Using ACTFL Can-Do Statements in Simulation-Based ESL Classes

Galina Shleykina*
English as a Second Language and Linguistics, Miami University, Ohio, USA.
Periodicity:July - September'2020
DOI : https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.10.3.16386

Abstract

The article presents the results of the work which used the National Council of State Supervision of Languages (NCSSFL) and the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) Can-Do statements for presentational writing in the context of first-year English as Second Language (ES) composition classes based on the simulation approach. The students were offered Can-Do statements first at the beginning of the semester; during the semester, they addressed the statements in journals and reflections; finally, they completed a semester-ending questionnaire about their progress in writing. The quantitative results from the questionnaire and qualitative results from the journals demonstrate that the use of Can-Do statements led to heightened awareness, self-reflection, objective self-assessment, and engagement in critical thinking. The students' engagement in the self-analysis of their progress led to a clear idea of their strengths and weaknesses. These user-friendly, learner-centered statements used in writing classes promoted self-regulation and self-learning.

Keywords

ACTFL Can-Do Statements, Simulations, Writing.

How to Cite this Article?

Shleykina, G. (2020). Using ACTFL Can-Do Statements in Simulation-Based ESL Classes. i-manager's Journal on English Language Teaching, 10(3), 12-21. https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.10.3.16386

References

[1]. ACTFL. (2017). ACTFL Can-Do statements. Retrieved from https://www.actfl.org/publications/guidelines-andmanuals/ ncssfl-actfl-can-do-statements
[2]. Benson, P. (2011). Teaching and Researching: Autonomy in Language Learning. London: Routledge.
[3]. Brown, N. A., Dewey, D. P., & Cox, T. L. (2014). Assessing the validity of can-do statements in retrospective (thennow) self-assessment. Foreign Language Annals, 47(2), 261-285. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12082
[4]. Cheng, A. (2007). Simulation based L2 writing instruction: Enhancement through genre analysis. Simulation & Gaming, 38, 67-82. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1046878106297879
[5]. Choy, S., & Lee, M. (2012). Effects of teaching paraphrasing skills to students learning summary writing in ESL. Journal of Teaching and Learning, 8 (2), 77-89. https://doi.org/10.22329/jtl.v8i2.3145
[6]. Connor, U., Nagelhout, E., & Rozycki, W. V. (Eds.) (2008). Contrastive Rhetoric: Reaching to Intercultural Rhetoric. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
[7]. Crookall, D., & Oxford, R. (1990). Linking language learning and simulation/gaming. In D. Crookall & R. Oxford (Eds.), Simulation, gaming and language learning (pp. 3- 26). New York: Newbury House.
[8]. Culp, J. (2013). The All-American movie. In G. B. Halleck (Ed.), English composition simulations (pp. 117-130). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.
[9]. Dörnyei. Z., & Ryan, S. (2015). The Psychology of the Language Learner Revisited. New York, NY: Routledge.
[10]. Ekbatani, G., & Pierson, H. (Eds.) (2000). Learner- Directed Assessment in ESL. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[11]. Faez, F., Majhanovich, S., Taylor, S., Smith, M., & Crowley, K. (2011). The power of “Can Do” statements: Teachers' perceptions of CEFR-informed instruction in French as a second language classrooms in Ontario. The Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 14 (2), 1-19.
[12]. Fazilatfar, A. M., Elhambakhsh, S. E., & Allami, H. (2018). An investigation of the effects of citation instruction to avoid plagiarism in EFL academic writing assignments. Sage Open, 8(2), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/215824 4018769958
[13]. Freiermuth, M. R. (2007). ESP needs washback and the fine tuning of driving instruction. Simulation & Gaming, 38, 35-47.
[14]. Garcia-Carbonnell, A., Rising, B., Montero, B., & Watts, F. (2001). Simulation/gaming and the acquisition of communicative competence in another language. Simulation & Gaming, 32, 481-491. https://doi.org/10. 1177/104687810103200405
[15]. Goto Butler, Y., & Lee, J. (2010). The effects of selfassessment among young learners of English. Language Testing, 27(1), 5-31. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F026553 2209346370
