purpose of this case study aims to explore the perception that the students have on pre-
communicative activities with the use of Realia and also to document the perceived benefits
that come from that. This was achieved through the application of several questionnaires
and tests. The first questionnaire was created to determine the students’ learning style and
showed that over 80% of them were visual/spatial and/or bodily/kinesthetic. This meant
adapting the existing programme in order to incorporate the use of Realia. The second test
was applied at the beginning and end of the unit “Technology and inventions”. The first
application determined the students’ lack of knowledge in regards to the unit’s vocabulary.
The results of the second application show the increase in their knowledge after using
Realia, by associating images to the vocabulary words. One special area to be considered
was the students’ context and the response they had to the application of the first unit using
normal grammar based methodologies. The final diagnosis was determined by the
perception of the experience by the students and by the guide teacher, showing that they
had a positive attitude towards the use of Realia in the pre-communicative stage and would
like to apply it again. The benefits include an easier acquisition of vocabulary and it was
also proven that the learning styles, even though important to be identified, are not decisive
for acquisition.
Keywords: Pre-Communicative Activities, Communicative Approach, Realia.

Resumen
El propósito de este Estudio de Caso apunta a explorar la percepción que los estudiantes
tienen sobre las actividades pre-comunicativas con el uso de Realia y también documentar
los beneficios percibidos que vienen que esto. Se obtuvo a través de la aplicación de varios
cuestionarios y pruebas. El primer cuestionario fue creado para determinar el estilo de
aprendizaje de los estudiantes y mostró que casi 80% de ellos eran visuales/espaciales o
kinestésicos. Esto significó adaptar el programa existente a modo de incorporar el uso de
Realia. La segunda prueba se aplicó al principio y al final de la unidad “Technology and
Inventions”. La primera aplicación determinó la falta de conocimiento de los alumnos en
relación con el vocabulario de la unidad. Los resultados de la segunda aplicación muestran
el aumento en su conocimiento después de usar Realia, asociando imágenes a las palabras
de vocabulario. Un área especial para ser considerada fue el contexto de los estudiantes y la
respuesta que tuvieron a la aplicación de la primera unidad usando métodos basados en
gramática. El diagnóstico final fue determinado por la percepción de la experiencia por los
estudiantes y por el profesor guía, mostrando que tenían una actitud positiva hacia el uso de
Realia in la etapa pre-comunicativa y que les gustaría que se aplicara nuevamente. Los
beneficios incluyen una mejor adquisición de vocabulario y también se probó que los
estilos de aprendizaje, aunque es importante identificarlos, no son decisivos para la
adquisición.
Palabras clave: Actividades pre- comunicativas, Enfoque comunicativo, Realia.

Introduction
During the past years, education has been more centered in student learning, strategies to
achieve it and the construction of the student’s own learning, leaving the teachers as guides
and learning facilitators throughout that process, rather than the lecturers they were before.
In the words of Piaget (n.d.) “When you teach a child something you take away forever his
chance of discovering it for himself.” This statement follows the Constructivist way of
seeing education: The idea that we construct our understanding of what surrounds us
dictates that teachers allow children to discover and experiment by themselves.
Students “today” are participants of the context because learning is essentially active so
they can create their own procedures, learning day by day and joint working with teachers,
developing their new and previously discovered abilities and, this way, activating their
meaningful learning that allows them to extend their learning experience and project it into
the future. Bonwell (1991) describes active learning as “anything that involves students in
doing things and thinking about the things they are doing”.
With no doubts, education is the right and main base of all people to learn and face the
world in a right way, giving meaning to our lives. People who are in charge of providing
that education other than the family are teachers, professionals of education that make an
effort to transform their students into comprehensive people. Also, they deliver the
necessary tools to face the world before them, and to achieve that goal, it is necessary to
know and apply strategies that are effective and meaningful for their student's learning.
Nevertheless, teaching certain contents is not always an easy job for teachers, even with
years of experience, especially when teaching a second language and considering that all
students are different and, as such, they possess various learning styles and rhythms,
especially those from different sociocultural frameworks.
It is through motivation and a low affective filter that the acquisition of language is
achieved. If the teacher uses a simple method to teach English, in this case, the student will
be more willing to notice and to leave anxiety aside. As Krashen (2002) states: “simple
codes may provide for the second language acquirer what ‘caretaker speech’ provides for
the first language acquirer, comprehensible input with a low ‘affective filter’”.

This could vary according to age and sociocultural environment, so these points will be
explored deeply: working with adolescents from low sociocultural stratus, since the chosen
School to develop the study is a Municipal School in Viña del Mar, V Region, Chile.
Municipal Schools have low-to- no income from parents and only receive a subvention
from the Municipalities, given by the Government. This School in particular, is inclusive
and receives students from low sociocultural stratums and older dropouts. The students’ age
range for the study goes from fourteen to seventeen years old.
Gardner (1991) states that the differences among the students “challenge an educational
system that assumes that everyone can learn the same materials in the same way and that a
uniform, universal measure suffices to test student learning.”
It is in this context and based on the students’ needs for a new method to acquire
vocabulary that this study suggests adapting lesson plans for the use of Realia.
Realia is a technique that is part of the Communicative approach and uses real things or
concrete objects that are used in the classroom to build background knowledge and
vocabulary. It is normally used in children and not explored enough in teenager or adult
learners.
Realia, according to Berwald (1987) contains “current language on all topics imaginable
and provide constant reinforcement of grammatical forms learned in the classroom”. This
turns it into a good way to make students feel comfortable about touching and getting
involved with the objects in order to achieve a better understanding and retention of a wider
range of vocabulary, and also to feel less anxious than in a regular class, lowering their
affective filter and making them more prone to understand the contents that are being
taught and also have a nice time with their classmates.
McGuire (2005) states that Realia “can enliven a classroom, using the senses to involve the
audience in what is being presented. The learning is natural and not forced. By using
Realia, a teacher can create an environment that is rich enough to compete with the
common ‘This is boring!’ complaint.”

It’s through this interest, getting students’ attention towards acquiring new vocabulary in a
fun and more participative way that Realia was chosen to work with the students of the
República de Colombia School in Viña del Mar. This school is an inclusive educational
center that, as it was briefly explained before, does not discriminate students in regards to
age, sexual tendencies, pregnancy, young parenting or social environment. All students
from High school are girls and most of them are from peripheral areas of the city and their
overall proficiency level in regards to the English subject is “beginner”.
The chosen information gathering method will be through a Case Study, which is defined
by Gary Thomas (2011) as “a kind of research that concentrates on one thing, looking at it
in detail, not seeking to generalize from it… as a whole... A case study is about the
particular rather than the general”.
This case study is centered on determining if the use of Realia in the pre-communicative
activity stage proves to have determined benefits in the meaningful learning in terms of
vocabulary of the previously defined students from First year of High school on the
República de Colombia School and their perception to the use of this approach.
In the first chapter, the problem, the purpose of the investigation and questions that need to
be developed will be presented along with the general and specific objectives.
In the second chapter, the literature review will be presented in order to achieve
understanding of all concepts that will later be applied, along with the theories and methods
that will sustain this investigation that is based on observation of facts and the application
of Realia in the pre-task stage of learning to identify and acquire new vocabulary. The Unit
that was taught at that moment is called: Technology and Inventions, following the program
of the School Book given by the Government to the students.
In the third chapter, the method and approach, subjects and procedure will be explained and
presented.
In the fourth chapter, the findings, discussion, limitations and suggestions, and conclusion
will be presented. These are based on the observation period of 280 chronological hours
within the school area, with 4 pedagogical hours of teaching a week in each course.

CHAPTER I

1.1 Purpose of the Investigation
From our early years people are taught from the easiest to the hardest things, from
particular to general. We have been surrounded by people that are there to guide and
educate us, starting by parents, family and teachers. In the case of teachers, the picture is
completely different from family and parents since they receive the knowledge and
expertise to form children from early stages and in many aspects that does not just involve
contents but also values, culture, moral, among others, adjusting the planning to the
student’s needs.
The purpose of this Case Study is to register the benefits, in terms of vocabulary
acquisition, that the use of Realia in pre-communicative activities brings to students,
recording their perception, considering the type of students they are and the type of learning
style they have. This is to have more authentic opportunities to use the language and not
just to be passive listeners, learning all contents by heart instead of participating actively,
“touching” the vocabulary in order to acquire it. This will be explained later in the
Theoretical Framework, in chapter II.
This Study also records the students’ context and cultural characteristics as they are
decisive factors that affect the acquisition of another language, along with the students’
disposition and reported benefits of using Realia as a means to acquire vocabulary. This
was determined through the observation period (two weeks) and the teaching period (nine
weeks).
The findings may serve as a way to improve the students’ vocabulary acquisition rate by
using a more significant way to introduce it and implement Realia as a method to serve
other students with the same characteristics and learning styles and similar backgrounds.

