UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Assessing French as a second language macroclasses in Vancouver, British Columbia 1994

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
ubc_1995-0058.pdf [ 7.37MB ]
ubc_1995-0058.pdf
Metadata
JSON: 1.0078091.json
JSON-LD: 1.0078091+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0078091.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0078091+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0078091+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0078091+rdf-ntriples.txt
Citation
1.0078091.ris

Full Text

ASSESSING FRENCH AS A SECOND L A N G U A G E MACROCLASSES IN VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA by SUSAN O A K E Y B.A., McGill University, 1988 B.Ed., The University of British Columbia, 1990 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF T H E REQUIREMENTS FOR T H E D E G R E E OF MASTER OF ARTS in T H E F A C U L T Y OF GRADUATE STUDIES Language Education We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard T H E UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA DECEMBER, 1994 @ Susan Oakey, 1994 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of / Q ^ D Q J > 6 BCLUCOJ-7 O /? The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date DjjTOJmJjfA) DE-6 (2/88) Abstract 11 The purpose of the present study is to investigate the impact of 130-minute macroclasses, as opposed to 65-minute classes, taught through the communicative approach,, on second language acquisition and long-term retention. The participant group consisted of 48 females and 33 males in 130-minute three times a week Core French as a second language (FSL) 8 classes, taught through the Entre Amis 1 program, running from September 1993 to February 1994 (5 months) and from February to June 1994 (5 months) at Lord Byng Secondary. The comparison group consisted of 27 females and 17 males enrolled in 65-minute three times a week Core FSL 8 classes taught through the Entre Amis 1 program from September 1993 to June 1994 (10 months) at Templeton Secondary. Parents, teachers and counselors of these students participated in the study. In summary, contrary to popular belief, students retain much of what they learn in Core FSL class. The present study found that the quantitative analysis was not nearly as revealing as the qualitative analysis. Quantitative analysis is limited when teachers and students are not randomized. Further research should emphasize the teacher difference and how adequate inservice affects the quality of time given to learning in the second language classroom. The results from the present study are particularly relevant to the 1994 Core French Curriculum because the Ministry of Education has mandated the study of a second language from grades 5 through 8. In addition, teachers must now teach second languages using the communicative approach. More importantly, all of these changes are expected to be fully implemented by the fall of 1995. iii Table of Contents Abstract » Table of Contents »i List of Tables vi List of Figures vii Acknowledgement viii Dedication ix CHAPTER ONE Introduction 1 Background of the Study 4 Statement of the Problem 8 Significance of the Problem 8 Research Questions 9 CHAPTER TWO Review of the Literature 11 Definition of Terms 11 Theories of Second Language Acquisition 12 Factors Affecting Second Language Acquisition 13 Motivation and Achievement 16 Motivation and Second Language Attrition 17 Second Language Retention 23 iv Secondary School Timetables 32 CHAPTER T H R E E Research Method 38 Introduction 38 Vancouver School District 38 Pilot Study 40 Subjects 42 Research Design 49 Instruments .....51 Procedure and Testing Context 59 Quantitative Data Analysis 65 Qualitative Data Analysis 67 CHAPTER FOUR Results 70 CHAPTER FIVE Discussion 101 Interpretation of Results 101 Conclusions ..104 Research Implications 106 Pedagogical Recommendations 109 V References 112 Appendix A .The Vancouver School District 118 Appendix B.Lord Byng Secondary School Profile 120 Appendix C.Templeton Secondary School Profile 122 Appendix D.Harvard Fax Re Questionnaire 123 Appendix E. Student Questionnaire 124 Appendix F.Teacher Questionnaire 134 Appendix G.Parent Questionnaire 140 Appendix H.Posttest 144 Appendix I.Interview Questions 157 Appendix J Consent Form 158 vi List of Tables Table 1: Total Sample 45 Table 2: Subgroup of Total Sample: Subjects From Whom All Data Was Collected 47 Table 3: Pretest-Posttest-Posttest Comparison Group Research Design 50 Table 4: Flow Chart of Groups and Testing Sequences 60 Table 5: Posttest 1 and Posttest 2 Observed Mean Scores of the Subgroup 71 Table 6: Posttest 1 and 2 Mean Scores of the Subgroup By Class 77 Table 7: Posttest 1 and 2 Mean Scores of Byng Term 1, Byng Term 2 and Templeton 84 Table 8: Motivation Score By Class: Inverse Relationship 87 Table 9: Frequency of Responses on the Student Questionnaire By Byng Students 89 Table 10: Frequency of Responses on the Students Questionnaire By Templeton Students..91 Table 11: Average Number or Percentage of Classroom Behaviours Observed 100 List of Figures vii Figure 1: Retention of Language Skills By School 73 Figure 2: Retention of Listening Skills By School 74 Figure 3: Retention of Writing Skills By School 75 Figure 4: Retention of Oral Skills By School 76 Figure 5: Retention of Language Skills By Class 78 Figure 6: Retention of Oral Skills By Class 79 Figure 7: Retention of Listening Skills By Class 80 Figure 8: Retention of Reading Skills By Class 82 Figure 9: Retention of Writing Skills By Class 83 Figure 10: Retention of Listening, Reading, and Writing Skills: Comparing Term 1 and 2 Byng Students 85 Acknowledgement Vlll I would like to thank Dr. Ted Aoki, Dr. Graham Kelsey, Dr. Ken Reeder and Dr. Stephen Carey for assisting in this project. In particular, I would like to acknowledge the teachers, who participated in the study, for their dedication to professional development. Of course, I could not forget Dr. Arleigh Reichl, who patiently introduced me to the world of statistics in a language that I could understand, and Brian Reid, who offered words of encouragement throughout. There are many more gracious people without whose help this project would not have been possible. Thank you. IX Dedication This thesis is dedicated to my parents for making it all possible, and to Jim whose support and love are what life is all about. 1 CHAPTER ONE Introduction The present study investigates the effects of two ways of time tabling French as a second language (FSL) instruction in grade 8. It compares two grade 8 FSL classes on a traditional timetable of 65-minute classes three times a week for 10 months at Templeton Secondary school to two grade 8 FSL macroclasses of 130 minutes three times a week for 5 months at Lord Byng Secondary school. This is an important question because researchers in Canada are currently comparing and combining different approaches to teaching French as an official second language in order to find the best way to implement the newly mandated FSL policy (BC Ministry of Education, 1994a) in B C schools.. French Immersion, in which course content is taught in French, is the most researched second language education model in North America. In a newspaper article called "Immersion Pioneers Do Not Regret It", reporter Craig Mclnnes (1994) investigates the success of French Immersion in British Columbia. Between 1979 and 1994, French Immersion enrollment grew almost tenfold in BC, despite the physical and cultural distance between BC and Quebec. Critics question the program's ability to produce perfectly fluent French speakers and whether it is effective in areas where there is little opportunity for French contact outside of the classroom (Hammerly, 1989). Stephen Carey, Director of the Modern Languages Education at the University of British Columbia, considers French Immersion to be a successful innovation but feels that it is unrealistic to expect native-like fluency of all second language learners in these programs. Carey (cited in Canadian Parents For French, 1994) states that "French is not the majority 2 language spoken in society and I think it is very important to realize that when you judge the success of these programs. To achieve the level of fluency that they do is remarkable" (p. 1). Carey (cited in Mclnnes, 1994) feels that students lose language skills just like other subject skills that are not used but that they will come back with exposure. "If they don't use it, of course it will get rusty, but it will come back" (p. A9). Mr. MacConnachie (cited in Mclnnes, 1994), one of the first graduates of early French immersion in Victoria, British Columbia, sums up his success in the program. "I went to France a while back and I could communicate really easily, which is probably the main thing out of the whole course, I thought - to communicate with someone in French" (p. A9). Core FSL education in British Columbia is subscribing more and more to the communicative approach based on interactionist theory and the French Immersion model. Students acquire French by using it for meaningful communication rather than by learning how it is linguistically structured. The Royal Commission on Education in British Columbia (BC Ministry of Education, 1988), the National Core French Study (BC Ministry of Education, 1990) and the Core French Curriculum Guide (BC Ministry of Education, 1994) support this approach. Carey (1984) compares French immersion teaching principles with those of traditional language teaching in his article Reflections On a Decade of French Immersion: More traditional language teaching such as core French has relied on a different method which included the learning of vocabulary, syntax, and grammar as formal learning units and formal rules and attempted to have the student write and produce grammatically correct larger units in a formal rule governed manner which was less dependent on communicative context. Obviously this is a caricature of present-day core French and we are all familiar with the innovations and perhaps even the influence that immersion programs have had on French core programs and the consequent improvements and exciting things that are taking place in core French programs today. I do not want to give the impression that 3 core French is in any way inferior to immersion French since the goals of the two types of programs are very different and the types of performance they produce are very different. I do want to make the point that the theoretical rationale for immersion programs is that their methodologies are more consistent with the sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic knowledge available on first language acquisition and thus represent a departure from the methodology employed in traditional language learning programs which from the outset are based on rule governed language production which includes more meta-linguistic activity (P-249). There are many factors considered to be relevant to second language acquisition (Ellis, 1994). The present study did not control for all of these external and internal factors. Personality traits, intelligence, aptitude, motivation, attitude and age have all been referenced when predicting the success of the second language learner. Accurately defining, observing and measuring these factors isolated from one another is impossible. One-way, causal relationships between learner characteristics and successful second language acquisition are difficult to prove. Theories based on the behaviourist view, the interactionist view and the creative construction hypothesis have been proposed as the best way to acquire a second language in the classroom. The only way to make an informed decision about which teaching methods based on which theories would be the most effective is to research relationships between teaching and learning. Lightbown and Spada (1993) state that "While formal research may add strength to theoretical proposals, informal research, including that carried out by teachers in their own classrooms, is also essential. It is hardly necessary to tell experienced teachers that what works in one context may fail in another" (p.79). 4 Background of Study In 1987, the Royal Commission on Education in British Columbia produced the Year 2000 or Framework For Learning documents (now revised as the Education Plan), and sparked changes in British Columbia's education system. The B C Ministry of Education (1994b) states that the education system is now responsible for producing citizens for a democratic society who "have a sound education that is related to their lives" (p.l). The Plan is based on principles of learning requiring active participation of the learner. The plan allows for different learning styles and encourages individual and group learning situations. Recommended time allotments for each subject are now expressed in percentages for grades 8 through 10. The plan states that "...variations in the recommended times are encouraged to address the learning needs of individual students and the particular needs of communities" (p. 5). Many schools have begun to look for ways of making education more student-centered in keeping with the philosophy of the new documents. A significant number of secondary schools in British Columbia have recently switched to new timetables in hopes of creating a more student-centered learning environment. One such innovation has been a renewed interest in year-round schooling where the school functions for 12 months of the year. On November 15, 1994, BC's Education Minister Art Charbonneau announced that year-round schooling is being studied in Nanaimo, Coquitlam, Maple Ridge, Abbotsford, Courtenay and Vernon. The most popular model being considered is one in which students attend school for nine 5 weeks and then have three weeks off. Nanaimo school board chairman Gerry Montgomery feels that eliminating the traditional nine-week summer break will eliminate the need for an extensive review of material in September because students will not have had time to forget (Chapman, 1994). The Education Plan emphasizes the need to organize time in such a way that students achieve a higher level of learning and retention. In September 1993, the British Columbia Principals' and Vice-Principals' Association sent out a survey to 350 British Columbia secondary schools to determine the extent of changes in scheduling practices. Of the 108 surveys returned, 68% responded that they were initiating some sort of timetable change. In summary, the project team found that "As the study progressed, it became obvious that the traditional secondary timetable in most British Columbia schools was being subjected to intense scrutiny. In order to satisfy the Ministry's desire to have secondary schools provide freedom and the flexibility to design programs and instructional strategies that are responsive to the needs of students and their communities most schools concluded that some type of timetable change was necessary" (Burianyk, Clayton, Dressier, Graf, Labonte, Melville, & Metzger, 1994, p.8). The British Columbia Teachers' Federation surveyed 291 secondary schools in British Columbia in June 1994. Out of the 133 schools that responded, 60 (45.11%) reported that they are using a traditional 5X8 linear timetable which consists of students taking five out of eight periods a day from September to June. The staff at 58% of these schools expressed satisfaction with their timetable and 42% were dissatisfied. 6 Twelve schools (9%) reported using the Copernican timetable, in which students take 2 1/2 hour classes twice a day for 10 weeks. The majority of the staff supported the change to this new timetable. Fifty-nine schools (44.36%) were reported to be using modified versions of either the traditional or Copernican timetables. The majority of these were on a semester system using classes of varying lengths. Responding to the questions accompanying these changes, Simon Fraser University organized a planning session for November 18, 1994, for schools who are thinking about changing to a Copernican timetable. The same university has scheduled a forum to take place in the Vancouver area in April 1995 for schools that are using a Copernican or horizontal timetable. Lord Byng Secondary School, where the present study was conducted, proposed a change to a modified Copernican timetable in the Spring of 1993. A committee of more than 15 teachers met each week to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of implementing such a timetable at Lord Byng. They attended a conference in Victoria and listened to several speakers including the founder of the Copernican model, Joseph Carroll, and numerous representatives from schools in BC that had already adopted a version of this model. In a poll conducted on March 8, 1993,79% of the staff at Byng agreed that a Copernican-style timetable, tailored to the needs of Byng students, would benefit all students. Two open forums were held in Byng's auditorium on March 23 and April 7, 1993 to allow students, teachers and parents to express their views. On Monday March 29, 1993, there was an opportunity for staff, parents and students to view the timetable in 7 action at Johnston Heights Junior Secondary in Surrey or Howe Sound Secondary in Squamish. It became increasingly apparent that enough parents, staff and students were opposed to the change to make implementation impossible for the fall of 1993. The administration at Byng approached the department heads for volunteers to try 130-minute classes for five months at the grade 8 level. The French and the Home Economics departments accepted. In September 1993, the 130-minute classes were implemented for grade 8 French and Home Economics classes. Investigations of the educational significance of timetable changes in B C have largely been based on intuition. Arguments have been presented for and against shorter courses comprised of longer classes. Among the possible advantages are better student/teacher relationships, improved classroom management and the facilitation of interdisciplinary teaching, team teaching and field trips. However, the massed practice effect of macroclasses, as opposed to distributed practice, may result in poorer achievement and retention of material, in part due to the students' limited attention span . Long-term retention of material has been identified as an area of concern in second language acquisition. However, FSL macroclasses may allow for more communicative learning which might more closely approximate immersion classes. Further research is required to determine which courses, grade levels and student bodies would benefit from macroclasses and how time impacts the quality and quantity of learning. The present study assesses the effect of grade 8 FSL macroclasses on students' achievement, retention and attitude. 