Learning and teaching challenges for Romanian [626730]

Learning and teaching challenges for Romanian
students and teachers

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION p. 3
I
2. THEORETICAL ASPECTS p.4
2.1 IDENTIFYING THE PROBLEM
2.2 SHORT INTRODUCTION INTO THE CEFR

2.2.1 THE ROLE OF EVALUATION
2.2.2 COORDINATING EVALUATION
2.2.3 OLD/NEW STYLES OF EVALUATION
2.3 SHORT INTRODUCTION INTO THE Multiple intelligences theory
DEALING WITH DIFFERENT LEVELS IN THE SAME CLASS – THE IMPORTANCE
OF USING DIFFERENTIATED TEACHING METHODS

2.4 TESTED LEVELS
2.5 EVALUATING CONTENTS

II.

1. WHAT IS OLD AND NEW WHEN IT COMES TO TEACHING?

1.1 CLASSICAL METHODS AND TYPES OF CLASSES
– GRAMMAR – TRANSLATION METHOD
– THE LECTURE CLASS

1.2 INTERACTIVE METHODS,MATERIALS AND TYPES OF CLASSES
 TPR- use a variety of realia, posters, and props , TBL – drills, NLP – modeling , CLT -Role –
play
 Interviews
 Games
 Surveys
 Pair-work
 Learning by teaching
 English through music
 English through stories
 WEB 2.0 tools

FLIPPING CLASSES?

III. CHALLENGES
THE ROLE AND COMPETENCES OF CLASSICAL TEACHER/ THE MANY ROLES OF
THE MODERN TEACHER (5PGS+)
THE FOCUS OF THE TEACHING PROCESS (TEACHER – STUDENT)
MAKING SURE ALL STUDENTS HAVE A MINIMUM PROGRESS DURING EACH
CLASS

3. METHODOLOGICAL RESEARCH
3.1 ABOUT THE RESEARCH
3.1.1. OBJECTIVES OF RESEARCH
3.1.2 HYPOTHESIS OF RESEARCH
3.1.3 TYPE OF RESEARCH
CHOOSING THE SKILLS TO CHECK
3.2. METHODS OF INVESTIGATION
PROCEDURES FOR GATHERING DATA
PRE-TEST, MODERN+CLASSICAL METHODS
QUESTIONNAIRE -FOR TEACHERS
3.3. CONTEXT OF THE RESEARCH
3rd AND 4TH GRADES
HOW TO OVERCOME CHALLENGES USING CERTAIN METHODS

3.4. RESULTS OF THE RESEARCH
4. CONCLUSIONS
5. BIBLIOGRAPHY
6. APPENDIX
3rd grade research – Activity plans using interactive methods (6 -10) (TPR, learning through
songs, role plays etc)
4th grade research – Activity plans mixing interactive and classical ( gramamar translation etc vs
the above ones)
Listening test
Speaking test (needs recordings attached, I’ll try to get that)
Questionnaire and results

Learning and teaching challenges for Romanian students and teachers

1. INTRODUCTION

Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.
(Nelson Mandela)

Nelson Mandela was one of the most prominent figures when it comes to revolution, human
rights and, why not, education. His visionary nature inspired many people around the world even
now, years after his passing.
Just like he said, we are now in the middle of a revolution: one in educati on, as well as in
understanding life and humanity.
World is revolving, generations of children change dramatically as compared to the ones
from 10 -20 years ago and we need to move along and find solutions that work out best for them
the way they are now.
It is known that most of the methods used in state schools nowadays are still the “classical”
“old fashioned” methods we actually grew up with. Why? Maybe because part of the teachers
working in the system right now spent the last 20 -30 years of their lives working this way and
because the younger teacher s from the system grew up with them and remember them from
school as being good methods. What was successful 30 years ago is now too slow or
discriminating while education nowadays needs to be interactive and inclusive. We still have a
difficult time findi ng the sparkle in kids who fail in maths and languages but they usually are
brilliant in sports, arts and handicrafts so this is certainly one thing to work on.
Will the newbies change this system, since they are educated in this new spirit and are
taught these new methods during their college or university years? I don’t think so, they don’t
yet have a style of their own and don’t yet have a leader voice to make older colleagues follow
them. I think this is the big challenge here: changing the system wit h every one of us. We as
teachers need to reflect more upon the status of our job and the way students react during
educational activities and after seeing the feedback we have to make a change and adjust
ourselves, our methods and our speech to this reali ty.
This is the big revolution that needs to be done and unless we do it sooner I believe these
smart and impatient children will feel so bored and disappointed by school that they will end up
turning against it.
Throughout my EFL teacher experience, I' ve managed to teach students aged 3 -14/15,
working both on a national curriculum basis and on private one. During the activities I attended
and carried out myself, I could notice that the 2 ways of teaching and handling a lesson differ
dramatically when we refer to the amount of oral interaction a teacher is supposed to have with