1.2 Identifying the problem
Using Realia as a way to teach vocabulary was chosen after having observed for two weeks
how the teacher of the selected courses taught English to both groups of students – First
year of High school “A” and “B”. The activities related to vocabulary were mainly aimed to
memorization after recording the new words on a copybook. The class was mainly
grammar oriented and the students showed low motivation and lack of participation.
According to Krashen (2002) there are two independent systems of second language
performance: “the acquired system” and “the learned system”. The “acquired system” or
“acquisition” is the product of a subconscious process very similar to the process children
undergo when they acquire their first language. It requires meaningful interaction in the
target language - natural communication - in which speakers are concentrated not in the
form of their utterances, but in the communicative act. In order to achieve acquisition it is
necessary to find a method that will transform the information that is needed for the
students to learn – in this case, vocabulary words – into intake, or the actual retained
information by the student.
As it was expressed above, there is a significant difference between “learning” and
“acquiring”. According to Krashen (2002), “learning” is the final product of formal
instruction and it comprises a conscious process which results in conscious knowledge
'about' the language, for example knowledge of grammar rules. For this reason and
according to Krashen, 'learning' is less important than 'acquisition' since acquisition implies
meaningful interaction and acts as natural communication.

1.3 General Objective
The Case Study attempts to apply the use of Realia in pre-communicative activities in order
to determine if this improves students’ attention and, in this way, their acquisition of new
vocabulary words. The creativity that the use of Realia implies helps students to get
motivated and not to have strong barriers that would get in the way of their significant
learning. Therefore, the general objectives are:
 To explore the students’ perception of the impact of using Realia in pre-
communicative activities in L2 classrooms.
 To record the benefits of the use of Realia in pre-communicative activities in L2
classrooms.
 To suggest the use of Realia as means to present vocabulary in pre-communicative
activities to teachers of English as a foreign language.
1.4 Specific Objectives
 To diagnose the students’ context and abilities and how they interfere in the
learning process through observation.
 To determine the students’ predominant learning style based on the Multiple
Intelligences theory by Gardner through a questionnaire.
 To determine the students’ previous knowledge in regards to the Unit’s vocabulary
through a pre-test.
 To determine the students’ acquisition of the vocabulary words at the end of the
Unit through a test.
 To know learners’ perceived benefits of using Realia as a way to acquire vocabulary
in a pre-communicative stage.
 To know the guide teacher’s opinion of using Realia in a classroom as a way to
teach vocabulary in a pre-communicative stage.
 To provide insight of the benefits and limitations of the use of Realia in a
classroom.

1.5 Reflective Questions
Does the use of Realia bring benefits for the significant learning of English as a second
language in students of first year of high school in a Municipal school with students from
low sociocultural stratus?
How does exposing students to learning situations in pre-communicative activities
involving Realia affect their ability to acquire and internalize vocabulary words in a second
language?
Is Realia a technique that can be applied to high school level students in terms of
effectiveness?
What are the limitations of using Realia in a classroom activity?

CHAPTER II

II Theoretical Framework
2.1 Introduction to the General Concepts
The use of Realia is considered to be a Constructivist type of approach, which proposes the
creation of new learning by considering the students’ previous knowledge. Within this
approach, students and teachers have different roles, different from each other and different
from other approaches. Also, the use of Realia can be analyzed from Steven Krashen’s
theories which present methodological strategies that work as Comprehensible Input and
that help maintain the students’ affective filter low to achieve significant learning; all this,
in the context of S. Krashen’s Natural Approach.
It was found important to determine the students’ different intelligences and the way in
which they learnt better. This is explained by Howard Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences (M.
I.) theory. The characteristics of those students in terms of the activities they enjoy, what
they are good at and the best way they learn something is detailed in the chart Murray
Loom created based on the M. I. theory.
Next, it will be detailed each one of the theories and methods, and their implications,
relating them to the use of realia in the pre-communicative stage of communicative
activities.
2.2 Constructivist Paradigm
According to Mascolol & Fischer (2005) "Constructivism is the philosophical and scientific
position that knowledge arises through a process of active construction."
One of Constructivism main authors is Vigotsky, who stated three major theories:
1. The fundamental role of social interaction in the process of cognitive development.
He felt that social learning preceded development and stated (1978) that “every

function in the child’s cultural development appears twice: first, on the social level,
and later, on the individual level; first, between people, and then inside the child.”
2. The More Knowledgeable Other. This refers to anyone with a better understanding
than the learner in regards to something. It can be an adult, a teacher or even a
computer.
3. The Zone of Proximal Development. That is the distance between a student’s ability
to perform a task under guidance and his/her ability to solve it independently.
Constructivism is a learning theory that states that the students should be given certain tools
that allow them to create their own procedures to solve a problematic situation, which
implies that their ideas will be constantly being modified allowing them to keep on
learning.
Constructivism states that learning is essentially active. A person that learns something new
incorporates that into the previous experiences and his own mind structures. Each new
piece of information is assimilated and deposited in a net of knowledge and experiences
that previously exist on the person. As a result we can say that learning is not passive or
objective, on the contrary, “learning is an intensely subjective, personal process and
structure that each person constantly and actively modifies in light of new experiences”
(Abbott, 1999).
2.2.1 Role of the Teacher
Bruner (1961, cited in MacLeod, 2008) stated that “The role of the teacher should not be to
teach information by rote learning, but instead to facilitate the learning process. This means
that a good teacher will design lessons that help student discover the relationship between
bits of information. To do this a teacher must give students the information they need, but
without organizing for them. The use of the spiral curriculum can aid the process of
discovery learning”.
According to Larsen-Freeman (1986, cited by Galloway, 1993), “teachers in
communicative classrooms will find themselves talking less and listening more--becoming
active facilitators of their students' learning”. The teacher dedicates more time to observe
since the student’s performance is the main goal. In the words of Galloway (1993), “The

students do most of the speaking, and frequently the scene of a classroom during a
communicative exercise is active, with students leaving their seats to complete a task.
2.3 Meaningful Learning
Meaningful learning from the pedagogical point of view comes from the vision of Ausubel,
a constructivist.
The concept of “meaningful learning” appears when a student relates new information with
the one he already has and readjusts it and builds new knowledge and experiences from it.
Ausubel (1986) viewed learning as an active process, not simply responding to the
environment. He said that “learners seek to make sense of their surroundings by integrating
new knowledge with that which they have already learned” (Ausubel, 1986).
Human beings have the disposition to –really- learn only what they can find real sense or
logic. We tend to reject what seems meaningless. The only authentic learning is the one that
is meaningful. Any other type of learning will be purely mechanical and by memory.
Meaningful learning requires motivation that involves wanting to learn, previous
knowledge to be connected with the new knowledge and the construction of meaning that
have to be clear and specific.
Some of the advantages of meaningful learning that can be found:
 It makes the acquisition of new knowledge easier.
 Lasting retention of the information.
 Active learning.
 Teaching becomes personal.
Ausubel (1962) defines learning as “… a change in the availability or future reproducibility
of the learning material”. According to him, a student can learn from a concept,
explanation, knowledge, etc. as long as he attributes a meaning to it. This means,
establishing a relation between what he knows and what he learns.
Therefore it could be state that for learning to be meaningful, the student has to be able to
give meaning to what he is learning.

2.4 Language Acquisition Theories
To relate to the Language Acquisition Theories, first, we need to determine the meaning of
language acquisition.
First, for a student to learn a second language, it is essential to have a mother tongue.
Without the mother tongue (or “L1”) we cannot have a notion of or learn another language.
For this reason, there have been several studies about Language Acquisition. Here we can
highlight the names of Stephen Krashen and Saussure that explain and clarify what
language is.
Saussure’s (1959 cited by Irvine, 2004) starting point is a structural description (the abstract
and necessary rules) of the conventional abstract codes that link speech sounds and
linguistic meaning; “that is, how acoustic stimuli (sounds, signifiers) get mapped onto
meanings (signified "content") in any language”. For Saussure, “a linguistic (or any cultural
meaning-unit) is a "sign," specifically defined as the arbitrary--but internally necessary--
coupling of a sensory vehicle (speech sounds, printed words)… and a mental concept”. On
one end, for Saussure language is a system of signs with rules that is a cultural instrument.
On the other hand, he also defines it as “speech”, that is the use of this system to
communicate.
We can summarize Saussure’s view by saying that language is seen as a mixture of speech
(sounds to communicate) and signs (signs and rules that help us to communicate): The
signifier and the signifier.
Image 1 shows the difference between signified and signifier.