8 Statement of the Problem The purpose of the present study is to investigate, both qualitatively and quantitatively, the impact of 130-minute macroclasses, as opposed to traditional 65- minute traditional classes, on the acquisition and long-term retention of FSL students in courses using the communicative approach. Significance of the Problem Many people share Bahrick's (1979) view that "much of the information acquired in classrooms is lost soon after final examinations are taken" (p.297). With time we forget. This is a fact that second language teachers accept. However, what exactly do we forget? Why do we forget? How long does it take to forget? How is time best organized to facilitate learning and long-term retention? These are important questions for Core FSL educators. French teachers work to cover the curriculum using strategies to facilitate mastery learning. Students work to transfer their learning and to effectively remember it for the exam. For teachers, there is rarely enough time. For students, the amount of knowledge they need to retain is often overwhelming. According to the BC Ministry of Education (1994a) the objective of Core French education is to "enable all learners to communicate in French with confidence and competence and to develop an openness toward cultural diversity" (p. 7). This goal is achieved through the communicative approach, whereby students are encouraged to take risks and to problem solve in order to acquire the language successfully. These learning skills can be transferred to other areas of the student's education. Rote learning leading to shorter terms of retention of material will not achieve this goal. If educators could discover a more ideal learning environment that fosters taking risks and problem solving through the communicative approach, perhaps more successful language learning would result. Research Questions The following principal research questions were identified as a basis for the present study: 1. What is the nature of FSL students' acquisition of reading, writing, listening and oral skills in macroclasses (130-minute classes three times a week for 5 months)? 2. How do macroclasses affect FSL students' long-term retention of reading, writing, listening and oral skills after a 13 or 29-week retention interval? The following ancillary questions were identified : 3. How do gender, the number of years of elementary school French, motivation and exposure to French over the summer affect long-term retention? 4. What is the impact of these 130-minute macroclasses on the communicative approach experienced by the participant groups? 10 In the next chapter, the literature relevant to the research problem and questions will be reviewed. 11 CHAPTER TWO Review of the Literature This literature review investigates theories of language acquisition, factors affecting second language acquisition, motivation and achievement, motivation and language retention, language retention, and secondary school timetables. Definition of Terms Retention - this study will discuss retention in terms of percent remembered of what was originally learned. Second language acquisition - acquiring a second language in a. setting where it is not the majority language (for the purpose of the present study, I do not differentiate between second language acquisition and foreign language acquisition). Second language attrition - the loss of proficiency in a language due to the lack of use overtime. Acquisition period - the time period from when second language instruction begins to when second language instruction ends. Retention interval - the time period from when second language instruction ends to when an assessment is made of second language competence. Some researchers refer to the retention interval as the incubation period, because it is possible that students will continue to acquire the language to varying degrees during this time period. 12 Theories of Second Language Acquisition There are many theories of Second Language acquisition. Behaviorists consider language acquisition to be the result of forming habits which are reinforced (Dulay, Burt, & Krashen, 1982). The creative construction theorists emphasize the innate capability of the learner to construct systematic internal meanings of the language (Krashen, 1985). The interactionists emphasize the importance of interacting with speakers of the target language who modify their speech to ensure comprehension (Ellis, 1994; Long, 1983). None of these theories alone can explain the complex process of learning a second language. The behaviorist view cannot account for the original utterances and overgeneralizations made by language learners. For example, students often overgeneralize the rule for avoir verbs in the passe compose to etre verbs and say "J'ai alle". Much of the trend toward communicative language teaching in North America has been based on the creative construction model promoted by such authors as Stephen Krashen. This theory does not consider writing and speaking skills to be necessary for acquisition. Krashen (1985) hypothesizes that second language acquisition requires the following: comprehensible input, a learning environment that emphasizes communication and meaningful interaction, motivation and a natural order for acquiring the rules of the language. Krashen's theory has been criticized for not meeting the standards of scientific research and writing (Lightbown & Spada, 1994). The interactionist theory also emphasizes the need for comprehensible input. Interactionists claim that interaction with speakers of the target language, who modify their speech, leads to increased comprehension and more successful acquisition of the second language (Ellis, 1994). However, research has not correlated comprehensible input with language acquisition (Uzawa, 1994). The Entre Amis 1 program observed in this study is based on an integrative approach to language learning (Jean, Muscovich, & Hartley, 1991). The necessary elements in this model are communication, interaction, experiential learning, linguistic structures, strategies for communicating and learning, culture, general knowledge and group learning (Jean et al. 1991). The ultimate goal of the program is to maximize the time that each student spends using the target language. Factors Affecting Second Language Acquisition: In general, almost everyone successfully acquires their first languages, however not everyone experiences the same degree of success in acquiring a second language. Some second language learners suffer what is known as subtractive bilingualism whereby they do not master their first or second language. Personality, age, intelligence, aptitude, motivation, attitude, situation and exposure influence second language acquisition (Gardner, 1991). Isolating, defining, observing and measuring these variables is difficult. For this reason, researchers must describe in detail the behavioral traits that they have grouped under certain labels (Crookes, 1992). 14 Intelligence has been linked to successful second language acquisition. Recent studies have shown that intelligence affects certain areas of second language acquisition more than others. For example, a study of French immersion students in Canada found intelligence to be related to performance on reading, grammar and vocabulary tests but not oral tests (Genesee, 1976). Similarly, other studies have found intelligence to be highly related to those second language skills taught through formal instruction (Gardner & Lambert, 1972). Misinterpretations occur when researchers emphasize different skills in their achievement measures. One study may find intelligent students to be more successful language learners and another may find that intelligence does not influence second language acquisition. These conflicting results may be due to the fact that one study has chosen to measure grammatical proficiency whereas the other has chosen to measure grammatical and oral proficiency (Carey, 1991; Reynolds, 1991). Assuming that intelligence causes motivation simply because intelligence has been correlated with motivation is problematic. Is it the motivation that causes the intelligence or the intelligence that causes the motivation? Cummins (cited in Ellis, 1994) promotes a model that differentiates between two types of second language proficiency, basic interpersonal communication skills (BICS) and cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP). This model has strongly influenced second language acquisition research. Basic interpersonal communication skills develop naturally by communicating in the target language and are required to engage effectively in face-to-face interactions. "BICS involves the mastery of context- 15 embedded uses of language in communicative tasks that are relatively undemanding" (p. 694). Basic interpersonal communication skills develop in conjunction with linguistic knowledge and literacy skills (CALP) required for academic work. "CALP involves the ability to communicate messages that are precise and explicit in tasks that are context- reduced and cognitively demanding" (p. 696). The more informal communicative approach does not rely on intelligence, as traditionally measured through IQ tests, for success. All students are encouraged to communicate regardless of their proficiency level therefore more students have the chance to participate and to experience success. Some people clearly find it easier to learn a second language than others. There have been many studies investigating language aptitude. Gardner and Maclntyre (cited in Ellis, 1994) summarize from their investigations that "Research makes it clear that in the long run language aptitude is probably the single best predictor of achievement in a second language" (p. 215). However, results are inconclusive primarily because it is not clear what constitutes aptitude and there are large individual differences (Skehan, 1991; Carroll, 1990; Lightbown et al. 1994). The relationship between personality and second language acquisition is complex. Males seem particularly vulnerable in the second language classroom and in learning language in general (Ellis, 1994). Many of these students have tales of being embarrassed and refusing to participate. Inhibition and self-consciousness are common at this age and do not promote the risk-taking that some feel is necessary to successfully acquire a second language (Naiman, Frohlich, Stern, & Todesco, 1978; Ely, 1986; Corder, 1978). Some studies have found extroversion to be related to success in a second language, others have not (Busch, 1982; Strong, 1983). The mixed findings may be explained by the fact that studies evaluating linguistic proficiency have been compared to studies evaluating communicative competence. Overall, personality traits seem to be related to communicative competence (Ellis, 1994). Motivation and Achievement There has been extensive research investigating the relationship of attitude and motivation to second language acquisition. This research has shown that motivational variables are related to achievement in a second language (Gardner et al. 1972; Anisfeld & Lambert, 1.961; Lukmani, 1972). However, it has not yet been determined exactly how motivation affects second language learning (Gardner & Maclntyre, cited in Ellis, 1994). One of the initial studies of the role of attitudinal/motivational variables and aptitude in second language achievement was conducted by Gardner and Lambert (1959). They measured the motivation, attitude and aptitude of 42 male and 32 female anglophone FSL students in Montreal. Two independent factors, language aptitude and integrative motivation, correlated positively with achievement in a second language. Many studies have attempted to clarify these variables. A study by Gardner in 1966 (cited in Gardner et al. 1976) proposed a definition of integrative motivation comprised of a set of attitudinal/motivational variables strongly related to achievement in the second language. Gardner recognized the importance of ' 17 factor analyzing different attitudinal and motivational variables in order to get a more accurate picture of how they affect language acquisition. Skehan (1991) has since then added two hypotheses about motivation and second language learning: the Carrot and Stick hypothesis and the Resultative hypothesis. Within Gardner's definition of motivation are two possible orientations in an individual's motivation to learn a second language. Students who are studying a second language in order to get into university, to get a job or for some other practical reason, are said to be more instrumentally motivated. Students who are studying the language for the love of it and who actively seek out contact with the target language, are said to be more integratively motivated. Studies of integrative motivation suggest that highly integratively motivated language learners will be more successful at acquiring the language than learners who are not as integratively motivated, regardless of aptitude (Gliksman, Gardner & Smythe, 1982; Gardner, 1985). This is particularly relevant to the FSL learning environment in British Columbia where contact with French outside the classroom is minimal. Even is students were motivated, they would have a difficult time finding speakers of the language with whom they could interact. Motivation and Second Language Attrition We have all exercised our selective memories. We forget to take out the garbage or to do our homework. If we have no need or desire to remember then we forget. 18 Second language learners comment on the rustiness of their language skills and how much they have forgotten after a period of disuse. More research is needed to determine the factors which influence second language attrition (Ellis, 1994). Gardner, Lalonde and MacPherson (1985) investigated the role of attitudes, motivation and language use (during the retention interval) on second language attrition. The results were based on the Clark Can-Do self-assessments of 79 students from all over Canada who attended a six-week French immersion course in Quebec. Students were sent a questionnaire six months after completing the course asking them to rate their second language skills immediately following the course and their present level of skill. The questionnaire contained 10 variables of attitudes and motivation, as well as listening, reading and speaking skills. Results from this study indicate that listening and speaking skills that were either poorly acquired or very successfully acquired during the course of study experienced no significant attrition over the retention interval. However, these results may be representative of the basement and ceiling effects. When students are not at all successful in acquiring a language skill, then they will show no retention loss. This is known as the basement effect. When skills are over learned students will show no significant retention loss. This is known as the ceiling effect. Listening and speaking skills that were acquired to a medium level of proficiency did experience attrition. Reading skills showed no evidence of attrition. In this study, students who had the opportunity to speak French during the retention interval evidenced less attrition of speaking and listening skills. A positive 19 attitude was shown to be related to retention of these skills. Language use during the retention interval was found to be independent of attitudes. It is not clear how much the acquisition phase effects the degree of language attrition compared to the retention interval. The opportunity to use the language during the retention interval seems very important to the retention and development of language skills. In addition, a second language learner does not need to be integratively motivated in order to benefit from exposure to the second language. Skills requiring the learner to interact with the language outside of the classroom may evidence more attrition if the opportunity for interaction does not exist. If integrative motivation has been correlated with achievement why did this study find language use during the retention interval to be independent of attitudes? A possible explanation is that the level of language proficiency attained during the acquisition period is a better indicator of the rate of attrition. Motivation may represent more of an individual difference in acquisition. Skills that are only partially mastered or committed to memory for a shorter time period are more susceptible to attrition. Bahrick (1984) theorizes on the basis of his.studies that well learned or overlearned knowledge survives in "permastore longevity" and is resilient to attrition. This study raises some important points for researching the complex phenomena of second language loss. It is important to define accurately the retention interval. Different factors affecting language attrition may take on different levels of importance depending on the type of language program being studied. Measures of achievement must reflect the skills stressed during the acquisition period. 20 Similar results were found in a study of factors influencing the language attrition of 58 graduates in grades 7 to 11 of a Spanish immersion program (Snow, Padilla & Campbell 1988). The majority of the subjects claimed to speak Spanish away from home, to read in Spanish and to have visited a Spanish-speaking area. The Modern Language Association Cooperative Test of Spanish was administered to the high school students to test speaking, listening comprehension, writing and reading comprehension skills. The Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills (reading and mathematics) in Spanish was administered to the elementary students. Productive writing and speaking skills were the most susceptible to attrition even in an immersion setting and with a high rate of language use outside of the classroom. Reading comprehension skills suffered no loss which could be explained by cognitive maturation, transfer from the first language and the use of cognates in the measures. Results from the attitudinal/motivational and language use questionnaire indicated that four variables were related to language attrition. Interest in Foreign Languages was related to retention of writing and speaking skills and to the use of Spanish in the home. The Encouragement and Pride in Work factor was related to retention of writing skills, self-assessment of proficiency in Spanish and travel to Spanish-speaking areas. There was a significant relationship between the Parental/Integrative factor and retention of writing and speaking skills and the use of Spanish media, Spanish outside the home and travel to Spanish-speaking areas. There was no relationship between Integrative Orientation and retention, use or self-assessment measures. 