young children, 3 -7 years old. In state schools, where until 2012, children had started learning
English around the age of 10, this oral interaction was very new at the moment when English
language became compulsory for all students, starting from Prep Grade once they were
introduced in the national curriculum.
I could say one of the greatest challenges Romanian teachers and students meet during EFL
classes is overcoming old school views and infrastructure. Back in 2002, using audio – video
materials was not very common in school when teaching 3rd -8th grades.
As technology and sets of textbooks changed, every teacher would be able to gather loads
of audio cassettes (that came wit h the teacher's books) and then CD s, followed by video
materials such as DVD s. Then, during the last years more and more schools were provided with
free access to internet in some (if not all) of the classrooms, which means teachers can now use
multimedi a materials during classes without having to buy special DVDs for them. The best
change, in this matter, would be the appearance of multimedia (or digital) student books, where
some of the DVDs traditionally offered at a relatively high price before, were made freeof charge
and available to all teachers, students and parents on the Ministry of Education online platform,
www.manuale.edu.ro .
Of course, we still need to have video projectors, computers and audio sets in all classrooms
in order to freely use technology while teaching our students. Right now we do have some of
these but not available for all classrooms.
Then, another big challenge would be the lack of competences some teachers face when
handling s uch devices.
Moving further, I believe that introducing English classes to prep grade students is a great
step forward towards the acquisition of the foreign language. First of all, this is one way to
ensure students with a foreign language exposure and u se before they start reading and writing so
they can first be introduced to the new language orally, in a natural way, increasing their chances
for a greater language acquisition.
Being in the middle of school curriculum reform, during the previous school years (more
specifically, in the school year 2013 -2014) Romanian teachers had the chance to teach 3 starter
grades in every school: the prep grade and 1st grade as being the ones starting EFL study together
following the new curriculum and the ones starti ng EFL after the older curriculum, the 3rd grade
students.
I could easily choose the winners of this – they were the prep grade students, the youngest
ones who had the chance of starting fresh, in a more informal way. The ones in the 1st grade had
to make up for the "missed" year first, since their workbooks looked a bit more difficult than the
ones prep grade students used. Plus, they had to deal with writing and reading tasks more than
the younger ones. Teachers usually enjoy using additional audio -video materials with both
classes and watching them starting to communicate in English in a natural way. This seems to be
more attractive than the way it is done with the 4th grade starter level students. They do have
attractive materials accompanied by audio an d video materials and feel very happy to learn the
new language but to them, it is a bit more difficult to learn in a natural way because they need to
stick up to the common curriculum, the books and lessons available there.

2. THEORETICAL ASPECTS

(Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment
Structured overview of all, CFR: All scales and skills)
Language use, embracing language learning, comprises the actions performed by persons
who as individuals and as soc ial agents develop a range of competences , both general and in
particular communicative language competences. They draw on the competences at their
disposal in various contexts under various conditions and under various constraints to engage
in language ac tivities involving language processes to produce and/or receive texts in relation to
themes in specific domains, activating those strategies which seem most appropriate for carrying
out the tasks to be accomplished. The monitoring of these actions by the participants leads to
the reinforcement or modification of their competences.