[16]. Hahxi, J.,& Van Houten, J. B. (2017). Using the newly revised Can-Do statements to make learning transparent. The Language Educator, 20-26. Retrieved from https:// www.actfl.org/sites/default/files/tle/TLE_AugSept17_Article. pdf
[17]. Halleck, G. B. (2013). English Composition Simulations. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.
[18]. Halleck, G. B. (2018, April). From headlines to role plays: How teachers can create timely 4-skills simulations. rd (Paper presentation). In 3 Annual Spring Forum in TESL & Applied Linguistics, Stillwater, OK.
[19]. Halleck, G. B., & Coll-Garcia, J. F. (2015). Developing problem-solving and intercultural communication: An online simulation for engineering students. Journal of Simulation/ Gaming for Learning and Development 1 (1), 94-111.
[20]. Halleck, G. B., Moder, C. L., & Damron, R. (2002). Integrating a conference simulation into an ESL class. Simulation & Gaming, 33, 330-344. https://doi.org/10. 1177/104687810203300307
[21]. Hirvela, A., & Du, Q. (2013). Why am I paraphrasing? Undergraduate ESL writers' engagement with sourcebased academic writing and reading. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12 (2), 87–98. https://doi.org /10.101 6/j.jeap.2012.11.005
[22]. Jones, K. (1995). Simulations: A Handbook for rd Teachers and Trainers. (3 Ed.). New York, NY: Nichols Publishing.
[23]. Kaplan, R. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. Language Learning, 16 (1), 1-20.
[24]. Kim, S. A. (2001). Characteristics of EFL readers' summary writing: A study with Korean university students. Foreign Language Annals, 34 (6), 569–580. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1944-9720.2001.tb02104.x
[25]. Kissling, E. M., & O'Donell, M. E. (2015). Increasing language awareness and self-efficacy of FL students using self-assessment and the ACTFL proficiency guidelines. Language Awareness, 24 (4), 283-302. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09658416.2015.1099659
[26]. Kohonen, V. (2000). Student reflection in portfolio assessment: Making language learning more visible. Babylonia, 1, 13-16.
[27]. Kovalik, D.L., & Kovalik, L.M. (2007). Language simulation: The blending space for writing and critical thinking. Simulation & Gaming, 38, 310-322. https://doi .org/10.1177/1046878106298271
[28]. Lin, O. P., & Maarof, N. (2013). Collaborative writing in summary writing: Student perceptions and problems. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 90, 599-606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.131
[29]. Loewen, S., Li, S., Fei, F., Thompson, A., Nakatsukasa, K., Ahn, S., & Chen, X. (2009). Second language learners' beliefs about grammar instruction and error correction. The Modern Language Journal, 93 (1), 91-104. https://doi.org /10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00830.x
[30]. Long, M. H., & Doughty, C. J. (Eds.) (2011). The Handbook of Language Teaching. Wiley-Blackwell.
[31]. Ma, W., &Winke, P. (2019). Self-assessment: How reliable is it in assessing oral proficiency over time? Foreign Language Annals, 52 (1), 66-68. https://doi.org/10.1111 /flan.12379
[32]. Marlowe, B. A., & Page, M. L. (2005). Creating and Sustaining the Constructivist Classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
[33]. Matsuno, S. (2009). Self-, peer-, and teacherassessments teacherassessments in Japanese university EFL writing classroom. Language Testing, 26 (1), 75-100. https://doi.org/10.1177 %2F0265532208097337
[34]. McDonough, K., Crawford, W. J., & De Vleeschauwer, J. (2014). Summary writing in a Thai EFL university context. Journal of Second Language Writing, 24 (1), 20-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.03.001
[35]. Mistar, J. (2011). A study of the validity and reliability of self-assessment. TEFLIN Journal, 22 (1), 45-58. https://doi. org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v22i1/45-58
[36]. Moder, C.L., Seig, M.T., & Van Den Elzen, B. (2002). Cimmaron valley: A simulation-based EAP composition curriculum. Simulation & Gaming, 33, 284-298. https://doi. org/10.1177/1046878106298269
[37]. Moeller, A. J. & Yu, F. (2015). NCSSFL-ACTFL Can-Do statements: An effective tool for improving language learning within and outside the classroom. In P. Swanson (Ed.), Dimensions (pp. 50-69).