21 Gardner, Lalonde, Moorcroft, and Evers (1987) conducted a study of 98 English- speaking students enrolled in grade 12 French as a second language in five schools in London, Ontario. This study focused on the effect of motivation and attitudes during the acquisition period (rather than the retention interval) on language attrition over the summer holidays. They continued their investigation of the effect of the use of the language during the retention interval on the loss of French language skills. Students completed the Clark Can-Do self-assessment questionnaire, a modified version of the Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (Gardner, 1985) and three timed measures of French achievement upon completion of the French course. They took the same tests nine weeks later. The 66 students who had enrolled in grade 13 French were compared to the 32 students who had not. The achievement test contained listening and writing subscales and were evaluated using a more traditional grammar driven approach. The objective and self-assessment pretest scores of the two groups did not differ significantly except that the drop-out students scored lower on the speaking component of the self-assessment pretest. The Attitude/Motivation pretest showed drop-out students to have significantly less positive attitudes toward French. In September, the drop-out students scored significantly lower on nine out of ten of the posttest measures. It would appear that a student's language skills were negatively affected after the period of acquisition, the retention interval, and the student's decision not to continue studying French. There were no significant differences between the two groups' self- assessments of their use of the language during the retention interval, despite the fact that 22 the drop-out group tended to have less favorable attitudes toward learning French and the fact that they scored significantly lower on the posttest. Of the self-assessment posttest measures, students felt that most aural and reading comprehension skills were significantly impaired. Speaking skills of intermediate difficulty were perceived to be more susceptible to attrition than very easy and very difficult speaking skills. The intermediate level activities involved a degree of abstract thought. It may be a combination of difficulty level and complexity of cognitive sequence that effects attrition of second language speaking skills. The results of the objective assessments revealed language attrition and growth and did not parallel the self-assessments. These findings may reflect measurement artifacts because the same measures were used for the pretest and posttest in order to guard against experimenter expectancy when evaluating performance. Therefore, improved retention of language skills may have been due to the student being more familiar with the assessment procedures the second time around. There were relatively stable correlations found with many of the attitudinal/motivational variables and the pretest and posttest objective assessments. Based on the assumption that the retention interval would not increase the variability of language achievement scores on the posttest, a causal model was used to evaluate the correlations among attitudinal/motivational measures, French achievement upon completion of the course, language use during the retention interval and French achievement after the retention interval. Motivation was implicated in the level of proficiency achieved in a second language during the acquisition period, the extent to 23 which the learner will use the language during the retention interval and the level of second language proficiency directly after the retention interval. There is a plethora of literature on motivation and second language learning; however the majority of it focuses on how integrative or instrumental orientations to motivation affect the product of learning rather than the process of learning. Crookes and Schmidt (cited in Reynolds, 1991) believe that the learner's persistence and effort to learn a second language should be emphasized as an important motivation variable. Second Language Retention "What do you mean we're going on to chapter four! We just started chapter three! Everything is going too fast, I can't cram it all in." This was a comment from a grade 8 student in a 130-minute Core FSL class at Lord Byng secondary school in October 1994. Researchers have debated the effects of time and its potential for improving classroom learning. Many studies that have found engaged time on task to be significantly related to learning are inconsistent (Karweit, 1984). More time does not necessarily produce more learning. It is more a question of what kind of time is needed by the learner. Ellis and Hulstijn and Hulstijn (cited in Ellis, 1994) examined the effects of planning time on second language production. Contradicting results from these studies imply that it is what learners do with designated acquisition time that is important. 24 Semb and Ellis (1994) conducted a literature review of studies which looked at variables that affect learning and long-term retention of information taught in the classroom. Variables that were found to effect long-term retention were prior knowledge, guessing, instructional methods, types of assessment, degrees of original learning, the retention interval, conditions of retrieval and individual differences. They concluded that students retain a lot of what is taught in the classroom. Retention decreases over time but the forgetting curve is not as steep or continuous as found in traditional laboratory studies. The level of original learning correlates positively with retention performance. Instructional content and assessment tasks affect learning and retention. Retention performance on recall tasks is worse than on recognition, comprehension and cognitive tasks. Cognitive tasks involved problem solving, concept identification, analysis, comprehension, rule using, diagnosis, prediction, explanation, and classification. Higher ability students learn and remember more than lower ability students. The mean relative loss scores generated from 96 studies were computed. The mean relative loss score for recall skills was -28.25 (n=22), for recognition skills -16.17 (n=52) and for cognitive skills -13.32 (n=26). These scores were organized into six blocks representing the length of the retention interval: 1 to 5 weeks, 6 to 13 weeks, 14 to 26 weeks, 27 to 52 weeks, 53 to 104 weeks, and more than 104 weeks. The sharpest decline for recognition skills was from the first to the second interval. After the second interval, attrition of these skills decreased. Recall skills were most susceptible to attrition between the second and third intervals. The results for cognitive skills were inconsistent. 25 Semb and Ellis concluded that "The general finding is that the amount retained declines quickly at first, then declines at a slower rate, or levels off (p.271). Most studies investigating the effect of different instructional strategies on retention have involved groups who received the same course objectives, content, length and tests. The differences in instructional strategies were more quantitative than qualitative. Semb and Ellis noticed that "...most studies that compared instructional strategies either found no effects or no differential effects on retention. The four exceptions investigated strategies that more actively involved students in the learning process. We hypothesize that these strategies produced qualitatively different memories that are more resistant to forgetting" (p.277). Bahrick (1987) administered a surprise retention test to 35 adults who had learned and relearned 50 English-Spanish word pairs at various intervals eight years earlier. Subjects who reviewed the words at 30-day intervals retained two to three times as many words as the subjects on 24-hour or less interval schedules. Concurrent with the results of Bahrick's study, Demster and Ferris (1990) claim that regular, spaced out presentations and review of material are more conducive to achievement and retention than massed presentations. This spacing effect is grounded in experimental psychology and Jost's Law which states that "if two associations are of equal strength but of different age, a new repetition has a greater value for the older one" (cited in Demster et al. 1990, p. 140). In essence, distributed practice is most effective when the material is relearned once it has been forgotten. The material is then coded in a different manner so that retrieval of the information is more successful. 26 Spacing effects have proved beneficial to reading and listening skills (English, Wellborn & Killian; Glover & Corkill, cited in Demster et al. 1990), programmed instruction (Reynolds & Glaser, cited in Demster et al. 1990) vocabulary learning and student motivation (Dempster, cited in Demster et al. 1990). The study of second language attrition has focused mainly on attitudinal/motivational variables during the period of acquisition. More attention is now being paid to variables that may affect the retention interval. Smythe, Jutras, Bramwell and Gardner (1973) investigated the loss of language skills of 220 grade 9 Core FSL students at three schools in London, Ontario. In early June, the subjects wrote a locally developed pretest which emphasized listening and reading comprehension. The same test was administered after the summer vacation in September. It was not clear which language methodology the measures advocated. Reading comprehension dropped by approximately 5% and listening comprehension increased by 2%. Smythe et al. (1973) conducted a study in conjunction with the above research. They investigated the effects of attitudes, motivation, aptitude and the length of the retention interval on the language acquisition of grade 9, 10, and 11 Core FSL students in a school in London, Ontario. Upon completion of a full year FSL course in June, these students took the 1961 version of the Canadian Achievement Test in French (C.A.T.F.). The 40-minute standardized test included components on vocabulary, grammar, comprehension and pronunciation. The following September, the school switched to a semester system. The subjects who were enrolled in Core FSL in the first semester were given the C.A.T.F. in 27 September. The subjects who were enrolled in Core FSL in the second semester were given the C.A.T.F. in February. There were no significant differences found between the two groups at the June testing time. The first semester group's performance increased after the nine week retention interval and the second semester group's performance decreased after the 29 week retention interval. A possible interpretation of these results is that the nine week summer vacation was a processing time for the subjects who returned to their studies refreshed. Increased cognitive maturity over the summer break is a possible explanation. Students who elected to take French in the first semester may have been more motivated. The decrease in the performance of the second semester students may be due to the longer retention interval, fatigue from taking other courses first term and test weariness. The above findings indicate the significance of the length and nature of the retention interval. If motivation and achievement are correlated, and the two groups were not significantly different in terms of achievement in June but did differ on the posttest, then one might conclude that the second semester students had changed their orientation in motivation since the pretest measure. A measure of attitudinal/motivational variables in June, September and February would be necessary to accurately understand this effect. Bahrick (1984) conducted a longitudinal study to investigate the effect of the length of the retention interval on language attrition. There were 773 subjects who had taken one or more Spanish as a second language courses as long as 50 years prior to testing. Bahrick included 40 subjects who had never taken Spanish before in an attempt 28 to differentiate between the test items that measured knowledge acquired through formal instruction and incidental knowledge. An objective test was administered to the subjects in the last week of their language course or within two months of its completion. The subscales included reading comprehension, Spanish-English recall vocabulary, Spanish-English recognition vocabulary, English-Spanish recall vocabulary, English-Spanish recognition vocabulary, grammar recall, grammar recognition, idiom recall, idiom recognition and word order. A questionnaire investigating the subjects' perceptions of their Spanish course, their language achievement and their opportunities to use the language during the retention interval was given to the subjects at this time. The posttest was administered to the subjects who were divided into eight groups depending on the length of their retention interval. The results from this study support Bahrick's theory of permastore longevity. The majority of language attrition occurred within three to six years of completing language study. After this retention interval, language attrition leveled off and no significant loss was reported for up to 25 years. Bahrick concluded that some knowledge may be stored permanently with minimum use during the retention interval. Semantic knowledge, especially receptive vocabulary, is most susceptible to long-term retention; The rate of success in, and the amount of, second language training is related to the amount of knowledge that will be retained long- term. A subsequent longitudinal study investigated the rate of forgetting, which language skills are susceptible to attrition and how language proficiency affects attrition 29 (Weltens, Van Els, & Schils 1989). The authors divided 150 students into two groups of those who had studied Core FSL for four years and those who had studied it for six years. Subjects were tested three times: immediately following the acquisition period, after two years and again after four years. The listening and reading proficiency measures were taken from the Dutch National Institute for Educational Measurement. The authors developed a general receptive proficiency measure and a phonology, lexicon and grammar measure for the study. The subjects completed a self-rating of their language proficiency and Clark's Can-do scales for listening and reading proficiency. The amount of second language training was significantly correlated with language proficiency, regardless of the length of the retention interval. There was an increase in proficiency in listening and reading skills, especially for the subjects who had studied Core FSL for four years. This could be explained by an increase in the subjects' incidental knowledge, knowledge of the mother tongue, universal language proficiency, cognitive maturity or use of the language during the retention interval. The lexicon and grammar measures experienced 10 to 15% loss. Intrigued by the inconsistency of their results, the authors analyzed the reliability of the subscales. They found that a significant portion of the reading and listening measures tested universal language proficiency and general knowledge of the world. The cloze test measured knowledge of French vocabulary and grammar and was a more valid indicator of French language proficiency. Overall, the amount of language attrition after four years was minimal regardless of level of training. This study emphasizes the need to acknowledge factors such as the 30 difficulty of assessing language attrition using objective measures, how sensitive the measures are to language loss, amount of language training, use of the language during the retention interval, cognitive maturity and the fact that productive skills are more susceptible to attrition than receptive skills. Kathleen McDicken-Jones (1994) conducted a study in Vancouver, British Columbia, to determine to what extent a second language is subject to loss after the summer vacation. She identified 52 females and 27 males in four classes of French 12 and in one class of International Baccalaureate French 12 at Richmond Senior Secondary school. The pretest and posttest measures were curriculum-specific and included 30 grammar questions, eight cloze questions, and seven reading questions. All questions followed a multiple choice format. The results showed overall attrition from pretest to posttest. There was a significant decrease in performance on the linguistic and cloze subscales, but the reading comprehension loss did not prove to be significant. The measures used in this study were more traditional with respect to second language methodology. The author suggested that it would be valuable to research how the communicative approach affects retention. Most of the objective measurement in the afore mentioned studies has involved receptive or comprehension skills rather than productive skills. Communicative language programs such as Entre Amis 1 test these skills before speaking and writing tasks. The student hears it, sees it and then does it. Sequencing of the skills promotes success and motivation. There is a reverse order hypothesis that claims that the last item learned is the first to be forgotten (Yoshitomi, 1992). It would follow then that productive skills are 31 more susceptible to attrition. Productive skills are learned last because they are generally more difficult to acquire and because they build upon the receptive skills. A person cannot learn to speak and write a language without audio and visual input of that language. This is the reason why deaf people do not acquire speaking skills to the same proficiency level as hearing people. There is an inverse hypothesis that helps to further explain the acquisition and attrition of different second language skills. The learner's level of language proficiency at the conclusion of the period of acquisition is inversely related to the amount and/or rate of language attrition (Ellis, 1994). One would expect the more easily acquired receptive skills to be retained over time regardless of motivation. However, more motivation is required to acquire and retain the productive skills, as shown by the previous studies. Another important issue for second language pedagogy is whether learners can transfer communication strategies from their first language or whether they must be taught them. Kellerman (cited in Ellis, 1994) claims that these strategies are acquired naturally whereas other researchers such as Faerch and Kasper (cited in Ellis, 1994) believe that strategy training is beneficial to second language acquisition. These results hold important implications for the increasing number of communicative Core FSL programs in British Columbia. At the time of the present study, there were three schools in Vancouver using the communicative Entre Amis Program. As of September 1994, four more schools had implemented it fully. The new French Second Language Core Curriculum was released to schools in November 1994 and is expected to be in effect in September 1995. The student learning outcomes 32 presented in the afore mentioned document are almost identical to those of Entre Amis. The thrust of the new curriculum is communicative in approach and as of September 1996, a second language will be mandatory from grade 5 through 8. The communicative approach advocates passive and active communication in the target language. More research is needed to determine how we can improve the acquisition and retention of speaking and writing skills. Secondary School Timetables The secondary school was established circa 1910 based on the Carnegie unit of time which reflected the needs of a community that revolved around harvest time and the traditional industrial model. Since this time, educators and administrators have debated how time is best organized to facilitate learning. In the early seventies, researchers were investigating the educational advantages of the quarter system (also known as the Copernican Plan) for teachers and students. Findings concerning student achievement are mixed. Forehand and Watkins (1979) claimed that there is some evidence of improvement in achievement scores in