2.1 IDENTIFYING THE PROBLEM

Some of the main "roots" of the most important difficulties and challenges Romanian teachers
and pupils have to deal with, come from one (or more) o f the following situations:
-traditional/modern teaching approaches and techniques (CLT, TBL, CLIL)
-inadequate or insufficient implementation of the CEFR
-the little impact teachers have on SEN or “distracted” students
-the lack of new curricula or material resources in schools in order to carry out successful
actvities involving the use of multimedia devices
-synchronizing national or local exams with the CEFR levels
-evaluation – summative vs formative evaluation
 Evaluation
 Role of evaluation (Bo cos, Evaluarea in invatamantul primar )
 Traditional methods used in Romanian educational system
 Modern interactive methods and strategies studied and implemented by Romanian
teachers during reform years
 -different language structures on phonetic /word order /
morphological/semanthic/syntactic/ pragmatic levels leading to confusions between the 2
languages
 – lack of dynamics throughout the teaching process (minimizing speaking activities in
favor of writing)
Thinking about my own classes, no secondary ones have the audio CD that should have
come with the book, so basic material resources regarding the given textbook are too limited.
The problem is more formal, based on the fact that any teacher could deliver i nteractive
moments, audio, video sections in their classes, but not when following the textbook only. Here I
admit my biggest challenge as a teacher: adjusting time resource and material ones. I either teach
by the book, improvising speaking and listening contents or find my own texts with audio /
video support over the internet and ignore the textbook. In this case, any official control would
take notice of the fact that according to the textbook we said we would use, we haven’t done
much/anything much. Usually, when we go by the book, speaking is not very often used .????
The primary classes and teaching materials, on the other hand, have audio, video, all skills
included textbooks both in PDF (print format), or interactive versions. It looks like the pol icy

change in Romanian education is doing a great job for English teachers. That is, of course,
when/if there are computers with an internet connection available for being used during classes,
in all schools. And again, it also depends on each particular t eacher, whether they are able to use
that online resource or not.

2.2 SHORT INTRODUCTION INTO THE EFR

Traditionally, when students in the rural area wanted to go to a highschool with
intensive/bilingual English classes, they had difficulties resul ting from the difference of
knowledge and practice when compared to the students who had studied in the city. Well, this is
not just a problem related to EFL teaching, but talking about this specifically, the high level
student from the country school woul d be the lower level student in the city class.
The same problem came up during LLP activities, where students and teachers from
different European countries had international meetings hosted by schools or training centers
with the common aim of communica ting on various educational topics. The most used language
among them was usually English. This could be a moment when students of quite similar ages
could notice how different their English language aquisition could be.. or how helpful this
foreign langua ge was to them. Of course, differences would come from each people’s own
language, phonological system, culture and civilization.
These differences and many more were roughly caused by the fact that each school, each
individual teacher, basically, taught the language in their own way, starting from the same
curricula (within one country’s educational system) or from the same recommendations made by
the British Council (in different countries). This is normal, taking into consideration that each
person is unique, not all students learn in the same way, and the teachers‘ personality influences
the teaching and learning style substantially from one school to another. And the same teacher
can teach in diferent ways, using diferent methods and tasks when he/she meets different groups
of students or in different educational environmnents.
So, yes, teaching and learning are known to be very subjective activities.
But still, there were more situations in which difference in language levels was (and can
still be, maybe): students trying to enroll in foreign/international schools where a certain level of
English language aquisition was required. Some of the best students in their schools or even
regions would not pass the language tests. Another situation, related to the labour market, came
to almost similar results, well trained people not getting the targeted job because of failing the
language level test. All these were part of the greatest challenges faced by teachers of English
around the world: the lack of a c ommon grading scale for all schools. Even now, when the
Council of Europe adopted the CEFR to be used on an international regular basis, many teachers
forget to refer to it when evaluating their students, leading to situations like the ones presented
above .
Trying to answer the question „What exactly does the CEFR do?“, we can reffer to the
definitions given by the Council of Europe when releasing this Common European Framework
of Refference:

The Common European Framework is intended to overcome the ba rriers to
communication among professionals working in the field of modern languages arising from the
different educational systems in Europe. It provides the means for educational administrators,
course designers, teachers, teacher trainers, examining bod ies, etc., to reflect on their current
practice, with a view to situating and co -ordinating their efforts and to ensuring that they meet
the real needs of the learners for whom they are responsible. By providing a common basis for
the explicit description of objectives, content and methods, the Framework will enhance the
transparency of courses, syllabuses and qualifications, thus promoting international co –
operation in the field of modern languages. The provision of objective criteria for describing
langua ge proficiency will facilitate the mutual recognition of qualifications gained in different
learning contexts, and accordingly will aid European mobility. (
http://www.coe.int/t /dg4/linguistic/Source/Framework_EN.pdf )