Another author that alludes to language acquisition is Stephen Krashen.
For Krashen (1981), “the 'acquired system' or 'acquisition' is the product of a subconscious
process very similar to the process children undergo when they acquire their first language.
It requires meaningful interaction in the target language - natural communication - in which
speakers are concentrated not in the form of their utterances, but in the communicative act”.
Krashen proposes five theories for Language Acquisition. These are:
 Acquisition v/s Learning
 Natural Order
 Monitor
 Comprehensible Input
 Affective Filter
The present case will focus on two of his theories:
 Affective Filter
 Comprehensible Input
2.4.1 Affective Filter Theory
The Affective Filter Theory was proposed by Krashen (1982), who speaks of how and how
much information is acquired regarding the socio-environmental factor. This means that in
a way, the environment where a language is being acquired has an impact on its
development. Our disposition to learn affects the way in which we learn, in this case, a new
language.
The “filter” is defined by Krashen (1982) as “that part of the internal processing system that
subconsciously screens incoming language".
According to Krashen (1982), this is an obstacle that can be present during language
acquisition – but not in language learning- acting as a “screen” of emotional variables. In
the words of Xiaoyan Du (2009), “people with high affective filter will lower their intake

whereas people with low affective filter allow more input into their language acquisition
device”.
Krashen argued that people acquire a second language only if they obtain comprehensible
input and if their affective filters are low enough to allow the input ‘in’.
There are mainly four factors that can influence the second language acquisition.
 Motivation: This term is defined by Gardner (1985) as "the extent to which the
individual works or strives to learn the language because of a desire to do so and the
satisfaction experienced in this activity”.
 Attitude: The students with positive attitude tend to learn a second language easily,
participate with an active role and showing rapid progress; while those with
negative attitude make slow progress because of a passive attitude towards the class.
 Anxiety: This term is described by Gardner and MacIntyre (1993) as "the
apprehension experienced when a situation requires the use of a second language
with which the individual is not fully proficient”. In terms of an English classroom,
anxiety has three levels: test anxiety (distress before, during or after an exam), fear
of negative evaluation and communication apprehension that is defined as the
"individual level of fear or anxiety associated with either real or anticipated
communication with another person or persons" by McCroskey (1977).
 Self-confidence: Self-confident people dare to adventure, to communicate in foreign
language and can gain more. Instead, students who lack self-confidence will lose
chances to practice the target language (TL) because they are afraid of making
mistakes.

Image 2 Shows a map of the factors involved in the filter
Therefore it is important to consider these four factors in order to achieve acquisition from
our students. It is the role of the teacher to try to know the students in order to be able to
determine the factors that can cause an excess of anxiety, for example: standing in front of
the class, reading out loud, etc.

2.4.2 Comprehensible Input Theory
Comprehensible input is another of Krashen’s theories in regards to language acquisition.
Krashen (2003) states that “We acquire language when we receive comprehensible input in
a low anxiety situation, that is, when we understand what people say to us and when we
understand what we read. This is the core of a general theory of language acquisition, a
combination of the Comprehension (a.k.a. Input) Hypothesis and the Affective Filter
Hypothesis. We do not, in other words, acquire language by learning about language, by
study of the rules and by memorizing vocabulary”.
Krashen proposes that to acquire a foreign language, we need to be exposed to
comprehensible input, which is described as something external that will motivate us to
acquire the language. This input needs to be motivational, comprehensible; it needs to
seduce the person into going beyond. It needs to be a little higher and more challenging
than what the person already handles. It is counter producing if what is going to be taught
has been learnt before, or is already in the students’ knowledge. It needs to be a little harder
or unknown so this motivates them into learning.
Krashen (2002) states that “free voluntary reading is an extremely powerful form of
comprehensible input, and it is delivered in a low-anxiety environment. Those who
participate in free reading programs in school make superior gains in reading, vocabulary,
grammar, and writing”.
This is what is called “I+1” (Input + 1). Schütz (2014) states that “According to this
hypothesis, the learner improves and progresses when he/she receives second language
'input' that is one step beyond his/her current stage of linguistic competence. For example,
if a learner is at a stage 'i', then acquisition takes place when he/she is exposed to
'Comprehensible Input' that belongs to level 'i + 1'. We can then define 'Comprehensible
Input' as the target language that the learner would not be able to produce but can still
understand”.
Taking these two hypotheses to the reality of this investigation, it is important to mention
that to generate learning results in our students from first year of high school in regards to

the English subject, it is necessary for them to control their first language (mother tongue).
Since this is a fact in all students, we need a low affective filter in all students so they will
be motivated to learn a little beyond their knowledge (i+1) and this will be achieved by
creating an environment that is favorable for a good acquisition.
2.5 Multiple Intelligences by Gardner
In order to determine the kind of students this study will work with, it is necessary to apply
a test based on Gardner’s M. I. (Multiple Intelligences). This will give us a pass to apply
realia exercises in pre-task activities, since this method works better with certain type of
students.
Howard Gardner (1991) has identified seven different types of intelligences. In his own
words, his theory "documents the extent to which students possess different kinds of minds
and therefore learn, remember, perform, and understand in different ways".
According to Gardner (1991) "we are all able to know the world through language, logical-
mathematical analysis, spatial representation, musical thinking, the use of the body to solve
problems or to make things, an understanding of other individuals, and an understanding of
ourselves. Where individuals differ is in the strength of these intelligences - the so-called
profile of intelligences -and in the ways in which such intelligences are invoked and
combined to carry out different tasks, solve diverse problems, and progress in various
domains.”
Gardner says that these differences “challenge the educational system” because it is
assumed that all students learn in the same way and should be taught the same way. This is
to create a sense of uniformity and universality. According to him, students learn in ways
that are distinctive and it would be better if the different subjects could be taught in a
numbers of ways so learning could be assessed through a variety of means.

The learning styles are as follows:
 Visual/Spatial (learning through seeing)
 Bodily/Kinesthetic (learning through moving, doing and touching)
 Musical (learning through music)
 Interpersonal (learning in groups and by working collaboratively)
 Intrapersonal (learning independently and introspectively)
 Linguistic (learning through hearing)
 Logical-Mathematical (learning through numbers)
As we already know, different students have different cognitive characteristics expressed in
the classroom through their different learning styles. It is important for teachers to consider
this aspect before planning a class.
2.5.1 Type of students based on Gardner’s M. I.
Based on Gardner’s M. I. theory, Professor Loom (n.d) created a chart in which each type
of student is described in terms of his dominant intelligence. The parameters are useful and
meant to help teachers determine how to work with each type of student. These parameters
explain what the student likes to do, what he is good at and the best way he learns
something. The chart is showed next:

Image 3. Shows the types of learners and how to teach them.
Considering this aspects it becomes easier to work with the different kinds of intelligences.
Through this chart it is easier for a teacher to determine the kind of activity or activities to
perform with the different type of students.

2.6 Communicative Approach
In the words of Richards (2006), The Communicative Approach, also called
“Communicative language teaching can be understood as a set of principles about the goals
of language teaching, how learners learn a language, the kinds of classroom activities that
best facilitate learning, and the roles of teachers and learners in the classroom”.
Communicative language teaching can be understood as a set of principles about:
 The goals of language teaching,
 How learners learn a language,
 The kinds of classroom activities that best facilitate learning,
 and the roles of teachers and learners in the classroom.
The Communicative Approach teaches the communicative competence as opposed to the
grammatical competence (knowledge of the “building blocks” of sentences). Richards
(2006) argues that “one can master the rules of sentence formation in a language and still
not be very successful at being able to use the language for meaningful communication”.
The Communicative Competence Includes:
 Knowing how to use language for a range of different purposes and functions)
 Knowing how to vary our use of language according to the setting and the
participants (formal/informal)
 Knowing how to produce and understand different types of texts (e.g., narratives,
reports, interviews, conversations)
 Knowing how to maintain communication despite having limitations in one’s
language knowledge (e.g., through using different kinds of communication
strategies)
In the case of the role of the students, they are expected to take on a greater degree of
responsibility for their own learning (Constructivism). And teachers now have to assume
the role of facilitator and monitor, seeing the mistakes students make as chances to improve
and facilitate the learning process.