statewide testing. Heron (1983) claims that the high school calendar, whether quarterly or semester, has no effect on student achievement. Studies which review quarter timetables and compare semester timetables to annual timetables generally find that the quarterly or semester timetables encourage improved student attitudes (Raphael, 1986), student-teacher and student-student 33 relationships (Brophy 1978), drop-out rates (Coleman, 1983) and a greater variety in teaching methodologies. Teachers spend more time preparing for semester courses and report higher stress levels. Results on standardized achievement tests tend to be higher for students on the annual system, particularly in the math and science subject areas. Students on the semester or quarterly systems exhibited more higher thinking and collaborative skills (Traverso, 1991). During the mid to late 1980's American high schools were faced with declining enrollments, limited financial resources and criticism from several national reports on education. High schools were not performing satisfactorily because they no longer met the standards necessary in a competitive world. Joseph Carroll, former superintendent of the Masconet Regional School District in Topsfield, Massachusetts, responded to this criticism with the Copernican Plan. This plan implements differentiated diplomas, a credit evaluation system, a mastery learning program, individualized learning plans, macroscheduling of classes, and a seminar learning block. Macroscheduling redesigns school conditions so that teachers meet with fewer students. Students take one 4-hour class a day for 30 days or two 2-hour classes a day for 60 days. This change in student-teacher contact produces conditions that are conducive to individualized instruction (Carroll, 1994). Some educators feel that high school students lose their attention during macroclasses. Carroll (1990) responds to this criticism in the following statement: "Overuse of lecturing is a major problem of high school instruction. The Copernican Plan establishes conditions that foster the use of a variety of instructional approaches that 34 are more personalized and more effective" (p.362). Carroll's motivation for macroscheduling is to improve teaching methodologies used in schools. Masconet Regional High School in Boston was the first school to implement the Copernican Plan. During the 2 years of implementation from 1990 to 1992, a Harvard evaluation team conducted an extensive study of approximately 50% of the grade 9 students based on classroom observations, surveys, interviews, and standardized student tests (Whitla, Bempechat, Perrone, & Carroll, 1992). Comparisons were made between the Tradpro (all-year course) and the Renpro (Copernican Plan quarterly courses). The academic performance of the two groups was essentially equivalent based on achievement tests. According to gap tests at 5, 10 and 15 months, the groups retained material at comparable levels. However, there was no random sampling or a covariate to equalize the differences between the groups, student and teacher participation was on a voluntary basis and the sample of students who wrote the achievement tests for individual disciplines was small. These are important limitations to consider when interpreting the findings. In a blind evaluation of 33 students 5 months after the termination of the Renpro program, Renpro students exhibited significantly higher thinking and collaborative skills than Tradpro students. Significantly more Renpro students than Tradpro students reported that their teachers knew them well and cared about them. They reported a higher frequency of student-teacher dialogue and individualized coursework. Renpro students felt more comfortable speaking out and voicing their opinions in class. They reported working in small groups more frequently and having more class discussions. Renpro 35 students were more satisfied with the length of class and the amount of material covered than were Tradpro students. They reported greater understanding of the material and more relevance of the material to their daily lives. They felt that their learning was enhanced as a result of improved rapport with their teachers and classmates. Classroom observations revealed that Renpro teachers engaged their classes in more group work, cooperative learning and individualized instruction than Tradpro teachers. Department chairs expressed concern about the increased workload. In 1990, four secondary schools in British Columbia implemented the Copernican Plan. L.V. Rogers, a senior secondary school in Nelson, reported an increase in achievement, attendance and graduation rates and a decrease in discipline problems and failure rates (Willis, 1993). Gala Sly, a French teacher at L .V . Rogers "was skeptical but now reports that the immersion factor when students come back to the French classes after a long absence more than compensates for any slippage in the intervening months" (Burden, 1993, p. 16). In another article, she commented that "When students are doing 2 1/2 hours of French a day, the rust scrapes off real soon" (Willis, 1993, p.3). Johnston Heights Junior Secondary in Surrey reported an increase in attendance and a decrease in failing grades (Baxter, 1993). Howe Sound Secondary reported improvements in attendance and students achievement but expressed concern over the lack of preparation time for teachers (Turner, 1993). Rutland Senior Secondary in Kelowna reported improvements in attendance and student achievement and a substantial increase in enrollment of students who returned to pick up some courses in order to graduate \ • 36 (Lindsay, 1993). However, they felt that their band program suffered as a result of the schedule. Gitte Gorgensen (1993) assessed the effectiveness of the Copernican timetable implemented at New Westminster Secondary School during the 1991/92 school year. Surveys reflecting the attitudes of students, parents and teachers toward the Copernican timetable were collected. Withdrawal rates and final letter grades were compared for the 1991/92 (pre-Copernican) and the 1992/93 (Copernican) school year. Results should be interpreted with caution due to the fact that the grade point averages were calculated using letter grades, which represent a range of scores, instead of using exact percentages. The results indicated a decrease in withdrawal rates and an increase in grade point averages. A two factor repeated measures A N O V A found the increase in final letter grades to be significant (p value=0.0001). The greatest increase was at the grade 9 and 10 levels. The study did not include grade 8 students. One exception to the increase in grade point averages was the Band program. A decrease in band performance was predicted because shortening the program to half the year reduces the number of available practice hours outside of class by half. This shortage of skill development time may account for the reduction in grade point average. Gitte (1994) summarizes the effect on achievement in an article written one year following implementation of the timetable. "Generally, the largest increases in achievement were in project-driven courses such as industrial education, arts and business; the lab-oriented courses; and in courses where, such as languages, immersion affects performance" (p. 19). The second largest increase in subject GPAs was found in 37 languages. Second language teachers suggested that the Copernican Timetable is ideal for language learning as the intensive time period allows for students to be exposed to an immersion-type setting. With respect to provincial exam scores, the largest relative improvement was found in French. The mean provincial exam score of grade 12 students in Core FSL increased by 12.3% while the province's mean score decreased by 0.3%. These results must be interpreted carefully due to the small sample size and to the fact that achievement was measured immediately following the courses indicating that massed practice may have been a factor.. There are advantages and disadvantages to different scheduling practices at the high school level. More research is needed to understand the effects of macroscheduling in the second language classroom. 38 CHAPTER THREE Research Method Introduction In this chapter, I present the research design used in the present study to investigate the effects of macro FSL grade 8 classes on student achievement, retention and motivation. I describe the Vancouver School District in which the participant and comparison schools are located, the French programs in both schools, the sample of Core FSL students involved in the research and the construction of the instruments used. The data collection and analysis procedures are also outlined. Vancouver School District Research consistently indicates that a highly significant proportion (typically 30% to 40%) of the variability of student outcome measures between different school districts in British Columbia can be explained by differences in demographic context variables of the school districts (BC Ministry of Education, 1991). Higher urbanization has been correlated with student success. However, it would be premature to conclude that one leads to the other. Significant variables within the context of higher urbanization, such as family values and socio-economic status, must be considered. Demographic influences must be accounted for when exploring features of the school system which influence 39 student outcomes (see Appendix A for a detailed description of the Vancouver School District). Lord Byng Secondary school offers a comprehensive program with high enrollment in both academic and elective areas (see Appendix B for a detailed school profile). In 1994, Byng students scored an average of 63.17% on the French Provincial Exam, lower than the District's average of 70.20% and the Provincial average of 69.36%. The language department offers French, German, Spanish and may offer Japanese in 1995. In 1992-1993, 71% of the student population participated in the Core French program and 20.4% took ESL. In 1991, the language department began piloting Entre Amis, a new communicative program, at the grade 8 level. By 1993 it had been implemented to the grade 11 level. Byng implemented a new timetable for grade 8 students in September 1993. Students take French for 130 minutes three times a week for half of the school year. In 1993-1994, 147 students enrolled in French 8 and 99 students enrolled in French 9. In 1994-1995, 169 students enrolled in French 8 and 74 students enrolled in French 9. In 1993-1994, there were five FSL grade 8 macroclasses and one fast-track FSL 8/9 macroclass. Students are recommended by their elementary school French teachers to take fast-track . The French teachers base their selection on their own subjective measure of the students' motivation and attitude. In this program, students complete three years of French in two years. Templeton Secondary school has four affiliated programs and six special programs (see Appendix C for a detailed school profile). The language department offers 40 Spanish, Italian, Japanese and French. In 1992-93, 36.3% of the student population took Core French, 7% took Japanese and 61.4% took ESL. Part of the language department's action plan, resulting from accreditation results, is to increase the quantity of communicative activities designed to increase the success rate of students. Similar to Byng, Templeton introduced Entre Amis 1 in 1991, and by 1993 it had been fully implemented at all grade levels. At the time of the present study, Templeton was on a traditional 5X8 timetable. However, in September 1994, Templeton implemented a 2x8 timetable comprised of four 80-minute periods a day. The days rotate continuously throughout the year. The change was the result of two years of investigation by a Templeton Review Committee involving teachers, parents and students. Some advantages cited in favor of the change are improved student/teacher relations, a decrease in tardiness and absences and a schedule more suited to the goals of the Graduation Program. I was not the first person to collect data on the new timetable at Lord Byng. Fortunately I was able to build upon a questionnaire given to the students enrolled in 130- minute Home Economics 8 or French 8 classes in February 1994. Pilot study On February 4, 1994, in response to a request from the administration at Byng, Brian Reid at the Vancouver School Board Program Services created a seven question survey for Byng students. The students, who had just completed a semester of French 8 41 or Home Economics 8 comprised of 130-minute classes three times a week, were questioned to determine their satisfaction with the new program (see Appendix). Students were told by their teachers that results from the survey would be important in determining the success of the program. They were assured of confidentiality. There were 141 subjects, 79 females and 62 males. The subjects had either recently finished or begun a 5-month term of 130-minute FSL macroclasses. A four point Likert Scale of Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree was used. Of the 72 students who responded, 46 agreed that 130-minute French classes were better for learning and 26 disagreed. Of the 108 students who responded, 63 agreed that 130-minute French classes should be continued for Grade 8 students in the 1994-95 school year and 45 disagreed. The students and teachers expressed great satisfaction with the 130-minute Home Economics classes. Students were given an opportunity to comment on the strengths and weaknesses of 130-minute classes. The first strength and weakness of 130-minute classes commented on by each student were analyzed. Of the 130 strengths reported by students, the most frequent response was the advantage of having more time to complete projects. Being able to accomplish more work was cited by 56 students. The fact that 130-minute classes are better for learning was mentioned by 35 students. Specifically, 10 students enjoyed having more time to learn. In addition, 1 student identified 130-minute classes to be advantageous for learning styles. Three students felt that the benefits only applied to Home Economics. Finally, two students thought that 130-minute classes were more enjoyable. 42 Of the 131 students who reported weaknesses, 73 agreed that 130-minute classes were boring. For 22 of the students, classes were noted to be too long. Forgetting more material was a concern for 19 students and, for much the same reason, 9 students said that extended classes were not good for French. In summary, students were in favour of continuing the macroclasses because the benefits for Home Economics were so evident. This initial survey helped to focus the questionnaire of the present study. Subjects By June, 1993, Templeton, David Thompson and Lord Byng were the only secondary schools in the Vancouver District which had adopted fully the communicative Entre Amis 1 program. Comprehensive sampling was used to identify 147 students in double-blocked 130-minute Core FSL 8 5-month courses taught through the Entre Amis 1 program in the 1993-94 school year at Lord Byng. The teachers, parents and counselor of these students were asked to participate in the study. Ideally, I wanted to compare the retention of material of the first term grade 8 French students with that of the second term students. However, some parents of the first term students objected to their child taking the posttest 1 in June 1994, despite the fact that the test could only improve the student's French mark. Even though the term 1 students did not write the posttest 1 in June, 42 of them did write posttest 2 (test of retention) in September, 1994. In order to compare mean scores of retention loss of the first and second term Byng groups, I used their French 8 43 percentages from their report cards as the posttest 1 score because it showed a strong relationship to the posttest 1 scores (p<.003). Far from the sterile environment of a laboratory, the rich and varying experiences within a school's culture were an integral part of the present study. The study appeared to be well under way. The Language Department Head at Byng, then a strong advocate of the 130-minute classes, smiled and reassured me that she would participate fully in the study. I casually scribbled a note to two of my close colleagues at Byng requesting their participation. I assumed that they would be happy to oblige. I caught Sally's nervous look through the chaos of fast moving human traffic in the office. She and Bob motioned me over. I noticed that they glanced at each other frequently for support. I had an uneasy feeling in my stomach but smiled a friendly greeting. They both looked down at the counter and Sally pointed to my note that she held in her hand. Her tone was uneasy but business- like. They were both adamant that they did not want to be filmed while teaching. Each of my desperate attempts at persuasion seemed to make them more determined. Bob chuckled nervously and Sally looked like I had just asked her to bungy jump off a bridge. I couldn't believe this was happening. My two friends were not willing to help me. We all rushed off to class and I experienced a painful lump forming in my throat. The task seemed too overwhelming to tackle on my own. 44 Reflecting on my hurried requests, I learned a valuable lesson: one must prepare others carefully for any sort of change or threat to their daily routine and identity. I sat down with my friends one at a time and carefully outlined the study, assuring them of participant confidentiality. With somewhat relieved expressions, they both agreed to participate in the study. I identified comparison groups enrolled in a 65-minute three times a week 10- month Core FSL course using Entre Amis 1 from September 1993 to June 1994 at Templeton'who were as similar as possible to the participant groups. All available subjects were used (see Table 1). / held my breath in anticipation of the response through the telephone receiver. My former high school French teacher, now the Language Department Head at David Thompson, sighed and apologized. The resignation in her voice was clear. She said that she had approached her department twice with my proposal but could not convince them to participate. My mouth dropped open and my skin prickled. I had not anticipated that the task of soliciting teachers would be a problem. Feeling defeated and frustrated, I thanked Cathy for her efforts and hung up the phone in the office. David Thompson had been a sure thing in my mind. I wondered how my professional colleagues could be so uninterested in a study that held important implications for their pedagogical strategies. I confided my frustrations to a close friend at work. She encouraged me to contact the Language Department Table 1 Total Sample (125 subjects) Group Byng Participant group 130-min. macroclasses 5-month course M F Total Templeton Comparison group 65-min. traditional classes 10-month course M F Total Terml 5 9 14 class 4 All-year 12 12 24 Class 8 Terml 9 9 18 class 5 All-year 5 15 20 Class 9 Term 2 10 15 25 class 1 Term 2 9 15 24 class 2 Totals 33 +48 = 81 17 + 27 = 44 46 Head at Templeton. Without much hope of success and contemplating the role of research in education, I sent off a fax to Templeton. Two days later, I was called to the phone in the office. The caller announced herself as the Language Department Head at Templeton and my adrenaline surged. Soon after, my whole body relaxed and as the conversation drew to a close I thanked the friendly voice who had agreed to partake in the study along with one of her colleagues. After the call, I cheered openly and shared my good news with anyone who happened to be standing close enough to hear. Suddenly, I had renewed confidence in my ability to complete the project. The total sample consisted of six classes of FSL 8. There were two classes on the 5x8 timetable from Templeton serving as the comparison group and four classes (two classes from term 1 and two classes from term 2) on a modified semester timetable from Byng serving as the participant group. The four teachers and one student teacher of these classes, parents of the students, the grade 8 counselor and the principal at Byng were part of the study. Complete sets of data (student questionnaire - June, 1994, student interview- September, 1994, posttest 1-June, 1994 and posttest 2-September, 1994) were collected from 64 (32 from the participant group and 32 from the comparison group) of the 125 subjects (see Table 2). This smaller group of subjects is referred to as the subgroup and does not include any of the term 1 Byng students. 