Together with the definitions and rationale of adopting such a laborious framework, the
European Council states a series of political objectives aimed at by the CEFR, when it comes to
modern languages teaching.
 To equip all Europeans for the challenges of intensified international mobility and
closer co -operation not only in education, culture and science but also in trade and
industry.
 To promote mutual understanding and tolerance, respect for identities and cultural
diversity through more effective int ernational communication.
 To maintain and further develop the richness and diversity of European cultural life
through greater mutual knowledge of national and regional languages, including those
less widely taught.
 To meet the needs of a multilingual and multicultural Europe by appreciably
developing the ability of Europeans to communicate with each other across linguistic
and cultural boundaries, which requires a sustained, lifelong effort to be encouraged,
put on an organised footing and financed at all levels of education by the competent
bodies.
 To avert the dangers that might result from the marginalization of those lacking the
skills necessary to communicate in an interactive Europe.
(http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/Framework_EN.pdf )

It is very clear, reading the fragments cited above, that using the CEFR in a proper way can
provide all teacher and students of modern languages in Europe with unitary scal es for language
learning and evaluating one‘s level of „language aquisition“.
Even so, many Romanian teachers and students don’t seem to be too familiar with it and are
still struggling with old -fashioned teaching methods and techniques.

2.2.1 THE R OLE OF EVALUATION

Checking the objectives of the CEFR above, one can also see some of the real functions of
evaluation.
The term “evaluation” is of French origin, “valoir” meaning “to be worth”.

The everyday meaning of the word 'evaluate' is quite si mple: to judge the worth of
something. This is a long -established usage, and it is hardly surprising that many people assume
that the task of the educational evaluator is to judge. Some evaluators do in fact share this
assumption, and a few would even argu e that the evaluator has a right to expect that his
judgements would be reflected in resulting grades or measures. But there are others who believe
that the proper position of judgements of worth, and the responsibility for taking them into
account lie els ewhere.
Teachers' observations, students' experiences, and the review of related literature indicate
that language anxiety is a significant factor adversely affecting the language learning process.
Unlike the old ideas, that evaluation is the most stress ful part of the process of teaching, or that it
can even be punnitive and an efficient discipline tool, it is now the time to face the real role of
evaluation.

In modern society, increasing emphasis on children‘s personal and social education, as well
as their academic results, have influenced the development of a range of techniques for
assessing all phases of child growth and development, of student achievement, of behaviour and
of the teaching -learning processes.
Due to the large number of factors that enter into teaching and learning including such
instructional variables as objectives, methods and techniques, and subject -matter on the one
hand; and such human variables as pupils and teachers, on the other, it has been difficult to
appraise the val idity of the pupil’s achievement.
There is, therefore, a comparatively large subjective factor in the evaluation of teaching and
learning that needs to be taken into account together with its objective features.
It cannot be denied that the evaluation of teaching and learning is an exceedingly complex
activity. However, the efficiency of the teacher and the growth and achievement of the pupil can
be evaluated through the use of such devices as check lists, rating scales, and tests of different
aspects of t eaching ability, interview, and questionnaires.
Through the use of such devices much valuable data may be gathered relative to many of
the important aspects of teaching and learning.

In the Glossaire de termes relatifs à l'évaluation et termes connexes (1987, pag. 3), there is
a „correcting “ definition of the evaluation process as "the operation aimed to objectively and
systematically determining the impact, efficiency and pertinance of activities in relation to their
objectives in order to improve the current activities on the one hand and, on the other hand, to
plan, program and decide future activities“.
A more pragmatical definition of evaluation (M.Q. Patton, 1987, pag. 15) states that “ The
evaluation practise implies systematically collecting great deal of information regarding the
activities, characteristics and objectives of the programs, and have them used by cretain
specialists in order to reduce their degree of relativity, improve their efficiency and decide on
what these programs bring up and the realities they affect“.
From an instructional point of view, evaluation is " the action of collecting a pertinent,
valid, reliable information set related to learning and training activities, and also the action of
examining the degree of appropr iateness between this set and a pertinent set of criteria
established in relation to the previously stated objectives of the training. Evaluating means

comparing a set of information with a set or pertinent criteria in order to make a decision " (M.
Bocoș, 2002, pag. 96).
As a whole actively part of the curriculum, evaluation gets a special importance in building and
re-building the curriculum; it can have a short term, middle term and long term effect and impact
on evaluated, evaluators and other educationa l agents, as well as decision -makers.
Any evaluation activity ends up with a judgement on the evaluated, who can be at the
moment on various points in his/her educational track. The gathered information can be of
various types, structured in various ways or shapes, and have various uses. Analysing it can help
us define 2 types of effects of the curriculum -evaluation, such as the feed-back effect and the
backwash effect.(A, Stoica, coord. 2001))
Self evaluation
Peer evaluation
Students‘ feedback
Summati ve- product evaluation
Formative –evaluation of the process
Traditional – tests
Alternative – portfolio, observation, project, investigation