The previous theories were centered mostly on grammar and habit formation through
correction and repetition; no mistakes were available. Now, and through the
Communicative Approach, there’s an interaction centered hypothesis that uses
collaborative creation of meaning in order to achieve meaningful interaction. This can be
achieved through negotiation of meaning and feedback (peer feedback and the one given by
the teacher). In this approach, experimenting with language and paying attention to it
(through input) is very important as a way of incorporating new knowledge.
The activities used previously to this approach were mostly based on memorization of
grammar use in order to produce mechanical sentences. The Communicative Approach
proposes pair work activities, role play, group work and projects in order to support
meaningful learning.
The communicative activities can be divided into three different phases that will depend of
their moment of application: Pre-communicative phase, Communicative phase and Post-
Communicative phase.
The Pre-Communicative phase is meant to “set the scene” in terms of motivation and is
also used for language input. Here, vocabulary and structures that will be needed for the
Communicative phase are going to be presented or revised. In the Communicative phase,
students use the language to do a communicative task. It is recommended to try to use all
four skills in a communicative way. And the Post-Communicative phase reflects on and
analyzes the task done previously. It is the moment to use feedback and discussion of
perception and awareness of the language.
The roles of the teaching materials are:
 To support the language acquisition
 To influence the quality of classroom interaction
 To promote communicative language use

There are three types of materials.
1) Text-based (for example: table of contents)
2) Task-based (for example: cards- role play)
3) Realia (for example: real objects brought to support the class). The type of material
used in this investigation in particular will be realia in the shape of real objects that
will support the teaching of vocabulary.
In this investigation, number three, Realia, will be used.
There is a difference between real objects and authentic material and they are very often
thought as the same. Hubbard et al (1987) describe authentic materials as “samples of
language, which are not designed for language teaching purposes”. Comparing, it can be
stated that Realia refers to a wide range of materials, of any kind, which are brought to the
classroom with the objective of doing innumerable activities based on language learning
goals; and authentic material are ideally used in order to work with socio-cultural aspects of
a foreign language, by “making the learner and the language studied come together through
samples of real life situations in places, where this language is spoken” (Cancelas and
Ouviña, 2013).
2.7 Realia
Herell and Jordan (2004) define Realia as “real things or concrete objects that are used in
the classroom to build background knowledge and vocabulary”.
Under this statement, realia is considered as real objects from the world outside the
classroom that are used to practice a new language, as a way to present meaningful
examples to students. The British Council site proposes that “realia refers to any real object
we use in the classroom to bring the class to life”. Considering this, realia can be used as an
example or aid when teaching a foreign language.

Richards and Platt (1998) see realia as “actual objects and items which are brought into a
classroom as examples or aids to be talked or written about and used in language teaching
such as: articles of clothing, kitchen utensils, items of food, etc.”. This means that realia is
seen as an infinite number of things or objects from the real realm.
Realia and authentic materials are seeing as two different things: Berwarld (1987) indicates
that “realia refers to real objects, specimens or artifacts – not copies, models or
representations – from a particular culture. Indeed authentic materials are designed for use
in real life situations, not for used as instruction tools.”
The implementation of materials create a more natural setting, where the learner acquires a
foreign language, much like a child learns his mother tongue in early stages of life.
Considering this factors, the use of realia can make language acquisition come as a natural
process, presenting an advantage for the learner, considering he would be acquiring a
second language the same way he or she acquired the mother tongue.
2.7.1 Benefits of Realia
The question is, why realia? The answer is because realia is suitable to the characteristics of
the students, especially those who are visual or kinesthetic. It also is suitable for teaching
new vocabulary words to beginners. Berwarld (1987) stated that “Realia and other
authentic materials provide a wide range of printed and spoken messages that can be used
as primary or secondary material in a foreign language classroom”.
Realia is a good option to be explored since, as a situation that doesn’t bring anxiety, it
maintains the students’ affective filter low and helps them get comprehensible input
through more than one sense. This is the main reason why this method was chosen.

CHAPTER III

III Methodological Framework
3.1 Design
This study was carried out under the frame of a qualitative research. This thesis project will
constitute a Case Study.
According to Sampieri (2010), “qualitative research is focused on understanding and into
detail about the different phenomena, exploring them from the participants’ perspective in a
natural and context centered environment”. According to him, the qualitative approach is
selected when there’s the need for understanding the participants’ perspective (individuals
or small groups of people that will be investigated) about the phenomena that surround
them, going deeper into their experiences, perspectives, opinions and meanings (the way in
which the participants perceive subjectively their reality). This approach is useful to be
selected when the subject of the study has been little explored, or no investigation has been
done to that specific group. The qualitative process begins with the idea of an investigation.
According to Punch (1998), “Qualitative research is empirical research where the data are
not in the form of numbers”.
In the words of Sampieri (2010), the qualitative approaches are: “opened, expansive, and
not directed at the beginning, supported by experience and intuition, applied to a small
number of cases. The understanding of the phenomena is in all its dimensions, oriented to
learning from experiences and points of view of the individuals, valorizing processes and
generating theories supported by the participants’ perspective”.
It is because of the previous description that the Case Study was chosen to work with the
qualitative research. This is because the chosen subjects represent a small sample and the
goal of the investigation is to learn from the experience and points of view of the
individuals. This was performed by analyzing the subjects, their environment and the order
in which the facts, in this case the use of realia in pre-communicative activities, was
applied.

According to Hitchcock and Hughes (1995), there are several distinctive features of Case
Studies: “Rich descriptions of events, chronological order, analysis of events, analysis of
people (perceptions), highlighting specific events, richness of the case is shown in the
report”.
Yin (1994 cited by Tellis, 1997) presented at least four applications for a case study model:
 “To explain complex causal links in real-life interventions
 To describe the real-life context in which the intervention has occurred
 To describe the intervention itself
 To explore those situations in which the intervention being evaluated has no clear
set of outcomes”.
In this case, it is explained an intervention itself and the context in which it occurred.
This design follows a “Narrative Exposition”, presenting the information about the various
subjects one after the other, in order (Sampieri, 2010).
This case study is aimed at “individual actors or group of actors and search for understand
their perceptions of events. It enhances specific events that are relevant to the case, and an
attempt is made to represent the richness of the case in writing up the report.” (Hitchcock
and Hughes cited in McKay).
The aims of the present Case Study are finding out the students’ perception of the impact of
using realia in pre-communicative activities in L2 classrooms; to record the benefits of the
use of realia in pre-communicative activities in L2 classrooms; and to suggest the use of
realia as means to present vocabulary in pre-communicative activities to teachers of English
as a foreign language.
The data gathered in this investigation includes tests, questionnaires responses, interviews
and classroom observations.

3.2 Subjects and Context
The participants of this study were 40 students from two courses, First year of High school
“A” and “B”, of the School República de Colombia, from Viña del Mar during the first
semester of the years 2014.
These students, in general, have had English classes for at least five years (from 4th
grade in
Elementary School). Despite this fact, the students overall English proficiency level is
classified as “beginners”.
All students were included in the Case Study since they all participated of the School’s
regular English classes. It was on First year “A” that two students were exempted of the
English class and left the classroom during the class to work with the school’s psychologist.
The students’ attendance varied considerably during the weeks of observation and
intervention due to reasons as the weather (There is winter during the students’ first
semester), bad behavior or sickness. This is the reason why most questionnaires and tests
have low attendance. For example, the questionnaire on Learning Styles was only answered
by 30 students.
This students’ context, as it was stated before, is from a low socio-cultural stratum. The
School is inclusive and receives students that had repeated one or more years of their
education or the ones who had stopped studying for years and then were reincorporated to a
School. These students are older than their supposed age to be in first year of High school.
Most of the students in the classroom are in “educational disadvantage” as stated by
Natriello (1990) speaking about education in United States that can easily be applied to
these students’ context: “Factors defining risk or educational disadvantage include race and
ethnicity, poverty, single-parent family structure, poorly educated mothers, and limited
English proficiency”. In this case, instead of a limited English proficiency, some students
don’t manage their mother tongue (Spanish) very well and replace many words with slang
or bad language, which is seen as normal in their context and even at their homes.
According to Burkham and Lee (2002), “Social inequalities in school increase as children
advance through school mainly because of differentiation in educational experiences that