47 Table 2 Subgroup of Total Sample: Subjects From Whom All Data Was Collected Subgroup Data Participant Comparison M F Total M F Total Student Questionnaire 13 19 32 13 19 32 June 1994 Student Interview 13 19 32 13 19 32 September 1994 Posttest 1 (Written) 13 19 32 13 19 32 June 1994 Posttest 1 (Oral) 13 19 32 13 19 32 June 1994 Posttest 2 (Written) 13 19 32 13 19 32 September 1994 Posttest 2 (Oral) September 1994 13 19 32 13 19 32 48 Every conceivable effort was made to collect full sets of data from each subject. Posttest 1 in June, 1994 fell on Canuck Fan Appreciation Day and five subjects elected to skip class. I was tempted to go. Posttest 2 and the student interviews were conducted in September, 1994. Of the two participant groups at Byng, 8 subjects did not enroll in French 9 in September, 1994, 3 subjects had left the school and 2 subjects were taking another language. Of the two comparison groups at Templeton, 5 subjects did not enroll in French 9 in September, 1994. I returned to each class at least twice in order to collect missing data and arranged for 7 subjects who were not taking French 9 in September, 1994 to take posttest 2. In addition to the core participant group at Byng, there was a fast-track class of grade 8 students (13 girls and 4 boys) taking 130-minute FSL classes from February to June, 1994. The fast-track class wrote the questionnaire and the Listening/ReadingAVriting/ part of posttest 1 before the other subjects in June, 1994 to help me refine these measures. These students also wrote the Listening/ReadingAVriting part of posttest 2 in September, 1994. Finally, the Listening/Reading/Writing part of posttest 2 was administered to all students enrolled in French 9 in September, 1994 at Byng and Templeton. Scores from these 152 French 9 students were analyzed to verify the reliability of the exam. 49 Research Design Chaudron (cited in Ellis, 1994) describes four traditional methods in second language classroom research. The psychometric and interaction analyses typically involve quantitative explanatory methods and the discourse and ethnographic analyses typically involve qualitative descriptive methods. For the present study, it was not possible to randomize teacher and student subjects, therefore, I used a quasi-experimental psychometric design using repeated measures to measure language gain and loss from the different treatments (retention interval and class length - see Table 3). Such a design does not completely control for internal validity, therefore I acknowledged teacher difference, student achievement, gender, years of elementary French, and exposure to French during the retention interval as possible differences in group characteristics that may have been reasonably related to the independent variable. I chose to use parametric tests, as opposed to non-parametric tests, even though the sample was preselected and relatively small, because they are generally more powerful in detecting statistical differences (Moore & McCabe, 1989). By using parametric tests, the researcher assumes that the population is normally distributed and that the variances within the groups are the same. To verify whether the assumptions of the parametric tests had been met, I included univariate homogeneity of variance tests and a multivariate test for homogeneity of dispersion matrices in my data analysis. None of 50 Table 3 Pretest - Posttest - Posttest Comparison Group Research Design Pretest Treatment Posttest Method Posttest Group Byng Term 1 students Byng term 2 students Templeton students (comparison group) June '94 Retention Sept.'94 Interval Yes 130-min. macroclasses Sept. '93 - Feb. 1994 Yes 130-min macroclasses Feb '94 - June 1994 Yes 65-min classes Sept. 93 - June '94 Yes Yes Yes 29 weeks 12 weeks Yes Yes 12 weeks Yes the p-levels for the analyses of the subgroup were significant (p>.134). These tests indicated that the variance within the groups was similar. In any case, psychometric 51 methods are not sufficient to ascertain cause and effect relationships of classroom behaviors to treatments therefore I also used a process element to describe actual events that took place in the classroom. Instruments Multiple data collection methods, conducive to classroom process research (Gaies, 1983), were employed to generate, rather than test, hypotheses. The absence of random sampling and the variability in the field warranted a qualitative as well as a quantitative approach. Questionnaires for students, parents and teachers were developed for the present study to research perceptions of the 130-minute French classes. The questionnaires were drawn from a similar study undertaken by a Harvard Evaluation Team at Harvard University and then modified. I assumed any measure used by such a reputable institution as Harvard was sure to be valid. In retrospect, this was naive. The Harvard report did not include a detailed methodology section so I contacted Joseph Carroll in Boston. He in turn forwarded my request to Dean Whitla. After two months of waiting for a response from the Harvard Evaluation Team, I received a fax from Dr. Dean Whitla, the director of Instructional Research and Evaluation at Harvard University (see Appendix D). The internal consistency of the questionnaires used in their study was not investigated. The motivational measures were based on previous studies. There was no rationale given for how they grouped the 52 remaining questions. In light of this news, I categorized the questions based on the language acquisition theories of the Entre Amis 1 program and on previous studies. The student questionnaire (see Appendix E) was comprised of seven categories of questions concerning the students' perception of their French class as well as their motivation to learn French: Motivation (questions 24, 36,45,46,54,58,62,63,65-68,), Teaching Styles (questions 18,29,32-38,42-44), Teacher/Student Relationship (questions 16,17,19,20,27,28), Student/Student Relationship (question 7), Amount Of Material Covered (7 questions 22,23,25), Retention Of Material (question 12), Overall Satisfaction With French Course (questions 5,6,8-11,13,15,31). A five-point Likert scale of Strongly Agree, Agree, Neither Agree Nor Disagree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree was used for 36 of the 69 questions. A five-point Likert scale of Almost Always, Frequently, Some Of The Time, Rarely, Never was used for 17 questions. A five-point Likert scale of Very Easy, Easy, Quite Difficult, Difficult, Very Difficult was used for one question. The remaining 15 questions were followed by more specific choices of answers. I did not use a seven-point scale because I felt that the five- point scale provided an adequate spread of possible responses. Students were asked to fill in their answers on a scantron sheet. They were given the opportunity at the end of the questionnaire to comment on strengths and weaknesses of their French course. The teacher questionnaire (see Appendix F) included 40 questions belonging to the following categories: General Satisfaction With The 130-minute French Class (questions 2,3,5-7), Satisfaction With Working Conditions (questions 4,28-37,39), 53 Retention Of Material By Students (questions 8,22,), Student Motivation (3 questions 12,15,), Quality Of Learning (questions 10,11,14), Amount Of Material Covered (questions 9,20,21,38), Teacher/Student Relationship (questions 13,16-18), Teaching Styles (questions 23-27). At the end of the questionnaire, teachers were given the opportunity to comment on the weaknesses and strengths of their French course. A five-point Likert scale of strongly Agree, Agree, Neither Agree Nor Disagree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree was used for 29 of the questions. A five-point scale of Very Positive, Positive, Neutral, Negative, Very Negative followed two of the questions. Specific answers were required for nine of the questions. The parent questionnaire (see Appendix G) included 22 questions from the following categories: Adequate Preparation For The Change (questions 3-6), Overall Satisfaction With The French Course (six questions 7-9,11,13,22), Student Motivation (four questions 10,12), Teaching Styles (question 14), Student /Teacher Relationship (question 15), Quality Of Learning (questions 16), Retention Of Material (questions 20,21). A five-point Likert scale of Strongly Agree, Agree, Neither Agree Nor Disagree, Disagree, Strongly Disagree followed 19 questions. Specific answers were required for three questions. On Monday May 16, the fast-track French 8 class, composed of 5 males and 15 females taking 130-minute FSL classes from February to June, 1994 at Lord Byng, piloted the student questionnaire, and the Listening/Reading/Writing posttest 1. Students were asked to comment on the setup and content of the questionnaire in the space provided. As a result, two questions were omitted and four were added. Based on the 54 average amount of time students in the pilot group took to complete the questionnaire, 20 minutes was allotted in the present study. Both French teachers who piloted the teacher questionnaire suggested that no changes be made. The students were allowed one hour to complete the posttest 1. The average finishing time was 32 minutes. The class average was 85.1% (88% for the listening, 100% for the reading and 72% for the written). Posttest 1 was lengthened and made more difficult for the study. In order to obtain data that was specific to the communicative approach fostered in the Entre Amis 1 curriculum, Listening/ReadingAVriting and Oral posttests were composed of evaluation activities taken directly from the teacher's guide of the Entre Amis 1 program (see Appendix H). This was to ensure that the objectives of the Entre Amis 1 program were being evaluated in keeping with the pedagogical philosophy chosen by both language departments. The program itself advocates using the same type of activities for learning as for evaluation. Entre Amis 1 evaluation activities claim to be valid, reliable and feasible (Jean et al. 1991). The majority of evaluation is informal and formative. The emphasis is on student participation and their desire to communicate and experiment with the language. Evaluation activities integrate listening, reading, writing and speaking skills. I planned the assessments involved in the present study in advance, representing a prospective approach to studying language acquisition. Scott Merrick and Caroline Krause, the Vancouver District Modern Languages Consultants, were consulted in the making of the posttest measure used in the present study. The Language Department Heads at Templeton, Byng and David Thompson, as 55 well as the other participating teachers, critiqued the final products. David Thompson used the exam as their final exam because they found that the one they had made up was too difficult. The posttest reflected all aspects of language acquisition using the communicative approach: a) listening b) reading c) writing and d) oral. The percentage of listening versus reading versus writing versus oral activities chosen was in direct proportion to the Entre Amis 1 program itself. The tests did not evaluate any items that were not covered by all four teachers in the classroom. Posttest 1 and 2 were identical. A second version of the test was not administered. It was imperative that posttest 1 and posttest 2 be of equal difficulty and accurately controlling for differences in the test items would have been difficult. Listening comprehension part 1 required students to recognize five French descriptions of places in a school. A choice of answers in French was given. Listening comprehension part 2 required students to match 10 sentences about daily routine with the correct picture. Listening comprehension part 3 required students to listen to five short conversations and decide whether the person was feeling well or poorly. Listening comprehension part 4 required students to complete a telephone conversation using the five sentences given. Listening comprehension part 5 required students to match five descriptions of sandwiches with the appropriate picture. Listening comprehension part 6 required students to distinguish which five foods were not junk foods. Listening comprehension part 7 required students to answer true or false with regards to five 56 statements about a map of a school. Listening comprehension part 8 required students to answer true or false to eight statements about a student's schedule shown to them. Reading comprehension part 1 required students to match 10 statements or questions in column A with the correct statement or question in column B. Reading comprehension part 2 required students to number five instructions in the correct order so that they formed the recipe for a sandwich. Writing part 1 was an open-ended question asking students in French what they like to do on the weekend. They were asked to answer using five complete sentences. Writing part 2 consisted of five personal questions that students were to answer in complete sentences. A sample question was "A quelle heure est-ce que tu te leves le samedi?". Writing part 3 required students to write a short paragraph in French on one of the following two topics: My School or A Typical Day. The posttest was out of 78: 48 marks for listening comprehension, 15 marks for reading comprehension and 15 marks for writing ability. See Appendix A for a copy of the test. The oral posttest was administered at a different time and was worth 25 marks. Examiners were given the same instructions and used the same marking scale outlined in the Entre Amis 1 Program. Students received two warm-up questions to minimize the effect of nervousness. Examiners were given four questions of similar difficulty and subject matter per unit that were alternated with each student to help reduce the effect of previous knowledge of test items. They asked two questions from each unit and provided a visual aid for each question. 57 The posttest 1 results from June 1994 were used to assess level of language acquisition. Posttest 2 was administered in September 1994 after the summer vacation. This was primarily to assess language retention but also to get a more accurate measure of student achievement. Testing students after a short retention interval is a better indicator of their achievement than testing them directly after the course. Such evaluation improves accuracy by 45% (Willet, 1992). Exposure to French during the retention interval was investigated. At the exam sitting in September 1994, students were asked to describe any French experiences that they had over the summer by answering the following questions: Did you watch French T. V.? Did you speak in French? Do you speak French at home? Other experiences: Initially, the students' grade 7 French mark was to be used as the pretest score. It became apparent that some elementary schools had not given grades for French. This, coupled with the fact that the students had come from a variety of elementary schools offering a variety of French programs, prevented me from using the French 7 mark as a pretest score. The permanent student records at Byng provided grade 7 standard achievement test scores in reading and math for the majority of my subjects. The records at Templeton did not provide adequate consistency so I was unable to use the standardized test scores as a possible covariate. In any case, using standard achievement test scores did not seem appropriate given that the study investigates achievement in French and not across all disciplines. In addition, there seems to be little correlation between standardized test scores and classroom learning (Ellis, 1994). 58 From my initial analysis of covariance, I found the number of years that students had studied French in elementary school to be significantly related to the posttest 1 and posttest 2 measures. I had collected this data on all of the subjects as a measure of the differences found between the participant and comparison groups before the treatment. I used this as a covariate. Each student's French 8 percentage was calculated using the results from the Entre Amis 1 program's oral and written evaluation activities throughout the year. The program does not specifically outline criteria for evaluating tasks such as homework, participation and journals. These were eliminated from this posttest score. The French 8 percentage score could not be used as a covariate because it was affected by the treatment. It was used to assess the consistency of posttest 1 and also as a posttest 1 score for the trem 1 Byng students. Participant classroom observation was used to investigate learning conditions. Categories of behavior to be observed were taken from the Entre Amis 1 Program Guide Book which clearly outlines the program's philosophy and objectives. Interview guide approach ethnographic interviews were used with the student subjects, the 5 teachers (including 1 student teacher), the grade 8 counselor and the principal at Byng (see Appendix I). This method has been used successfully by many researchers (Naiman et al.; Rubin; Politzer & McGroaty; Oxford; Wenden, & Chamot, cited in Ellis, 1994). Questions asked in these 15 to 20 minute interviews were based on the Harvard study. 