THE ROLE AND COMPETENCES OF CLASSICAL TEACHER/ THE MANY ROLES OF
THE MODERN TEACHER (5PGS+)
lecturer
facilita tor
role model
planner
information provider
resource developer
assessor
3. METHODOLOGICAL RESEARCH

RESEARCH
A1 – A2 levels

Global scales – according to the CEFR, A1 level students should prove the following abilities and
skills:
Can understand and use f amiliar everyday expressions and very basic phrases aimed at
the satisfaction of needs of a concrete type. Can introduce him/herself and others and
can ask and answer questions about personal details such as where he/she lives, people
he/she knows and things he/she has. Can interact in a simple way provided the other
person talks slowly and clearly and is prepared to help.

Listening : can recognise familiar words and very basic phrases concerning myself, my family
and immediate concret surroundings when people speak slowly and clearly.
Reading: can understand familiar names, words and very simple sentences, for example on
notices and posters or in catalogues.

Spoken interaction : can interact in a simple way provided the other person is prepared to repeat
or rephrase things at a slower rate of speech and help me formulate what I'm trying to say. I can
ask and answer simple questions in areas of immediate need or on very familiar topics.
Can make an introduction and use basic greeting and leave -taking expre ssions.
Can ask how people are and react to news.
Can understand everyday expressions aimed at the satisfaction of simple needs of a concrete
type, delivered directly
to him/her in clear, slow and repeated speech by a sympathetic speaker.
Written interacti on: can write a short, simple postcard, for examples sending holiday greetings. I
can fill in forms with personal details, for
example entering my name, nationality and address on a hotel registration form.
Spoken production : can use simple phrases and sentences to describe where I live and people I
know.
Written production: can write simple isolated phrases and sentences.

A2: Can understand sentences and frequently used expressions related to areas of most
immediate relevance (e.g. very basic personal and family information, shopping, local
geography, employment). Can communicate in simple and routine tasks requiring a simple and
direct exchange of information on familiar and routine matters. Can describe in simple terms
aspects of his/her background, i mmediate environment and matters in areas of immediate need.
Listening: : can understand phrases and the highest frequency vocabulary related to areas of most
immediate personal relevance (e.g. very basic personal and family information, shopping, local
geography, employment). I can catch the main point in short, clear, simple messages and
announcements
Reading : can read very short, simple texts. I can find specific, predictable information in simple
everyday material such as advertisements, prospectuses, menus and timetables and I can
understand short simple personal letters
Spoken interaction :
can communicate in simple and routine tasks requiring a simple and direct exchange of
information on familiar topics and activities. I can handle very short soci al exchanges, even
though I can't usually understand enough to keep the conversation going myself.
Spoken production : can use a series of phrases and sentences to describe in simple terms my
family and other people, living conditions, my educational backgr ound and my present or most
recent job

B1: Can understand the main points of clear standard input on familiar matters regularly
encountered in work, school, leisure, etc. Can deal with most situations likely to arise whilst
travelling in an area where t he language is spoken. Can produce simple connected text on topics,
which are familiar, or of personal interest. Can describe experiences and events, dreams, hopes &
ambitions and briefly give reasons and explanations for opinions and plans.
Listening : can understand the main points of clear standard speech on familiar matters regularly
encountered in work, school, leisure, etc. I can understand the main point of many radio or TV
programmes on current affairs or topics of personal or professional interest when the delivery is
relatively slow and clear
Reading : can understand texts that consist mainly of high frequency everyday or job -related
language . I can understand the description of events, feelings and wishes in personal letters

Spoken interaction : can deal with most situations likely to arise whilst travelling in an area where
the language is spoken. I can enter unprepared into conversation on topics that are familiar, of
personal interest or pertinent to everyday life (e.g. family, hobbies, work, tr avel and current
events).
Spoken production : can connect phrases in a simple way in order to describe experiences and
events, my dreams, hopes & ambitions. I can briefly give reasons and explanations for opinions
and plans. I can narrate a story or relate the plot of a book or film and describe my reactions.