begin as early as first grade (with reading groups, special education placement, and
retention), extend through elementary school (as ability grouping, special education, and
gifted and talented programs continue), and are well recognized by high school (with
formal and informal tracking, advanced placement, and the like).” This means that
students’ characteristics are defined in early years and so it is important to determine them
earlier. The student’s affective filter towards a determined subject also can be related to his
perception of it during his first years of schooling or his home education or parents’ opinion
in regards to it.
According to Harmer (2001) “the age of our students is a major factor in our decisions
about how and what to teach. People of different ages have different needs, competences,
and cognitive skills”. This was taken into consideration by applying the Learning Styles
questionnaire to determine the students’ different cognitive skills in order to determine the
best teaching methodology that would best suit both courses.
Teenagers, despite the fact that sometimes their motivation is low and may seem
uncooperative to the class, are the best language learners, according to Ur (1996 as cited by
Harmer, 2001). This is due to several factors, but the most important one is the search for
individual identity, and that this search provides the key challenge for this age group… not
to mention the problems they bring into the class from outside school. This was Harmer’s
opinion and describes exactly the main problem within these two courses –and most
courses at this School. According to Harmer (1998), students “may push teachers to the
limit, but they are much happier if that challenge is met, if the teacher actually manages to
control them, and if it’s done in a supportive and constructive way so that he or she ‘helps
rather than shouts’”.
Finally, Harmer (2001) concludes saying that “teenagers, if they are engaged, have a great
capacity to learn, a great potential for creativity, and a passionate commitment to things,
which interest them”. This is why the affective variable is so important. Maslow (1987)
said that “the learning experience and how it makes students feel about themselves is an
issue that has educators preoccupied”.

After considering this facts and knowing the students’ context it became imperative to think
of new ways to teach these students in order to give them a teaching experience that would
lower their affective filter and help in the vocabulary acquisition stage.
3.3 Description of Methodology used in Class at School
During the first Unit that was taught, there was a search for different ways to encourage
students’ motivation and transform the class into a more active one. The students did not
respond well to listening, writing, worksheets or flashcards to teach vocabulary, which is
both courses main weakness. This information was given by the students’ English teacher
before the investigation and intervention started and confirmed during throughout the
application of the first Unit where all those elements were used.
After this, the need to apply a questionnaire to determine the students’ learning style in
order to find a more adequate method that would suit their cognitive abilities became a
need and a means to begin solving the problem. (SEE APPENDIX FOR LEARNING
STYLES QUESTIONNAIRE).
The most used methods (by the Guide Teacher) for teaching vocabulary where: short films
and videos with the contents the students were more familiarized with (SEE APPENDIX
FOR TEACHER’S QUESTIONNAIRE).
3.4 Instruments
As it was explained before, there was the need to determine students’ learning styles in
order to find a methodology that would best suit their cognitive capacities. There was also
important to know the students’ opinion in terms of the methodologies used in the first unit
in order to contrast them with their perceptions after applying realia in a pre-
communicative activity to introduce new vocabulary. This was carried out by a plenary
conversation in which most students participated. The aim of this plenary was only to have

a general opinion based on the observation of this process (SEE APPENDIX FOR
PLENARY OBSERVATION REPORT).
Along with that, once the methodology was found, students needed to be tested in terms of
previous knowledge of the new vocabulary words that were going to be taught throughout
the presentation using realia during the pre-communicative stage of the communicative
activity. This was done through a very simple test applied at the beginning and end of the
second Unit “Technology and Inventions” to determine the improvement made by students
in terms of vocabulary acquisition. (SEE APPENDIX FOR VOCABULARY
KNOWLEDGE TEST).
Finally, to fulfill the objective of exploring the students’ perception of the impact of using
realia in pre-communicative activities in L2 classrooms, a questionnaire was applied. The
purpose of this questionnaire was to determine the students’ way of seeing how realia
affected them and the impact it had when compared to the previous methods they had seen
in classes. (SEE APPENDIX FOR STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION QUESTIONNAIRE).
3.4.1 Learning Styles Questionnaire
During the first part of the practicum experience, during Unit 1, not part of the
documentation of this Study, it was necessary to explore several methods and learning
approaches in order to achieve students to connect with the subject and obtain a positive
answer that would prove they are acquiring vocabulary and not just memorizing for a test to
later forget. For this reason, it was important to determine not just the context of the
students, presented previously in detail, but also to determine the way they learn, in a
cognitive level, in order to plan the classes accordingly.
This is why a learning styles questionnaire was applied. This tool was retrieved from
Internet at the Edutopia website and later validated by an English teacher.
The present questionnaire was retrieved from a webpage (mentioned previously) dedicated
to provide resources for education. The students were given an answer sheet to complete
with their interests just as showed on the questionnaire. The questions were presented in

Spanish in a PPT presentation in order to help students answer as accurately as possible and
they were read by the teacher.
The completion of the test took almost ten minutes and students were told their answers
would be kept a secret and used to create a chart to be presented as evidence in a Case
Study and also to determine the best method to teach vocabulary in the following unit.
All 30 students that participated in the application of the test did it in conscious of what
they were doing. The chosen amount was 40 students that made up the average of both
selected courses but, as the rate of attendance was so fluctuant, only thirty students
participated by answering this questionnaire.
This quote was used as introduction and it belongs to the webpage the questionnaire was
retrieved from: “This quiz asks 24 questions and will take less than five minutes to
complete. Try not to think too hard -- just go with your first thought when describing your
daily activities and interests. By the end, you may have some new insights into your
learning preferences.” The translation into Spanish was made orally by the teacher.
This instrument, as it was presented previously, had 24 questions is divided into the
following four sections:
 How much time do you spend…
 How keen would you be to…
 When you are in a group, how often do you find yourself…
 How well do these statements describe you…
The students had to complete with the degree in which those statements described them.
The scale went from zero (or similar definition) to four, ascending from negative to positive
statements.
Table 1. Example of the scale answers used in the questionnaire. Statements 1-7.
0 None
1 Only a little
2 A fair amount

3 A lot
4 All the time
Example First Statement: “How much time do you spend… Getting lost in a good book”
3.4.2 Plenary Observation Report
The plenary observation report was written after finishing the first Unit in which several
methods were used in order to capture students’ attention, lower their affective filter and
achieve acquisition of vocabulary.
This plenary was held during a class. It took 5 minutes and several students gave their
opinion in terms of their perception of the application of the first unit.
It turned around three questions. The observation made during the plenary was registered in
a report:
1) Did you like the way vocabulary was taught during the first unit? And in previous
classes?
2) Would you like to see a different method?
3) What way would you like the teacher to present vocabulary words to you?
3.4.3 Vocabulary Knowledge Test
The new vocabulary words that the students were going to learn were presented twice
during the Unit. First, it was presented before the Unit started as a way of determining the
student’s previous knowledge in regards to the vocabulary. The second time it was applied
occurred after finishing the Unit. This time the aim was to determine the changes in terms
of the increase in the students’ knowledge after using realia.

The Test consisted on a Matching activity with words and images. In this test, students had
to determine which word corresponded to the presented image. It was meant to take no
more than 20 minutes.
During the first application of the test, students were asked to answer the test in silence and
ask questions directly to the teacher. They were told the activity was not graded in order to
lower their affective filter. The students were not given the names of the words in Spanish
but the teacher provided the pronunciation of all in vocabulary words in English.
During the second application of the test, that was applied at the end of the unit, students
were instructed the same. This time, the test was meant to prove the students’ improvement
in terms of vocabulary acquisition and how well they were able to relate the image with the
written word and the pronunciation given by the teacher.
The vocabulary words are the following ones:
Table 2. List of vocabulary words presented through the use of realia.
1) Old 2) New 3) Telegraph
4) Cellular Phone 5) Morse Code 6) Vacuum Valve
7) Transistor 8) Floppy disk 9) DVD
10) Pen drive 11) Cassette 12) Personal Stereo
13) MP3 player
Even though, for the reader, many of the words may seem familiar, for the students, most of
them were new since they are too young and with severe lack of vocabulary both in Spanish
and English to figure out a way to associate the written words with real objects and the
pronunciation.