59 Procedure and Testing Context For the purpose of this study, consent was received from parents and students (see Appendix J). Students, parents and teachers were told that information resulting from this study would help to identify the most effective schedule for acquiring Core French as a second language. Participants were assured that individual identities would be kept anonymous throughout the study. As soon as my research proposal was approved, I began collecting data (see Table 4). I reviewed the history of the timetable change at Byng and consulted the Ministry Profile of Byng and Templeton in order to get a better understanding of the participants in the study. I proceeded to observe and video tape 12 hours of class time of the participant groups and observe 6 hours of the comparison groups. With shaky hands, I set up the video camera in the front corner of the classroom during lunch at Lord Byng Secondary. Students began filing into the room and looked suspiciously at me and then at the camera. Several lamented while rearranging their appearance self-consciously, "Oh no, you're not filming us are you?" I smiled nervously and tried to be unobtrusive. Students had been told that I was investigating the effects of 130-minute classes. I wanted everything to run smoothly but the students continued to make faces at the camera. My chest inflated as one students exclaimed, "Yeah!" when he saw me and the camera, but almost immediately deflated as another disgruntled student replied "Boo!" 60 Table 4 Total Sample Flow Chart Of Groups and Testing Sequence Measure Posttest 1 Written Posttest 1 Oral Posttest 2 Written Posttest2 Oral June 1994 FSL8 June '94 FSL 8 Sept. '94 FSL 9 Sept. '94 FSL 9 Class Byng 1&2 YES YES YES YES Feb.-June '94 130-min.classes Byng 3 Feb.-June '94 YES NO YES No 130-min. classes fast-track Byng4&5 YES NO YES NO Sept. '93- (grade 8 %) Feb. 1994 130-min. classes Templeton 8&9 YES YES YES YES 65-minute classes Sept. '93-June '94 The teacher moved stiffly around the classroom, smiling constantly. I sat at the front of the room and took descriptive notes, trying not to appear as if I were evaluating but failing in the attempt. I questioned my role as a teacher- researcher. The living of the definition was still unclear to me. During a 15- minute break, the teacher collapsed into a chair and spoke to me in long, deep breaths, "You have to be on your toes all the time. They're trying every trick in the book with me today because you're observing." I felt guilty. When it was appropriate, I circulated and spoke to the students about what they were doing. The data was coming fast and furious transforming the camera into an aid to the project and not the nuisance it had seemed earlier. I consulted the videos later to ensure the accuracy and detail of my field notes. After leaving the field, I allowed myself time for summary observations and for describing in further detail the setting and activities of the subjects. In order to capture details that I may not have been able to express in words, I sketched and photographed the classrooms and schools. I arrived early for Templeton's first class of the day. I reached into the trunk of my car for the video camera and then changed my mind. Suddenly I felt like an unwanted travelling salesperson. In the classroom, I timidly broached the subject of the video camera. Molly responded briskly that she would rather not. I would receive the same response from the second teacher in the afternoon. The camera stayed in the trunk. 62 / sat on the counter at the back of the room with a view of 25 heads and desks. The students politely inquired after my raison d'etre. I explained that I was investigating the difference between 130-minute French classes at Byng and 65-minute French classes at Templeton. They turned their attention back to their teacher. At one point, I rose to circulate and Molly hurried over and, without looking at me, told me that they were to work on their own. Without the help of the camera, I wrote steadily. On a susequent visit, I was met by a teacher on call. Although Molly had informed her of my pending visit, she responded aggressively with an unsmiling rigid face to my request to observe the class. Unprepared for such a reaction, I retreated. I conducted scheduled interviews with the four full time teacher participants (including the two Language Department Heads from each school), the student teacher who taught one of the participant groups for three months, the Grade 8 Byng counselor and the Byng principal in various locations at their convenience. A l l interviews were audio taped and transcribed. Two of the participants, however, asked that their interviews not be audio taped. Field notes were taken at each interview. / placed the cassette recorder on the counter in front of Mary and watched as her features froze and sensed her body go rigid. I asked if the tape recorder made her feel nervous, "Yes it did" she replied. As I put it away, she relaxed and 63 leaned forward again. I was not accustomed to making other people feel uncomfortable. The purpose of these interviews was to allow the participants to describe in detail their perceptions and interpretations of their experiences with the Core FSL course at their school. After transcribing the interviews, I reflected on the experience and asked myself how my research focus might have changed. I felt more certain that the teacher is the key to an effective learning environment. I decided to focus my assessment on the quality of learning as opposed to the quantity of learning. I acknowledged the importance of linking the retention of language skills measured on tests to the language methodologies used in the classroom. I learned that successful research requires planning and dry runs and that positive change requires good communication. On Wednesday June 1 and Thursday June 2, 1994,1 asked the students to take questionnaires home to their parents, to be returned by Wednesday June 15. Students and teachers of the participant and comparison groups were given a questionnaire in order to determine their impressions of their French course. The questionnaire took approximately 20 minutes to complete and was administered by the French teachers in their classrooms. Teachers filled out their questionnaires at the same time. Listening/ReadingAVriting Posttest 1 was administered by the participant teachers who had all received the same instructions. The tape could only be stopped between sections. Teachers were not to repeat or read any of the taped script nor were they to help 64 the students with any of the answers on the exam. I was available to answer any questions. Most students took the full hour allowed to complete the exam. Listening/ReadingAVriting Posttest 2 was administered to all students enrolled in French 9 at both schools by their teachers on Thursday September 8 or Friday September 9, 1994. Most students took the full hour to complete the exam. Students were not given notice of the tests and were assured that the results of these posttests could only enhance, not hinder, their standing. Oral posttest 1 was administered by myself, a French teacher from Byng, a French student teacher and a service student. Each interview was audio taped one on one and took approximately seven minutes. All interviews were conducted in confidence, although interview locations ranged from small staffrooms to empty classrooms to bookrooms. Interviewers evaluated each student and then I transcribed and re-evaluated them. Wherever possible, the subject was given the same interviewer and location for both oral posttests. The student teacher who helped with oral posttest 1 was unavailable so the language monitor of three years at Byng helped. The same procedures were followed for posttest 2 as for posttest 1. Following oral posttest 2, students were asked which subscale of the test they found easiest and most difficult and why. They were given the opportunity to identify any weaknesses and strengths of longer French classes. They were asked specifically if they believed they remembered material better in a longer or shorter class. These focus questions were a result of the responses on the questionnaires. 65 Quantitative Data Analysis The listening, reading, writing and oral sections of both posttests were scored separately. The listening and reading sections were of multiple choice format and easy to tabulate. The three writing sections were scored according to the evaluation procedures outlined in the teacher's guide of the Entre Amis 1 Program (Jean et al. 1991). Fifty percent was given for successfully communicating the message in French. Twenty-five percent was given for the correct use of vocabulary. Twenty-five percent was given for the correct use of the grammar point being evaluated. I marked the exams and then checked the consistency of my evaluation by remarking both posttests side by side with another French teacher who teaches Entre Amis 1. The oral posttest was evaluated according to criteria outlined in the Entre Amis 1 Program. Forty percent was given to the successful communication of the message in French. Twenty percent was given to the accurate use of vocabulary. Twenty percent was given to precision of pronunciation and 20% was given to the precision of grammar. The interviewers' evaluations were consulted in order to check the consistency of my marking. To establish the reliability of individual test items, an item analysis and a subtest analysis of the listening, reading, writing and oral measures were conducted. The test items and subscale items showed excellent reliability (overall Alpha = 8.2). I carefully weighed the effects of eliminating a test item to the overall reliability of the measure. All things being equal, the more test items there are, the more reliable the test is. By 66 administering subtests within a larger test, the reliability of the measure is increased because more levels of ability are being tested. A Pearson two-tailed bivariate correlation was done to assess the relationship between the test subscales, years of elementary French, exposure to French over the summer, gender, and the grade 8 French percentage which was the designated covariate. The designated covariate was not used as planned because it was measured after the treatment and "the covariate represents a source of error that is related to the dependent variable but is uncontrolled by the design of the research" (McMillan & Schumacher, p. 368). A repeated measures A N O V A was used to assess differences within the participant and comparison groups. The difference was found to be significant. The groups were collapsed because increasing the number of variables would lead to very small sample sizes. Mean scores of the posttests and of the posttest subscales were compared by class and by school. There were three methods of analysis that were appropriate for my research design. Given the high reliability of my test items (overall Alpha = 8.2) and subscale items, I could have made a strong case for doing a two factor repeated measures A N O V A using the posttest scores. In order to analyze the effects of the treatment on the individual listening, reading and writing subscale, three separate repeated measures ANOVAS would have been appropriate. A repeated measures M A N O V A (the Doubly multivariate repeated measures test) would have acknowledged the strong relationship between the subscales by analyzing a composite score. I ran all of these analyses and did individual 67 post-hoc Tukey and Tukey-Kramer t-tests to explain significant interactions between variables. "The reader may be wondering why a researcher does not use separate t-tests as a follow-up to the significant F ratio found from doing an A N O V A . The answer is that if multiple t-tests were used, the researcher would increase the likelihood of finding a significant difference where none exists" (Macmillan et al., 1989, p.386). Frequencies of responses on the questionnaires were tabulated by school. I examined the responses by Chi-squared analysis to see if the differences in opinion were significant. Students were given a score for motivation based on their responses to certain questions on the questionnaire. An item by item analysis was carried out as a back-up check on reliability of the categories on the questionnaire. The overall Alphas for each category were as follows: Student/Teacher Relationship = .82, Overall Satisfaction With the 130-minute French Class = .73, Teaching Strategies = .7, Motivation = .82. A factor analysis assumes that the categories are based on a theory. If the categories are not based on theory, one runs the danger of forcing questions into categories in order to make the categories work. I decided to give detailed descriptions of the categories as well as doing a factor analysis. Qualitative Data Analysis Although I completed some analysis of the data while in the field, such as developing categories for the classroom behaviours that I observed, most of the analysis was done after leaving the field. 68 I used interaction analysis to determine to what extent classroom behaviors were the result of teacher interaction. After I had completed 18 hours of classroom observation in May, 1994,1 read through all of the data, watched the videos and noted frequently used words and phrases and patterns of behaviour in order to identify which combinations of behaviors might be relevant to second language acquisition. From these notes, I sorted classroom interactions into five categories based on the teaching principles of the Entre Amis 1 program: Student/Teacher Relations, Student/Student Relations, Student Participation (voluntary or not), Teaching Strategies, Off-Task Behaviour (not actively listening). A disadvantage of interaction analysis is that the behaviors of the subjects are often observed in isolation of one another. As a result, I chose to video-tape the classroom behaviors in order to get a more holistic, integrative representation of the classroom activities (McLaughlin, cited in Ellis, 1994). As a teacher-researcher, I bring a certain degree of subjectivity and human error to the field. Video-taping the classes increases the reliability and the validity of the measurements. Inductive analysis was also used with the counselor and teacher interviews in June, 1994, and with the student interviews in September, 1994. I transcribed the interviews and then scanned them for possible topic categories. Then I examined them from all angles in order to recognize any emerging patterns. I noted any irregularities and clusters of meaning. I identified four topic categories for the student interviews: Language Skills Most Susceptible To Attrition, Strengths Of Longer French Classes, Weaknesses Of Longer French Classes, Length Of Class Most Conducive To Retention Of Material. I recognized 5 topic categories of data from the teacher interviews: Planning 69 For The Change, Student/Teacher Relations, Students Motivation, Instructional Strategies, Pace/Attention/Retention. Finally, I recognized three topic categories of data from the interview with the counsellor: Student/Teacher Relations, Attention, Instructional Strategies. I conducted a qualitative analysis of the open-ended response section of the student, parent and teacher questionnaires. I read all of the responses and took mental notes of possible patterns. From this preliminary data analysis, I identified five possible topic categories of student responses (Teaching Strategies, Student/Teacher Relations, Student/Student Relations, Motivation/Attention, Retention), two possible topic categories of teacher responses (Time and Learning, Attention/Motivation), and four possible categories of parent responses (Retention Of Material, Pacing, Student/Teacher Relations, Communication). The results of the data analyses are presented in the next chapter. 70 CHAPTER FOUR Results The results from the Pearson, two-tailed bivariate correlations among the four subscales of posttest 1 and 2, exposure to French over the summer, years of elementary French and gender showed a strong relationship between all of the subscales (except for the oral test at time 2) and years of elementary French which represent prior knowledge (r=.24 to .45, p< 05). The number of years that the subjects had studied French in elementary school was used as a covariate in the analysis when it was significant. The observed mean scores for posttest 1 and 2 showed that the term two Byng students outperformed the Templeton students on posttest 1, but that the reverse was true for posttest 2 (see Table 5). A repeated measures, two-factor M A N O V A was used to analyze the results of the posttests because the subscales were significantly related. The main time effect was significant for the oral and writing subscales . The group and time interaction was significant for the oral (p< 004) and listening (p<007) subscales. Results from the repeated measure A N O V A tests of the total test scores (listening, reading, writing, oral subscales) supported the findings of the M A N O V A . Templeton's scores went up and Byng's scores went down from posttest 1 to posttest 2. The main group and time interaction was significant (F(l,65)=12.45, p<001). A Tukey test revealed that Templeton's increase in score from time 1 to time 2 was significant (q(65)=4.41, p<05) and that Byng's decrease in score from time 1 to time 2 was Table 5 Posttest 1 and 2 Observed Mean Scores of the Subgroup Byng students Templeton students 130-minute classes 65-minute classes Feb. to June, 1994. Sept.'93 - June'94 Mean Mean Posttest 1 A 03 68.93 65.82 June, 1994 - Posttest 2 A 03 64.55 69.04 September, (4.25% loss) (3.12% gain) 1994 Oral (June) /25 14.04 12.86 Oral (Sept.) 13.85 (.76% loss) 15.37 (10% gain) Listening (June) /48 37.94 36.44 Listening (Sept) 36.68 (2.62% loss) 38.22 (3.71% gain) Reading (June) A 5 9.44 9.84 Reading (Sept) 8.81 (4.2% loss) 9.59 (1.67% loss) Writing (June) A 5 7.61 6.64 Writing (Sept) 6.33 (8.53% loss) 6.31 (2% loss) 72 significant (q(65)=4.32, p<05, see Figure 1). For the listening subscale, the group by time interaction was significant (F(l,65)=12.45, p< 001). A Tukey test revealed that Templeton's increase on the listening subscale was significant (q(70)=3.86, p<05) see Figure 2. For the reading subscale, no effect was significant. For the writing subscale, the main time effect was significant (F(l,69)=5.57, p<021). A Tukey test showed that Byng's decrease on the writing test was significant (q(69)=4.16, p<.05, see Figure 3). For the oral subscale, the main time effect (F(l,63)=6.42, p<014) and the group by time interaction (F(l,63)=8.69, p<004) were significant. A Tukey test revealed that Templeton's increase on the oral subscale was significant (q(63)=5.65, p<01, see Figure 4). When broken down by class, the mean scores showed that only one class, class 2 from Byng, did not increase its score from posttest 1 to posttest 2 (see Table 6). The analysis of variance by class followed by a Tukey test revealed that Byng class 2's decrease in score was statistically significant (q(31)=5:46, p<01, see Figure 5). Mean scores of the individual oral and listening subscales showed that Byng outperformed Templeton on posttest 1 but that the reverse was true for posttest 2. In general, Templeton's oral and listening skills increased from posttest 1 to posttest 2 and Byng's scores decreased. The analysis of variance by class, followed by Tukey tests, revealed that Templeton class 8's increase on the oral subscale was statistically significant (q(31)=6.54, p<01, see Figure 6), that Templeton class 9's increase on the listening subscale was significant (q(33)=3.85, p<05, see Figure 7), and that Byng class 2's 73 Mean Raw Score o c T3 ro II H CD '3 •g_ CD i—i- o O c "D CD —̂ 3 ro C/) (Q CD £ g-r* CD CO D (—t- CO 03 O O O o o c "O O) CD 4̂  Ol CD CD CD -vj 0 ro <̂ C O &) Q . —I 0 0 i—i- O 3 C / ) T l O O c r CQ o C / ) 3 • a CD o CD O CO CD J3 CO I—I- CD 0) CQ c CQ CD 0 ) c/T H TJ CD O CO CO ZD CD CD 5' CD CO i—»• ro (/) CD •a CD CO 4* O TJ Z! O CO 0) 0 0) 3 CQ CD CO c CD CO CO 4* Mean Raw Score 7V C D C D o c "a o c 3 CD CD 3 N> CO o zr o o O o c "O o oo a> CQ c Q . CD 0) CO >—*• c CL CD i—i- co CD l—I- CD 13 o' CO CD •a CD c_ (J) c w" CD CD CD 3_ 3 - CO 3 - CQ CO CQ —1 —\ CD CD CO W ^+ i—*• o 0 ) o o o c r CQ "D o — + 1 3 CD O i—H 0) CQ 0 N> J3 CD i — i - 0 3 i — o " 0) i—H 0 CQ 75 Mean Raw Score CD CO CO CO CO -vl b ro 4^ co co b 3 ^ CD 5; CD - • CQ §" H 3 CD CO w CD ~ •a o cd 4 ^ ho - s i 4̂ c _ < c < CD i— D ' — L CQ CO CO — 1 4 * CD CO .