(CEFR -all scales and all skills)

B1
Threshold The ability to express oneself in a limited way in familiar situations and to deal in
a general way with non routine information.
Example: CAN ask to open an account at a bank, provided that the procedure is
straightforward.
All practice tests at this level
A2
Waystage An ability to deal with simple, straightforward information and begin to exp ress
oneself in familiar contexts.
Example: CAN take part in a routine conversation on simple predictable topics.
All exams and practice tests at this level
A1
Breakthrough A basic ability to communicate and exchange information in a simple way.
Example: CAN ask simple questions about a menu and understand simple
answers.
http://www.examenglish.com/B1/B1_reading.htm

Action research
a) Questions (puzzle area)
What are the main EFL (difficulties and) challenges for Romanian students and teachers?
How can these be minimized?

CHALLENGES
 PRONUNCIATION
th – f
paw-cow

 LISTENING
not understand ing all words they hear (Set sail4, Revision and assessment – the listening
exercise asking them to draw lines showing where some objects would be placed in a room:
being related to the newly taught vocabulary – objects in a house, prepositions of place – the most
common mistake is confusing under/between

 SPEAKING
lack of vocabulary

shyness
conversations –
prep grade – 3nd grade students have used conversational dialogues almost every week during
their classes and can now interact easily,
while 5th-8th grade students are not as easygoing when it comes to producing oral messages.
They need more exercising

 ORTHOGRAPHY
students often write the word as they hear it, finding it difficult to follow English rules
mother – madar

 READING – PHONOLOGY
different phonetic systems – students often read following Romanian phonetic rules

 VOCABULARY
isolated words and phrases – can't make up for a more consistent oral interaction

 GRAMMAR
word order: they freque ntly misplace adjectives after nouns
number – use the plural form for adjective
categories: " -s/es" ending – confusing plural nouns with 3rd person singular of verbs

b) Hypothesis : (refined thinking about the puzzle area)
Using the theory of multiple intelli gence, differentiated strategies and modern interactive
techniques in teaching and evaluating students might minimize the impact that difficulties and
challenges have on EFL teaching and learning

c) Context (particular aspect to focus on)
Students in our school studying English as a foreign language
I undertook the action research study on 2 student groups: 10 students in the 7th grade (13
years old) and 10 students in the 8th grade (aged 14 -16), in order to observe and compare their
evolution using diff erent course books, a different methodological routine at different ages.
All students involved in this research come from the same area – Boldesti -Scaeni town
village, situated 15 km far from the city of Ploiesti and 70 km from Bucharest. They have almos t
similar social backgrounds -parents with medium studies(highschool) most of them working in
the industrial field (tailoring and/or oil). Each group has got an equal number of male and female
students(5+5).

Working procedure
In all secondary classes I r an up placement tests – initial tests at the beginning of the school year.
Analysing the results without taking into consideration the formal placing – into grades -, I
obtained the following diagram:

It looks like most of the students in grades 5th -8th mee t the requirements for A1 level
In the 6th grade some of the students – 1/7- solved the A2 tasks correctly and so did about 1/5 of
the 7th grade students and 1/9 of the 8th graders.
B2 can only be reached by 1/10 of the 7th graders and 1/9 of the 8th graders.

d) pretesting – all students in the target groups were equally tested following a level setting
test Cambridge exam pattern – http://www.cambridgeenglish.org/test -your-english/ , and
then the results were collected and interpreted. (Brown, Language assessment – Principles
and Classroom Practice )

LISTENING
A1
From the YLE practice tests

Students had to place items around the room by drawing lines from their image to the specific
place described on the audio track.

Speaking test:
Speak about your pet or an animal you would like to have as a pet.
Speaking –
Analytical scales
1) Discou rse management 40 marks – relevance if ideas 10 marks – coherence and cohesion 10
marks – time constraints 10 marks – fluency 10 marks
2) Grammatical resource 20 marks – accuracy 10 marks – range of structures 10 marks
3) Vocabulary resource 20 marks – appropriacy 10 marks – range 10 marks
4) Pronunciation 20 marks – pronunciation and intonation 10 marks – stress and rhythm 10 marks
Total 100 marks
Methods used so far &impact

Drills VII dialogues – inviting and accepting/refusing GOOD
groupwork V II, not good, too competitive
pairwork I, VII GOOD
teaching through music VIII B,VII irregular verbs – fluency MC GOOD
TPR VIII B Hokey pokey shake – body parts Very GOOD
Flipped classroom VII Indefinite/definite article confuse, shy
Verbs without an ING form more confident, but still shy