3.4.4 Students’ Perception Questionnaire
This questionnaire constituted the primary instrument of data collection for this study. The
questionnaire´s objective was to determine the students’ perception of the impact of using
realia in pre-communicative activities in L2 classrooms at República de Colombia School.
Its purpose was to find out the students’ opinion on how the use of realia had an impact on
their vocabulary acquisition. The idea of documenting these results will serve as a way to
prove that teaching High school students from low socio-cultural stratums using realia
brings benefits in terms of vocabulary acquisition and also a positive attitude towards
vocabulary classes.
This questionnaire was given to the students at the end of the Unit “Technology and
Inventions”. The results can easily be contrasted to the ones obtained in the plenary
observation report to determine the impact that teaching realia had on the students’
vocabulary acquisition when compared to their perceptions from the application of the first
unit using different methodologies.
The questionnaire was composed of ten statements and students had to answer Yes or No in
order to determine their perception and positive or negative attitude towards the application
of realia during the pre-communicative part of communicative activities.
3.4.5 Teacher’s Questionnaire
This instrument was given to the guide teacher in order to record her perception of the use
of realia and the impact it had on the students from her point of view and comparing it to
the use of other methods. It was also a way to determine the teachers’ previous
understanding of the use of realia.
The questionnaire consisted of six questions that the teacher answered via email in Spanish.
This questionnaire ended with a suggestion for using realia to teach vocabulary to the
students with the previously defined characteristics in order to achieve a better disposition
from the students and a low affective filter to obtain real vocabulary acquisition.

3.5 Procedure
The administration of the learning style questionnaire was carried out after finishing the
first Unit and at the middle of the first semester during English classes’ hours. The students
were told the results would be completely confidential and used in a Case Study, where
only the teacher in training would have access to them. 30 students answered the
questionnaire.
The plenary questions were also held after finishing the first unit, since the new method
would be used after knowing the results. Students were asked to gather in a semi-circle and
to answer in honesty to the three before mentioned questions. This conversation was very
short and lasted approximately five minutes. The teacher in training read the questions both
in Spanish and English and then, the students answered in order, complementing each
other’s answers. This instrument was carried out in Spanish since students’ fluency was
needed in order to record their impressions and opinions. 35 students were present during
the plenary.
The vocabulary knowledge test during its first application was carried out after determining
most of the students had the characteristics of bodily/kinesthetic and visual/spatial
cognitive abilities. Realia was chosen to be applied with the students and a list of “new”
and “old” technologies and inventions was created. The total of items was 13 and they were
presented in the test through a matching activity in which the images and the written words
were needed to be put together by the students. The instructions were read in English and
explained through miming. In some cases it was necessary to give a short explanation in
Spanish. The students were told the activity was not graded in order to lower their affective
filter. The teacher read the words in English and students took about twenty minutes to
complete the activity. The attendance was of 30 students in total.
The class using realia in a pre-communicative stage was held in a two pedagogical hour
period and the teacher in practice, who established the case to be analyzed, used two bags
in which the elements were kept. The title “New and Old” was put through a PPT
presentation and the teacher showed the class the two bags. One looked as it was made of
metal and had drawn screws; the other bag was made of brown paper and looked worn-out.

The teacher asked the students if they could identify the “old” and the “new” bag and
explained some new and old technologies were kept inside them. Students were able to
determine the meaning of “new” and guess that the other one was “old”. Students provided
answers out loud both in Spanish and English to associate the words “new and old” to their
Spanish translation “nuevo y viejo”. Once the meaning of the two words was stated,
students were asked to take one by one the objects of the “old” bag. Every time an old
object appeared, the teacher took a “new” object out of the other bag to show how that
invention had improved through the use of new technologies. After taking every object, the
teacher gave the students the correct pronunciation of the name of the item and asked them
to repeat several times in order to achieve a clear pronunciation. All items were passed
along through the classroom so all the students would be able to touch, see, experiment,
move and feel the objects they were given. After every new vocabulary word was presented
in a real object, the word’s spelling was presented in a PPT presentation with a picture of
the object. This is so students could see the object, read the word and listen and repeat to
the teachers’ pronunciation. After the pre-communicative activity, the teacher moved to the
communicative part of the class and asked students to gather in groups and choose at least
seven objects and create a new invention. This is a fantasy invention so there are no
limitations. Students have to present their inventions the following class. The materials
given to the students were a white poster board and markers. They could use the dictionary.
This procedure was repeated in both courses and it was a way to allow students to create
using the new words and to acquire vocabulary in a meaningful way so they would
remember it and use it in real life and not just in the preparation for a test.
The second application of the vocabulary knowledge test was held after the second unit was
over and approximately three weeks after the previously described procedure in order to
determine the effectiveness of the students’ acquisition of the vocabulary words. The
students were given the same instructions as in the first application and the test lasted the
same time. 30 students participated of this test.
The students’ perception questionnaire was applied at the end of the semester and it was
answered by 30 students. Students were instructed to answer the statements by marking
“Yes” or “No” next to it. The answers were kept confidential. This questionnaire pretended

to determine the students’ perception of the introduction of new vocabulary through the use
of realia.
The teachers’ questionnaire was held at the end of the semester and acted as a way to
record the guide teacher’s opinion of the use of realia in the classroom as a way to teach
vocabulary. And also, to record the teacher’s experience with the students, methods used
previously and her own description of the students’ context. The answers were sent via
email.
All of these instruments were used in order to obtain accurate information to complement
with the observations made throughout this qualitative research.

CHAPTER IV

4.1 Findings
4.1.1 Learning styles questionnaire
This questionnaire was held in order to determine de students’ learning styles based on
Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences theory. The total of students that participated in this
questionnaire was 30. Students were given an answer sheet to complete with their interests
just as showed on the questionnaire. The questions were presented in Spanish in a PPT
presentation in order to help students answer as accurately as possible and they were read
by the teacher, giving students time to answer.
In the following chart the primary and secondary intelligences are shown, which define the
learning style for most of the students in the classroom. The answers were retrieved from
the Edutopia webpage which allowed the information to be registered in order to get a
chart.
Image 4. Results of the Predominant Learning Styles among students.
Image 1 expresses the results of the main learning style among students. The results of the
questionnaires show that 60% of the students (18 students) are mainly body/kinesthetic;
30% (9 students) are visual/spatial and 10% (3 students) are mainly interpersonal.
Learning Styles - Primary
Bodily/Kinesthetic.
Visual/Spatial
Interpersonal

Image 5. Results of the Secondary Learning Styles among students.
Image 2 expresses the results of the secondary learning style among students. The results of
the questionnaires show that 30% of the students (9 students) are body/kinesthetic as a
secondary characteristic; 40% (12 students) are visual/spatial; 20% (6 students) are mainly
interpersonal and 10% (3 students) are naturalistic. This is as a second Intelligence
developed by the students (their main intelligence was determined on Image 1).
The rest of the learning styles were shown in third of fourth place and where not considered
necessary to be mentioned in this study because they were presented in percentages under
40% in third or fourth place in order or importance according to the students’ answers. This
other learning styles correspond to: linguistic, logical-mathematical, intrapersonal and
musical.
The results of the learning styles’ questionnaire show that students of the two intervened
courses were mainly Bodily/kinesthetic and Visual/Spatial. The interpersonal intelligence is
also very present.
Learning Styles - Secondary
Bodily/Kinesthetic
Visual/Spatial
Interpersonal
Naturalistic

4.1.2 Plenary Observation Report
The plenary was focused on three questions to determine the students’ perception of the
methods used in the previous unit to teach vocabulary. The questions were asked in Spanish
to assure students’ fluency. All students were able to answer the questions and create a
conversation moderated by the teacher.
First Question: Did you like the way vocabulary was taught during the first unit? And in
previous classes?
Teacher: ¿Les gustó la forma en que se enseñó el vocabulario en la Unidad 1?
Most students answered that they didn’t like the way the vocabulary was taught because
they didn’t like to write from the board or from a PPT presentation. Most students
acknowledged to have felt demotivated by the classes and so that affected the way they
were paying attention.
Second Question: Would you like to see a different method?
Teacher: ¿Les gustaría ver un método diferente?
Here, most of the students showed enthusiasm to change the way vocabulary was taught.
This is the first step into lowering the students’ anxiety that come from being faced to
something unfamiliar. They know they will have a new method and they showed, through
their answers that they will be receptive to it.
Third Question: What way would you like the teacher to present vocabulary words to
you?
Teacher: ¿De qué manera les gustaría que la profesora les presentara las palabras de
vocabulario?
Here, students answered that they would like vocabulary to be taught in a fun and
interesting way, where they could pay attention and not forget.