—t- —I CD 3 rjo C O &) Q_ —I CD 3 CD r—t- o o o o c r CQ o 3 • a — I o T l CQ" CD CO • • J3 CO I—H 0 i—i- o ' o CQ CO <D = — C/) 1: DO Mean Raw Score ro co 0 1 b O CD o c TJ O c ro -»• CD 3 TJ CD #—f O =3 CD 3 ro DO CO CQ c Q. CD r—*- CO CO i—•- c Q. CD r—•- CO 0) o IX O o O — \ o c T 3 3D O CD — I 51 O co O —t 03 CD CO C O o o o D " C Q " D O — h tt> 0) 3 • o CD C Q C —* CD • • J3 CD CD o o O • — « 7T O a) » DO r o 7 7 Table 6 Posttest 1 and 2 Mean Scores of the Subgroup By Class Total Score = /103 Posttest 1 Posttest 2 June 1994 Sept. 1994 Mean StdDev Mean StdDev Byng Class 1 59.78 12.58 60.86 13.75 Feb. to June'94 130-minute classes Byng Class 2 76.51 11.66 68.27 14.05 Feb. to June '94 130-minute classes Templeton Class 8 71.73 9.42 74.97 11.97 Sept. '93 to June '94 65-minute classes Mini-school Templeton Class 9 56.14 12.51 Sept. '93 to June '94 65-minute classes 61 11.97 Mean Raw Score 12 o o CD CO CO oo 03 o_ CO CO 0) Q_ CD rO o zr o o O 0) C O C O CD 3 CD CD —̂ 3 ro o oo CO CQ c Q . CD 3 . CO C O c Q . CD 13 CO O l o o o 00 o N> H 00 CO —1 O T l S. 5T CQ 3 co c ro CQ 0) Q_ CD 3 CD i—i-o 3 33 CD CD o" 3 T J O CO i—h f—t- CD CO »—f- ro eg a> co 13 o co #-•• i— CD C O CD CD' CO CO ® r 3 13 5" ® CQ CO CO D " CQ " D O Cf) 3 -g_ CD o I—H CD O CO 0 0 ) O l 33 CD i — i - 0 0) 3 CQ C 0) CQ 0 0 ) c/T DO Mean Raw Score o o 0) co co oo &> ZJ Q . 0> CO CO 0) CL co ro CD 3 TJ_ CD CD ro O DO CO CQ c Q . CD i—t- co CO i—f- c Q . CD Z5 i—h CO CO o zr o o Q 0) C O 0 II Q) CO 01 c c r CO O 3 o 33 CD CD O O 7T C/) ."" DO r o < • J3 CD CD o' C O CD T J CO o O EL H —1 CD CD CO CO »—•- 1—»- c _ c CD CO CO Mean Raw Score o o 03 CO CO CD 03 =3 Q . CD CD 3 CD r—h O Z3 CO i—h C Q_ CD Z3 r-+- co 03 CO CO 03 Q . ro H CD —r 3 ro •3 CQ CO f—t- c Q . CD i—»• CO 0) O =r o o O 0) CO CO 33 CD f— CD D" 5' CO CD T3 CO 1— c _ co" c co" CD CD CD , •3 u ' CO 13* CQ CD CQ H — 1 CD CD CO CO »—f- r—t-o O I] CQ cy) o5 c : c r CQ T3 o 3 CD o 4^ 00 CD • • CO 0 O Z3 CO CD O CQ Cfl 81 decrease on the listening subscale was marginally significant (q(52)=3.89, p<10, see Figure 7). The reading and writing mean scores showed a decrease from posttest 1 to posttest 2 for Templeton and Byng. However, Byng experienced more language loss than Templeton. Templeton outperformed Byng on the reading tests while Byng outperformed Templeton on the writing tests. The analysis of variance by class followed by a Tukey test showed that the difference in reading scores was not significant but that the decrease in writing score of Byng class 2 was significant (q(51)=5;93, p<.01, see Figures 8 and 9). A general factorial A N O V A was used to compare the posttest 2 Listening/ReadingAVriting mean scores of the term one Byng group, the term two Byng group and the Templeton group. There was a significant main group effect (F(2,118)=4.79, p<01). The first term Byng students had the lowest mean score followed by the second term Byng students. Templeton had the highest mean score (see Table 7). A Tukey test showed that the difference between Templeton and both Byng groups was significant (q(99)=3.83, p<05, q(99)=4.32, p<01). An analysis of variance by class did not reveal any significant pattern of original level of learning. A subsequent repeated measures M A N O V A comparing the posttest 1 (represented in this analysis by the French 8 percentage) and posttest 2 scores of these three groups did not meet the assumptions of parametric testing (p=.000). The variance in the French 8 percentages could not be accounted for. As a result, the findings from this particular analysis must be interpreted with caution. The main time effect (F(l, 100.26)=44.62, Mean Raw Score 23l O O 0) co CO 03 CO CO 0 0 -»• 0) CL CO —I 0 3 • D CD O CO c Q . CD CO 0> Q . ro II H CD 3 ro CD CQ CO c Q . CD ZJ t- co CO O O O o CO CO O " n J3 J3 CD CD •—•• CD adi i—i-o' CQ 13 —1 CO CD CD CO c d C_ c CD ID CD 0) CL CO ( Q CD CO CD CQ CO CO c ^ CD tn co c r CQ 3 CD O i—t- en J3 co i — CD Q . Z5" CQ 0 ) ^; co" 00 Mean Raw Score 23 O O CD co CO 0) ZJ Q . CD 3 CD c Q . CD ZJ CO 0) CO CO CO - a CD ZJ Q_ CD ro CD 3 ro o CD CO CQ CO f—•- c Q . CD ZJ I-+ CO C/> O O O O CO CO ro co 4̂ . cn o) -vi op co o I I L _ I L I I ro oo co O ~ n CD — —• JD CQ HI 3 0 ) c o ro oo CQ 0) Q_ —I 0 3 ~D_ 0 i— O c r CQ "O 3 CD Z D CO r—t- CD CD 7T 0) ZJ CQ J3 CD r-+- CD ZJ »—• o' CO co CD ~ "O o CO 4*. c Z5 CD CO CO 4̂ ZJ CQ CD CO 84 Table 7 Posttest 1 and 2 Mean Scores of Byng Term 1. Byng Term 2 and Templeton Subjects (excluding the oral test) Total Score = /100 Posttest 1 (French 8 %) June 1994 Posttest 2 - Sept. '94 Mean Mean % Loss Group Templeton 79.23 65-minute classes Sept. '93 to June '94 Byng Term Two 70.21 130-minute classes Feb. to June 1994 71.69 7.54% 64.88 5.33% Byng Term One 130-minute classes Sept. '93 to Feb. '94 78.07 61.17 16.9% p<000) and the main group by time effect (F(2,100.26)=6.49. p<002) were significant. A Tukey test revealed that Templeton's 7.54% loss of language skills after a 12-week retention interval was significant (q(91)=4.36, p<05, see Figure 10) and that the Term 1 P e r c e n t a g e CD CD o o c O C T3 H CD 3 •o CD 3 _ r° S. CD § 3 CQ CD o c T3 CO II H CD CD CQ o c T3 CO c J T CD' o i — i - CO CO CD T3 i—H CD 3 c r CD O w r-+- CO Tl o CO .—»- CD CO ro ->• CD o zr 00 25. o 33 o CD 3 0) "D Q . CD CQ CQ —1 CD 3 Q_ CD -^ r iti Q_ ro CQ 00 0) CQ co" —I c 1 o Q_ CD 3" CD o o c —t CD 33 CD «—i- CD i—H o o 7 7 7 S i CD 3 c q CD CO 86 Byng students 16.9% loss of language skills after a 29-week retention interval was significant (q(91)=9.77, p<01, see Figure 10). The Pearson, two-tailed bivariate analysis of covariance showed a strong relationship between the following: motivation and gender, French 8 percent, posttest 1 reading subscale, posttest 2 listening subscale, and the posttest 2 writing subscale (r=-.31 to -.21, p<05). It appeared that motivation was related more to posttest 2, the test of retention, than to posttest 1, the test of original learning. The observed mean scores revealed that Templeton (M=27.28) scored lower on the motivational variable than the second term Byng students (M=32.07). This score represents an inverse relationship, therefore, the lower the score, the higher the motivation. This result implies that the Templeton students (N=37) were more motivated than Byng students (N=49). An analysis of variance by class showed that the Mini-school Templeton class 8 was the most motivated class (see Table 8). A Tukey test showed that the difference between Byng Class 2, the least motivated class, and the fast-track Byng Class 3 was significant (q(70)=6.87, p<01). The difference between Class 2 and both Templeton Classes was significant (q(70)=8.02, p<01, q(70)=4.06, p<05). The student questionnaire produced interesting results. The three term two Byng FSL classes (including the fast-track class) and the two Templeton FSL classes completed the questionnaire in June, 1994. The fast-track term two Byng students were only used in the questionnaire analysis because they took a slightly shorter posttest, which also excluded the oral subscale, and because they had so much more elementary French than the other classes. In total, 67 Byng students and 42 Templeton students responded. 87 Table 8 Motivation Score By Class: Inverse Relationship - Score = /60 Class Mean Std Dev Templeton Class 8 26.24 7.28 Mini-school 65-minute classes Sept *93 to June '94 Byng Class 3 27.30 4.07 Fast-track Feb. to June '94 130-minute classes Templeton Class 9 28.94 6.53 65-minute classes Sept '93 to June '94 Byng Class 1 30.57 3.15 130-minute classes Feb to June '94 Byng Class 2 130-minute classes Feb 37.41 7.67 - June '94 88 Responses are separated into topic categories (see Table 9 and Table 10). I have quoted student responses to the interview questions and to the open-ended invitation at the end of the questionnaire to indicate further weaknesses or strengths of the French course. Twenty-one students in the participant group and 34 from the comparison group commented. The majority of Byng students were not satisfied with the 130-minute French class. "I hate French. It's the worst subject". However, they seemed to find the program interesting and want to do well. "I enjoy French and — is a great teacher. I find it reasonably tolerable to have it double-blocked". "The strengths of 2-houf French classes are the same as 1-hour French classes". "Sometimes it is better for learning". "I learn a lot because we work for so long". The majority of the 42 Templeton students who responded were satisfied with their 65-minute French class. "It is a good program and we have a good teacher". "It all depends if you like French and how you look at it. If you think you're going to hate it, you're going to hate it. Making classes longer can cause lots to become time watchers. Tick! Tick! Watching the clock until class is over. Two hours sounds long!". In the focus/attention category, 21 Byng students reported that they were not able to concentrate for the entire length of their 130-minute French class without being disruptive (the fast-track class did not respond to this question because it was not on their questionnaire). "Two hours is too long, it gets boring and you lose your concentration". 89 Table 9 Frequency Of Responses On The Student Questionnaire by Byng Students Three classes of Term 2 Byng Subjects (including the fast-track class) 130-minute French classes 3X a week from February to June 1994 Yes No No Opinion Total Respondents p-level ?# Topic Category #5 Overall satisfaction 14 35 18 67 p<01 with French class 130-minute classes are: #8 Better For Learning 13 26 16 66 p<05 #10 More Fun 18 35 14 67 p<02 #13 Should Be Continued 16 23 36 66 #48 I am cautioned by my 21 35 8 64 p<001 teacher re behavior #47 I can maintain my 16 21 9 46 concentration #17 I can talk to my French 6 47 13 66 p<001 teacher about things not related to school #20 My French teacher 12 38 16 66 p<001 knows me personally 90 Yes No No Opinion Total Respondents P-Level ?# Topic Category #40 We do independent projects 41 26 0 . 67 p<10 #11 Better For Projects 32 14 21 67 p<01 #12 I will forget more 47 4 16 67 p<001 #62 I enjoy French 19 26 21 66 #45 Interesting topics in 28 12 27 67 p<02 French class On the other hand, Templeton students seemed confident that they could concentrate for the length of their 65-minute French class. Of course there were some exceptions. "It's boring and no fun". Byng students were cautioned about their classroom behavior more often than Templeton students. With regards to student/teacher relationships, both groups felt comfortable participating in class and asking the teacher questions. "— is a very good teacher". "The teacher is nice". "The teacher will take time to help every individual but still keep the others on task". However, neither group implied much of a personal connection with their French teacher. Under the topic category student/student relationships, 27 Byng students did not agree that students get to know each other better in a 130-minute French class than in a 1- hour French class. "Many of the people are distracting". Twenty-five students agreed and 16 offered no opinion. "A strength is that you make new friends and talk to people". 91 Table 10 Frequency of Responses on the Student Questionnaire by Templeton Students Two classes at Templeton taking 65-minute FSL 8 3X a week from Sept. '93 to June '94. Yes No No Opinion Total Respondents P-Level ?# Topic Category #15 130-min classes 4 26 11 41 p<001 are better for learning #14 65-min. classes 4 20 17 41 p<01 are too short #48 I am cautioned 12 24 6 42 p<001 by my teacher re behavior #47 I can maintain 16 6 19 41 p<05 my concentration #20 My French 6 21 15 42 p<01 teacher knows me personally #40 We do 38 4 20 42 p<01 independent projects #62 I enjoy French 18 5 18 41 p<01 #45 Interesting topics 12 5 25 42 p<10 in French class 92 With respect to teaching strategies, all teachers were reported to be using the communicative approach faithful to the teaching principles outlined in the Entre Amis 1 Guide. In spite of the fact that this program is student-centered, both groups felt that instruction was not individualized. Supplementary activities employed at both schools were commented on by the students. "I like that we get to watch videos". "Things like doing a journal entry every day, making real sandwiches for the food chapter and SINGING really help the slow time go by faster". "Watching the video Telefrancais helped make class more interesting". "The days when I get to see Telefrancais I am especially enthusiastic". "Doing a journal is good because it increases our vocabulary". The majority of students from both schools reported that they often worked on individual projects. "I like doing projects". "There are not enough individual projects". Thirty-two students believed that they did a better job of projects in a 130-minute French class than in a 1-hour French class. The students reported that they seized the opportunity to speak French in class. "There should also be more orals because book work is always uninteresting". "Speaking French in class all the time is a strength of my class". "I like speaking French during French class". "It's good that we speak a lot of French". Most students were satisfied with the amount of material covered, the quality of learning and their level of comprehension. "Most of the assignments were easy to understand". Some Templeton students commented on the lack of time. "There is too much material to cover in too little time". "Teaching too fast makes it very hard for students to learn". "We get too much homework". However, 47 Byng students believed that they would forget more French by taking it for half the year as opposed to all year. "I 93 don't like the 2-hour French class because by the time September comes, all the people who took it in the first half of the year will have forgotten it". In general, Templeton students enjoyed French more than Byng students, although more Templeton students chose not to express an opinion. "It's fun". "The tests are interesting". "Some subjects actually proved interesting. Telefrancais was an interesting and fun way to interact with the French language". "I enjoy studying French and I plan to take it for all my high school years". There were 15 questions included in the motivation category. Thirty-five Byng students did not enjoy doing their French homework, 13 did and 19 had no opinion. "The reason why I don't do French homework is because 2 hours of French is too LONG!! I lose my concentration in the second hour". Most students found the course easy. "It's a bit too easy, I enjoy a challenge". "The work is way too easy and done at a really slow pace. This is why it's very easy to get bored and lose interest". Most of the students attributed their success in French to personal effort. Most students expressed a high degree of instrumental motivation. They felt that French was useful and important in order to get a good job. Interestingly enough, most students did not want to work at a job that required French. One student's comment indicates the possible negative effect of mandating the study of a second language: "I don't like the fact that I'm required to take French". Twenty-four Byng students reported that it was difficult to catch up on missed French assignments following an absence, 7 did not and 14 had no opinion. "When I am sick, I have a hard time catching up". However, only 14 Templeton students agreed that it 94 was difficult to make up work after an absence, 16 believed that it was not and 8 had no opinion. The results from the student interviews indicated that the students found the listening tests to be the easiest to remember and the writing tests to be the hardest to remember. Students reported that the listening activities tested more general knowledge. "You get an idea of what they're saying when they use certain words and it makes it easier from what they're doing or whatever is in the background". "They asked if they were sick or okay and you could tell by the tone of their voice. If they just said the words normally, it would probably be more like listening". "Most of the junk foods sound like English words". The writing activities were more recall tasks. "The written was the hardest because I hadn't practiced French in 2 months". "It's difficult to think of a lot of sentences to put together". The 32 Byng students who were interviewed commented on strengths and weaknesses of their 130-minute French class. The most common strength mentioned was that they learned more in a 130-minute class. "You can get more work done, you can continue on, not having to stop something in the middle of it if there's only one hour, just come back to it in the second hour". "The first 10 minutes of a class you're just getting warmed up. You don't really have to do that when you have a 2-hour block". The most frequently mentioned weakness was that 130 minutes was too long to keep their concentration and that it was boring. "You lose your concentration. By the second hour, I was dying". "It gets boring after two hours unless you have a really good teacher". "You can't really concentrate for 2 hours and you goof off'. "It's worse 95 remembering for the 2 hours if you had it in the first half of the year but it was a bit easier in the last half of the year". "If you had it from September to June, you'd remember a lot more and you'd do well because the teachers wouldn't be throwing it at you". Fifteen students stated that it was harder to retain material and six maintained that it was easier. There were other interesting comments such as: "You should have a longer break if you're having a double block of French" and "It depends on your teacher. If you like your teacher then it doesn't bother me to have 2 hours. But if you don't really like your teacher, then if you have 2 hours you wouldn't like it, right? But I think I liked last year's class (130-minute class) better because I liked — better". At the time of the student interviews in September 1994, Templeton was experimenting with a new timetable comprised of 85-minute classes. The students were asked to comment on the weaknesses and strengths of their 85-minute French class. Similar to Byng, the most common strength cited was that they had more time and as a result they learned more. "We learn more, we have more time to do things. With 60 minutes, we were rushing" The most frequently cited weakness was that the class became boring. "Towards the end of class, everyone starts getting cranky and annoyed and they don't want to be there anymore and they stop listening and they start getting mad and frustrated". "The problem is you start shortening your attention span as you go along because you've been sitting for so long". Ten students felt the longer classes would enhance retention of material and one student did not. "It is easier to remember things for a test because the teacher will tell you 96 more". "You would absorb more material if you had more time to do it. So, it depends how long the teacher spent on that, because usually now with longer periods we do several lessons. So it's just more condensed". "I like doing French in a 1-hour session because then you can go home and think about it instead of having too much information thrown at you and forgetting the littler things". The students offered some insightful comments: "If we had French for 2 hours, there would be too much of it. 85 minutes is okay. It's not too long or too short". "Eighty-five minutes will probably be better because we'll get to expand our ideas". The results of the teacher questionnaires from Templeton and Byng are summarized below. The quotes are comments that the teachers made on the questionnaire or during the interview. Two of the French teachers at Byng now feel negatively about the 130-minute French classes. The fast-track French teacher feels positively about it. However he qualified his answers by saying "My responses pertained to my French 8/9 Fast-track class. My responses would likely be different for the regular French 8 class that I taught at the beginning of the year". They all stated that they were not well-informed of the change to longer classes. There was no inservice and one of the teachers did not realize that she was teaching a 130- minute French class until she arrived in September. Teachers from both schools wanted more time for planning and meeting with colleagues. All three Byng teachers believe that the change increased their stress level. 