[38]. Moeller, A. J., Theiler, J. M., & Wu, C. (2012). Goal setting and student achievement: A longitudinal study. The Modern Language Journal, 96 (2), 153-169. https://doi. org/ 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01231.x
[39]. Mok, M. M., Lung, C. L., Cheng, D. P. W., Cheung, R. H. P., & Ng, M. L. (2006). Self-assessment in higher education: experience in using a metacognitive approach in five case studies. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31 (4), 415-433. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 02602930600679100
[40]. Naidu, S. (2007). Transporting GOLDEN RICE to Malaysian classroom. Simulation & Gaming, 38, 344-351. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878106298333
[41]. Nikolov, M. (2016). A framework for young EFL learners' diagnostic assessment: 'Can Do statements' and task types. In M. Nikolov (Ed), Assessing Young Learners of English: Global and Local Perspectives. Educational Linguistics, Vol. 25 (pp. 65-92). Springer, Cham.
[42]. Peacock, M. (1998). Exploring the gap between teachers' and learners' beliefs about 'useful' activities for EFL. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8 (2), 233- 250.
[43]. Reese, C., & Wells, T. (2007). Teaching academic discussion skills with a card game. Simulation & Gaming, 38, 546-555. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878107308063
[44]. Ross, J. A. (2006). The reliability, validity, and utility of self-assessment. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 11 (10), 1-13.
[45]. Sahinkarakas, S., Yumru, H., & Inozu, J. (2010). A case study: Two teachers' reflections on the ELP in practice. ELT Journal 64 (1), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp020
[46]. Saito, H., & Fujita, T. (2004). Characteristics and user acceptance of peer rating in EFL writing classrooms, Language Teaching Research, 8 (1), 31-54. https://doi.org/ 10.1191%2F1362168804lr133oa
[47]. Salies, T. G. (2007). Reflections on the GUN CONTROL simulation: Pedagogical implications for EAP writing classes. Simulation and Gaming, 38, 569-580. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/1046878107308080
[48]. Salies, T.G. (2002). Simulation/gaming in the EAP writing class: Benefits and drawbacks. Simulation & Gaming, 33, 316-329. https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781 0203300306.
[49]. Shleykina, G. (2013). Lottery: Money changes everything. In G. B. Halleck (Ed.), English composition simulations (pp.131-146). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.
[50]. Shvidko, E. (2015). Beyond “Giver-Receiver ” relationships: Facilitating an interactive revision process. Journal of Response to Writing, 1 (2), 55-74.
[51]. Summers, M. M., Cox, T. L., McMurry, B. L., & Dewey, D. P. (2019). Investigating the use of the ACRFL can-do statements in a self-assessment for student placement in an intensive English program. System, 80, 269-287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.12.012
[52]. Tigchelaar, M., Bowles, R. P., Winke, P., & Gass, S. (2017). Assessing the validity of ACTFL Can-Do statements for spoken proficiency: A Rasch analysis. Foreign Language Annals, 50 (3), 584-600
[53]. VanPatten, B., & Hopkins, W. P. (2015). Can-Do statements for a basic language program. CLEAR News, 19 (2), 1-5.
[54]. Yun, S. (2013). Verichip. In G. B. Halleck (Ed.), English Composition Simulations (pp. 173-186). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.
[55]. Ziegler, N. (2014). Fostering self-regulated learning through the European Language Portfolio: An embedded mixed methods study. The Modern Language Journal, 98 (4),921-936. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12147
[56]. Ziegler, N. A., & Moeller, A. J. (2012). Increasing selfregulated learning through the LinguaFolio. Foreign Language Annals, 45 (3), 330-348. https://doi.org/10.11 11/j.1944-9720.2012.01205.x
If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Purchase Instant Access

Single Article

North Americas,UK,
Middle East,Europe
India Rest of world
USD EUR INR USD-ROW
Pdf 35 35 200 20
Online 35 35 200 15
Pdf & Online 35 35 400 25

Options for accessing this content:
  • If you would like institutional access to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian.
    Library Recommendation Form
  • If you already have i-manager's user account: Login above and proceed to purchase the article.
  • New Users: Please register, then proceed to purchase the article.