4.1.3 Vocabulary knowledge Test – First and second application.
During the first application of the test, students were not familiar with several of the
vocabulary words presented, especially the ones that represented old technologies.
There is a dramatic change in the results after the second application of the test. Students
were able to recall the images and their names in written English. In both tests, the teacher
read the names of the objects out loud in English.
Here there are the results one by one, considering 11 vocabulary objects and the
achievement level according to the results obtained. The first digits represent the first
application and the second ones, the second application.
Table 3. Object 1:
Correct Answers
15/30
30/30
Cassette
Table 4. Object 2:
Correct Answers
2/30
25/30
Floppy Disk

Table 5. Object 3:
Correct Answers
10/30
28/30
Telegraph
Table 6. Object 4:
Correct Answers
2/30
25/30
Vacuum Valve
Table 7. Object 5:
Correct Answers
5/30
26/30
Transistor
Table 8. Object 6:
Correct Answers
20/30
30/30
DVD

Table 9. Object 7:
Correct Answers
10/30
30/30
Pen drive
Table 10. Object 8:
Correct Answers
20/30
28/30
Cellular Phone
Table 11. Object 9:
Correct Answers
5/30
26/30
Personal Stereo
Table 12. Object 10:
Correct Answers
10/30
29/30
MP3 Player

Table 13. Object 11:
Correct Answers
5/30
25/30
Morse Code
According to these results, after the first application, the only word that was most familiar
for the students was DVD. The rest of the words presented were not familiar because of the
spelling (like in the case of Pen drive) since students know very vaguely how to write or
pronounce them.
After the second application, students were able to recall how to write and/or recognize the
pronunciation of the vocabulary words by seeing the images and relating them to the real
objects that were brought to the classroom. The following graphic shows the difference.
Image 6. Comparative Graphic between first and second application test.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
First Application
Second Application

4.1.4 Students’ perception questionnaire
This questionnaire consisted of 10 questions. Students had to answer Yes or No to the
different statements created to determine their perception in regards to the impact that the
use of Realia had on their vocabulary acquisition process. The questionnaire was held at the
end of the semester and approximately a month after the pre-communicative activity with
the use of Realia. The questionnaire was presented in Spanish for students’ best
understanding.
The questions and their answers are presented next:
Question N°1: Me gustó relacionarme con objetos reales para aprender vocabulario.
In this question, all thirty students (100%) answered Yes. Students felt good by getting
involved with the real objects to learn vocabulary.
Question N°2: La clase se volvió más interesante cuando se usaron objetos reales para
aprender vocabulario.
In this question, 25 (83.3%) students answered Yes because they though the class became
more interesting when the real objects were used to learn vocabulary.
Question N°3: Tener contacto cercano con los objetos me ayudó a recordarlos mejor.
In this question, 26 (86.6%) of the students thought that having closer contact with the
objects helped them remember all better.
Question N°4: Me gustó conocer objetos de otras épocas y poder manipularlos.
In this question, 20 (66.6%) of the students were glad to get in touch with objects from
other times (old technologies) and being able to freely handle them.
Question N°5: Me ayudó tener los objetos frente a mí al momento de repetir sus nombres.
In this question, 24 (80%) of the students thought that having the objects in front of them at
the moment of repeating their names was helpful.

Question N°6: Me sentí relajada durante esta actividad. No sentí ansiedad.
In this question, all students (100%) didn’t feel anxious during the activity. They showed to
feel relaxed while participating in the class. This shows that the students’ affective filter
was low and allowed them to acquire new vocabulary.
Question N°7: Recuerdo, aún, más de la mitad de las palabras que aprendí (6 o más).
In this question, 28 (93.3%) of the students were able to remember more than half of the
words presented. This questionnaire was held at the end of the semester.
Question N°8: La actividad me animó a querer participar del resto de la clase.
In this question, 27 (90%) of the students thought that the pre-communicative activity
encouraged them to participate of the rest of the class (communicative activity).
Question N°9: Me fue muy fácil seguir el orden de la actividad de vocabulario.
In this question, 20 (66.6%) of the students thought that it was easy for them to follow the
order of the vocabulary activity.
Question N°10: Me gustaría que me enseñaran vocabulario con objetos reales en otras
unidades.
In this question, 30 (100%) of the students would like to be taught vocabulary using real
objects in the following Units.

Image 7. Graphic that shows the students’ perception answers in regards to the use of
Realia in pre-communicative activities.
The results of this questionnaire can easily be contrasted to the ones obtained in the plenary
observation report to determine the impact that teaching Realia had on the students’
vocabulary acquisition when compared to their perceptions from the application of the first
unit using different methodologies.
In this questionnaire, the students showed a positive reaction towards the use of Realia and
would like to learn more vocabulary through the use of real objects in the classroom.
4.1.5 Guide teacher’s questionnaire
The teacher’s questionnaire was designed to determine several aspects. The first one was to
determine the teacher’s previous knowledge in terms of the use of real objects and
communicative activities in the classroom. Other aspect was referred to the teacher’s
perception of the application of Realia in a pre-communicative activity. It was also
necessary to determine the teacher’s description of the students in terms of their context and
learning styles.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Si
No

The questionnaire was answered in Spanish by the teacher and sent via email.
The questions are the following:
1) ¿Antes de esta presentación, estaba familiarizada con el uso de Realia (objetos
reales) en la sala de clases para la enseñanza de vocabulario? ¿Y con el uso de
Actividades comunicativas?
In terms of this question the teacher mentioned she was familiar with Realia and
with the use of communicative activities because she had seen them during her
teaching practice at PUCV.
2) ¿Cuáles son las principales formas en las que enseña vocabulario a los alumnos del
Colegio Rep. de Colombia?
The teacher stated that she tries to teach vocabulary through videos, short films and
contents that the students are more familiarized to. This meant that many times she
needed to adapt the contents to match the students’ needs and context in order to
achieve significant learning.
3) ¿Es necesario considerar el tipo de estudiantes para así poder establecer un método
de enseñanza de vocabulario? ¿Qué consideraciones tomaría?
The teacher thinks it is very important to consider the type of students she has in
order to stablish a method for teaching vocabulary. She thinks it is important to
know the students’ social and cognitive reality in order to have a starting point to
the teaching of English.
4) ¿Cuál es su opinión de la lección realizada con el uso de Realia para presentar
vocabulario?
The teacher’s opinion in regards to the lesson made with the use of Realia to present
vocabulary is that it was very entertaining for the students. This, she says, is
because there were several objects that they didn’t know and by manipulating them,
it was easier for them to remember the new vocabulary.
5) ¿Cuál es su percepción con respecto a la efectividad que el uso de Realia tuvo en
esos cursos en particular?

The teacher’s perception in regards to the effectiveness of the use of Realia in these
particular courses is that the learning is going to last in time, not being limited just
to one test. This can be used in their real life context.
6) ¿Cómo describiría a las alumnas de este curso? (social, cultural, habilidades, forma
cómo aprenden mejor, tipo de inteligencia).
The teacher’s description of the students of this course is the following. The
students come from the city’s peripheral areas, and for this reason, socially and
cognitively there is a lot to work on with them. They have established abilities and
when it comes to learning new ones, they have problems acquiring them at the
beginning. She believes that they learn more by doing and putting the contents into
practice.
From this questionnaire we can determine that the teacher’s perception of using Realia as a
means to teach vocabulary is positive and that the learning will last in time, not being
limited to a test at the end of the unit but it can be used in the students’ life and following
contents. She also acknowledges the need to adapt the contents to meet the student’s
necessities in terms of their context and socio cultural reality.
This instrument proved to be helpful and necessary in order to open Realia as a suggestion
for further vocabulary presentation to these students and the ones in other courses that may
match their characteristics.

4.2 Discussion
Students were exposed to communicative activities in order to improve their significant
learning and assure vocabulary acquisition that would help them create their own mental
vocabulary list. The problem these students had was referred to vocabulary acquisition in
terms that they were not able to create sentences or write a composition because of their
serious vocabulary absence. It was important to find a way to teach vocabulary that would
assure acquisition in order to advance and improve their English proficiency.
During, specifically, the pre-communicative part of the activity the students were exposed
to Realia as a way to teach them vocabulary related to “technology and inventions”.
By doing this, the study pretended to explore the students’ perception of the impact of
using Realia in pre-communicative activities. It was also aimed to record the benefits of the
use of Realia and to suggest the use of it as means to present vocabulary in pre-
communicative activities.
Students found a way, through touching and feeling the objects, to remember their names
and pronunciation in a best way than with the methods they had been exposed to before.
4.2.1 Perception of using Realia
The first objective of this study was to explore the student’s perception of the impact of
using realia in pre-communicative activities in L2 classroom. Through the analysis of the
main instrument of this case study, the students’ perception questionnaire, it is possible to
determine that the students had a positive attitude towards the use of Realia. It was proven
that students would like to continue to see Realia whenever they need to be exposed to new
vocabulary (stated by 100% of the students). The students also felt good by being in contact
with the objects and stated that it helped them to remember their names later and kept them
interested about the rest of the class, when it moved to the communicative activity.

All of the students felt no anxiety when exposed to Realia and this meant that their affective
filter was low enough for acquisition to occur. Students, after three weeks still were able to
describe and name more than 50% of the words.
The fact that 100% of the students both liked and would like to use Realia again in their
classes that involve vocabulary presentation means that despite most of the students were
bodily/kinesthetic or visual/spatial learners, Realia also works on the rest of the students
who primarily do not have those characteristics.
4.2.2 Recording benefits of the use of Realia
The second objective was to record the benefits of the use of Realia in pre-communicative
activities in L2 classrooms.
Through the different instruments presented, it was possible to record several benefits of
the use of Realia in the classroom in terms of: Motivating the students to participate and get
involved in their own learning; the effective acquisition of vocabulary words; the positive
attitude of the guide teacher and students towards the use of Realia, among others.
Realia proved to be of benefit in terms of vocabulary acquisition for High school students
from low socio cultural stratums.
One of the downsides of using realia is transporting it. The guide teacher mentioned Realia
worked amazingly in terms of vocabulary acquisition but comes with an “extra burden” for
teachers in the sense that they literally have to carry all of the objects and it gets more
complicated when vocabulary needs to be taught to more than one course. Despite this
reason, it is possible to apply Realia with objects related to the classroom or the school
itself in order to achieve a better vocabulary acquisition, or ask students to bring objects,
have field trips, etc. It is possible to keep on using Realia to teach most concrete vocabulary
and use it as aid to teach some abstract vocabulary as in the adjectives “new” and “old”,
presented in this study.

4.2.3 Suggesting the use of Realia
The third objective was to suggest the use of Realia as means to present vocabulary in pre-
communicative activities to teachers of English.
One of the reasons for using the teacher questionnaire was to determine her perception of
the performed class and determine, in this way, her interest in. All this was done in order to
suggest Realia for further vocabulary teaching classes. This is also complementary with the
students’ perception questionnaire that provided evidence of the positive perception that
students had towards the use of Realia in following classes that needed to teach vocabulary.
Please, go to the Limitations and SUGGESTIONS area of the present chapter for further
information.
4.3 Limitations and suggestions of the Investigation
Unfortunately, this case had some constraints. One of them is the gender, since all
participants were females, since all High school students of the República de Colombia
School are girls. There is a possibility this study could change significantly if it is applied
in a mixed course, since there could be a difference between the way boys and girls from
first year of High school acquire vocabulary and the way they respond to questionnaires
and tests.
One suggestion related to this limitation is to apply all tests and questionnaires in a mixed
course in order to compare the differences between male and female participants’ responses
in order to determine the benefits of the use of Realia in a wider range.
Other limitation is related to the type of learners the students were since there could be
classrooms where there are many different predominant learning styles. Although in this
case, 100% of the students liked and would like to see Realia exercises applied to learn
vocabulary, there might not be the case in a course with many different learning styles,
especially in mixed courses.

A suggestion related to this limitation would be to widen the number of courses in order to
obtain more characteristics of the different subjects and their main and secondary learning
styles.
Other suggestion would be to have a control group and teach vocabulary to it using a
different method. This is as means of stablishing a comparison. This would change the
qualitative approach of the investigation in order to obtain more data to be analyzed next to
the observations and perceptions presented by this study. Also, it is important to let
students know from the beginning the steps that will follow during the investigation, so that
students could be willing to and aware of what will come next. This is in order to maintain
their motivation and letting them know what the study will be about and the importance of
their participation and honest answers to the investigation.

4.4 Conclusion
The purpose of this Case Study was to explore the students’ perception and perceived
benefits of the use of Realia in pre-communicative activities as a way to acquire vocabulary
words and to suggest this as means to present vocabulary.
The general objectives of this research were: to explore learner’s perceptions of the impact
of using Realia in pre-communicative activities; to record the benefits of the use of realia in
pre-communicative activities; and to suggest the use of Realia as means to present
vocabulary in pre-communicative activities to teachers of English as a foreign language.
The results seemed to be positive towards the use of Realia in terms of motivation,
attention, low affective filter and successful acquisition of the given input.
After participating in a class using Realia as a way to teach vocabulary related to the Unit
“Technology and inventions” from their School Book, given by the Government, all of the
students considered that it was an interesting way to acquire vocabulary words. This is in
terms of vocabulary retention which was tested three weeks after the class involving Realia
during a communicative class. The same percentage of students agreed that they would like
to keep on seeing Realia when the teachers present new vocabulary because, according to
their answers, it was an interesting way that kept them focused on the class and its
development and also ready to participate in the following part of the class… moving on to
the main communicative activity that would imply to use the newly acquired vocabulary.
It can also be concluded that the students’ learning style is important in terms of them using
their main cognitive skills to respond to the class, in this case visual/spatial and
bodily/kinesthetic. But also, since all of the subjects answered they understood the class,
were interested and wanted to continue to see this means to acquire vocabulary and had a
positive perception of it, it can be concluded that the students’ learning style is not
mandatory to be the ones mentioned before in order for the acquisition to occur.
The diagnosis of the students’ context made by this observation and on behalf of the guide
teacher was a way to center the investigation and narrow it down to students, all girls, from
low socio cultural stratums. As it was stated by Natriello (1990) -when speaking about
education differences in United States but that can easily related to this students’ reality-

“factors defining risk or educational disadvantage include race and ethnicity, poverty,
single-parent family structure, poorly educated mothers, and limited English proficiency”.
In this case “limited Spanish proficiency” which acts as a barrier for learning or acquiring a
second language, included to the entire previous list which describes this students’ reality.
The results of the pre and post test showed that after a class using Realia, students are able
to acquire most of the vocabulary words and show it after being testes three weeks after the
exposure. This is a positive way of providing significant learning that will accompany the
students and allow them to use it later in other aspects of their lives or following Units,
helping them to create a mental “data base” with the acquired vocabulary words. This was a
big achievement since students used to memorize the vocabulary words for a test and then
forget them, causing them to suffer from serious problems when faced to writing or
speaking exercises weeks after the test. This was the starting point of the investigation that
was successfully overpassed through this study and its intervention.
To sum up, in terms of the students’ perception of the use of Realia and its benefits, it can
be understood through this study that the subjects demonstrated a positive reaction towards
its use and it has many benefits in terms of motivation since it maintains students interested
in the class and its following activities; in terms of affective filter, since it maintains it low
permitting the correct acquisition of the new vocabulary words shown through real objects.

References
Abbot, J. (1999). Constructing Knowledge, Reconstructing Schooling. Educational
Leadership.
Ausubel, D. El desarrollo de la expression oral en el aula. Carabela, 47.
Berwald, J. (1987). Teaching Foreign Languages with Realia and Other Authentic
Materials. ERIC Clearinghouse ~n Languages and Linguistics, Washington, D.C.
Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the
classroom (ASHE–ERIC Higher Education Rep. No. 1). Washington, DC: The George
Washington University, School of Education and Human Development. Page 2.
Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31
Gardner R. (1985) Social Psychology and Secong Language Learning: The role of attitudes
and motivation. Edward Arnold
Gardner, H. (1991). The unschooled mind: how children think and how schools should
teach. New York, NY.: basic Books.
Gardner, R.C. & MacIntyre, P.D. (1991). An instrumental motivation in language study:
Who says it isn't effective?: Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 266.
Hubbard, P., Jones, H., Thornton, B. and Wheeler, R., (1989). A training course for TEFL.
Oxford University Press.
Krashen S. (1981). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning”.
Pergamon Press.
Krashen S. (2002). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. University of
Southern California: Pergamon Press Inc.
Krashen, S. (2002). Explorations in language acquisition and use: The Taipei lectures.
Taipei: Crane Publishing Company.

2014 ing carla álvarez

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to 2014 ing carla álvarez

Similar to 2014 ing carla álvarez (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

2014 ing carla álvarez