97 Overall, the French teachers from both schools are satisfied with their professions and teaching the Entre Amis 1 program. There was as much variation in teaching styles within schools as between schools. In general, all teachers practiced the communicative approach in a student-centered classroom. They feel that they know their students well and are happy with student achievement and retention in their course. However, one Byng teacher commented "I am very satisfied with the French courses at this school and student achievement. To me this is not the issue". The issue is that two of the Byng French teachers would prefer 75-minute French classes and one would prefer shorter periods for junior grades and longer ones for senior grades. "Two-hour classes can work - no problem! But NOT for junior grades- ESPECIALLY grade 8's. Grade 8's can just make it through 60 minutes - 2 hours is much too long for them". "The 2-hour block is too long for grade 8 students, a shorter time, 75-90 minutes , would be better. For more mature students, 2 hours might not be too long. If the timetable were built so that we taught four blocks a day, rather than five, the longer classes would be more suitable. It's hard to fit a 2-hour class .in especially when I have to teach three more classes". The Templeton teachers agreed that 60-minute classes three times a week are most conducive to learning a second language. Of the 12 Byng parents who returned completed surveys, four (two from each class) commented in the space provided. These parents felt that there was a lack of communication from the school. "There isn't really a way to know how well my child is doing". In general, they were pleased with their child's progress in French. Some were concerned about pacing and retention of material. "Although my child enjoyed the class, 98 she has not learned anything new from grade 7". "I feel that at this age, the pace of learning is too slow and too much time is spent colouring pictures". "The half year without French would cause the students to forget their work". One parent commented on the effect of the intensified teacher/student relationship: "I am aware that general attitude and teaching style of the teacher seem to be very important to my child's learning behavior. Although a teenager, my child generally displays a positive attitude toward learning and school. However, I have noted some dissatisfaction on some occasions in her French classes, which seem to stem from communication problems between her and her teacher. Unfortunately due to the timeframe involved in teaching French this year, I did not pursue this matter further. Otherwise, my child liked the 2-hour teaching and according to her, she has more knowledge now than at the beginning of the term". Of the 20 Templeton parents who returned completed surveys, 6 (5 from one class) commented in the space provided. In general, it was apparent that many parents had little information about their child's French class. "It is very hard to answer questions when you don't know anything about the subject". "I have no idea what my daughter's French class is like. She never mentions it to me". "The students will have a better idea than the parents". Response to the French course was generally positive. "Jennifer enjoys her French classes. She frequently converses in French with her sister at home. I believe that a second language is a must in today's world". Some students apparently did not enjoy French class. "My child does not seem to be very interested in learning French. She rarely 99 discusses the class and in general seems to think it is a waste of time. I myself have a different view but also feel that this type of attitude is hard to change". Students and teachers from both schools reported that they were learning French through an integrative, communicative approach that was student-centered. They frequently spoke French and interacted in small groups. They found the Entre Amis 1 program interesting and wanted to do well. Byng students reported that the 130-minute class was too long and that they lost their concentration, possibly resulting in off-task behavior in class. I calculated the average number of behaviors exhibited in the established topic categories for a 65-minute session in French (see Table 10) to establish whether perceptions of behaviors reported by the students and teachers were actually exhibited in the classroom. In general, the classroom behaviors that were observed reflected the students' and teachers' perceptions of their French class. Byng teachers appeared to spend more time on student-centered activities. Longer classes did not appear to result in significantly better student/teacher relations, however, students in the longer classes did exhibit fewer off-task behaviors. Contrary to the questionnaire results, Templeton students exhibited more off- task behaviors than Byng students. One of the Templeton teachers revealed in the interview that she did very little group work because of the classroom management involved. The results will be discussed in the next chapter. Table 11 Average Number or Percentage of Classroom Behaviors During 65 minutes of French class Group Byng Templeton 130-minute classes 65-minute classes Feb to June'94 Sept '93-June'94 Class 1 Class 2 Class 8 Class 9 Topic category Student-centered 59% 58% activities Teacher-centered 41% 42% 47% 50% 53% 50% activity Off-task behaviors 12 Positive student/ 0 student relations Negative student/ 0 student relations Positive teacher/ 1 student relations Negative teacher/ 1 student relations Student Participation 7 26 1 32 3 13 1 19 101 CHAPTER FIVE Discussion Interpretation of Results The present study asked how macroclasses affect second language acquisition, long-term retention and student motivation. As was expected, the level of original learning and student motivation did influence forgetting, and students did experience loss of second language skills after a retention interval. The results of the present study parallel, for the most part, results from previous studies. As Semb et al. (1994) found, the level of original learning does correlate positively with retention. Byng's strong performance on posttest 1 in June could be interpreted as a massed learning effect, as found by Bahrick (1984:1987) and Demster et al. (1990). As a result of the massed learning effect, language skills are acquired to a medium level of proficiency and are more susceptible to attrition, which would explain Byng's overall decrease in score after the retention interval. However, concurrent with the findings of studies by Gliksman et al. (1982), Gardner (1985), Gardner et al. (1987) and Crookes (1992), Byng's overall decrease in scores from posttest 1 to posttest 2 may be attributed to one class being less motivated . Templeton's increase on the listening subscale may be attributed to overlearning of listening skills, (also known as the ceiling effect) observed by Bahrick (1984), or to the fact that the listening test measured general knowledge or general language proficiency rather than language skills. This would also explain the lack of relationship between the 102 number of years that students had studied French in elementary school and retention loss. On the other hand, similar to the findings of Gardner et al. (1985) and McDicken-Jones (1994), there was no significant loss of reading skills by either school. These skills may have been overlearned or undernamed resulting in very little measured language loss. Overall, it appears that one class from Byng and one class from Templeton experienced a basement effect whereby their level of original learning was so low that their measured retention loss was minimal. On the other hand however, the fact that the scores of both schools decreased on the writing subscale from posttest 1 to posttest 2 may be indicative of the difference between acquiring receptive skills and productive skills. Similar to the findings of Snow et al. (1988) productive skills, such as writing, are more susceptible to attrition because they are often acquired subsequent to receptive skills, such as reading and listening comprehension. However, the analysis by class revealed that writing skills were acquired to a lower level of proficiency than oral, listening and reading skills. Once again class 1 at Byng and class 9 at Templeton may have experienced a basement effect. It is more difficult to account for one of the Templeton group's dramatic increase on the oral subscale from posttest 1 to posttest 2. A possible explanation for this anomaly is that more students in this group were exposed to French over the summer, which Gardner et al. (1985) found to be conducive to retaining listening and speaking skills. However, Snow et al. (1988) found that writing and speaking skills were more susceptible to attrition than reading and listening skills even with a high rate of use outside of the classroom. Another possible explanation is that there was a measurement artifact, as was 103 the case with Gardner et al. (1987) and Welten et al. (1989). That is to say that the group did better on the test the second time around because they were more familiar with the testing context and the test itself. This group was also more motivated. The overall measured retention loss or gain of listening, reading, writing and oral skills of the subgroup was minimal. Even the 10 % increase in oral skills experienced by the Templeton students represents a difference of only three marks out of 25. The subanalysis comparing the retention of term 1 Byng students (after a 29-week retention interval) to term 2 Byng students (after a 12-week retention interval) revealed that the term 1 Byng students experienced more language loss. Term 1 Byng students may have experienced more language attrition due to the longer retention interval or to the fact that they did not have the same advantage of taking the identical posttest in June, 1994. Semb et al. (1994) found that the sharpest decline for recognition skills occurred after a retention interval of 1 to 13 weeks. However, recall skills were most susceptible to attrition after a retention interval of 13 to 26 weeks. It is possible that the recall skills of the term 1 Byng students were more accurately measured than the term 2 Byng students because the term 1 students had undergone a longer retention interval. The quantitative analysis was not nearly as revealing as the qualitative analysis. Contrary to the findings of Rogers (Willis, 1993), students found it difficult to maintain their concentration and reported exhibiting more off-task behavior wherein they were not actively listening, although I did not observe this effect in the classroom. These student perceptions could be explained by a lack of preparation for the change. The students were not given any strategies on how to use the 130-minute classes effectively. In addition, 104 some students seemed to experience a Hawthorn effect whereby they felt cheated because they were the only grade in the school forced to take longer French classes. Why then did students feel that macroclasses should be continued? One explanation is that they felt the advantages of the extended Home Economics classes outweighed the disadvantages of the extended French classes. Another possible explanation is that students recognized the potential of the longer classes but felt that students and teachers needed time to adjust to the new learning situation in order to make full use of the macroclasses. Similar to teachers at L.V. Rogers (Update, 1993) and at Howe Sound Secondary (Update, 1993), the macroclass teachers at Byng experienced increased stress and a lack of preparation time. As a result, none of the teachers took field trips in order to interact with French outside of the classroom, although field trips have been cited as an advantage of macroclasses. Laurie Mannings (1993), a teacher currently in a school using the Copernican timetable, states that "field trips, guest speakers, and community involvement are easier to arrange (on a macroclass schedule) and can be organized during the. week with no impact on other classes" (p. 14). Unlike Carroll's (1990) observations, teaching strategies were no more varied than in 1-hour classes. Again, a possible explanation for this lack of innovation on the teacher's part is the lack of inservice. In addition, teachers found the classes too long to sustain a communicative-style of teaching which could explain the students' boredom and negativity. Conclusions At first glance, the results of the present study do not favor the continuation of 130-minute French classes at Lord Byng. Responding to the research questions posed in 105 the present study, it would appear that FSL acquisition and retention were not enhanced as a result of the 130-minute macroclasses. In addition, students did not appear to be more motivated and teachers did not use the longer classes to create more of an immersion-style learning environment while using the communicative approach. Although the majority of Byng students and teachers were not satisfied with the French macroclasses, further analyses of the qualitative data indicated that the determining factor for the lack of success of the macroclasses was insufficient inservice for the teachers and students before and during the change. Students and teachers did have some positive things to say about the extended classes indicating that there was the potential to create an effective learning space in 130 minutes. Students commented on their increased quality of learning and teachers emphasized that macroclasses could work for older grades. In November, 1994, a grade 9 French student at Byng approached her former grade 8 French teacher and said, "You know, I really miss our 2-hour French classes from last year. Can you come and teach us again?" To which the teacher replied, "You're kidding! I thought you hated them!" The student said, "No. Once you got used to them, they were pretty good." This student's comment once again emphasizes the need for time and support in order to adjust to change. It remains to be seen how adequate inservice and preparation would affect the success of the macroclasses at different grade levels. The results from this study are particularly relevant to the exciting pedagogical changes proposed by the 1996 Core FSL Curriculum for second language teachers in British Columbia. One of the more drastic changes is that the study of a second language 106 has been mandated from grade 5 through 8 in British Columbia. Now students who do not like language learning to begin with, and who are forced to take a second language, may become even less motivated. Given the fact that the least motivated class in the present study experienced the most retention loss, combined with one student's comment, "I don't like the fact that we have to take French", it would appear that student motivation in the second language classroom will become even more crucial. Equally important is the fact that second language teachers are now expected to use the communicative approach. These changes are scheduled to be implemented fully by September 1995. The results from this study will help teachers to find the timetable that best facilitates learning a second language through the communicative approach. It will also impress upon educators and administrators the importance of preparation and continued inservice to successful change, and this will be particularly true for any successful implementation of the mandatory grade 5 to 8 FSL program, regardless of timetable. Implications for Further Research In this study, identical posttests were used in June and September in order to minimize the effect of experimenter expectancy on the evaluation of the tests and of confounding test difficulty with the retention interval. It is possible that student performance on posttest 2 was influenced by having already experienced the same evaluation procedure in June 1994. That is to say, using the same retention test may have contributed to the lack of measured language loss over the retention period. However, the measurement artifact effect would be equal for both groups of subjects. 1 0 7 Eliminating the possibility of confounding test differences between posttest 1 and posttest 2 with retention differences by using the exact same measure for both posttests was more advantageous than using different measures in an attempt to control for measurement artifact. Measuring change or loss using objective measures is ambiguous. Gardner and Neufeld (cited in Gardner et al. 1987) demonstrated that correlating a change score with another measure is complex because it is a function of three factors, "(a) the difference in the correlation of the other measure with the measurements at the two time periods, (b) the correlation of the two measurements at the two time periods, and (c) the variability of the posttest measurements relative to the pretest" (p. 30). Determining which factors correlate with language loss is complex. The validity of any evaluation can be complicated further by the possibility of subjects guessing the correct answer. Sixty-one percent of the posttest used in the present study was multiple-choice or true-false format. The chance factor was 31% for the listening test and 13% for the reading test.. Again the chance factor would be equal for both subject groups and posttests since subjects were required to answer all of the questions. Ideally, I should have administered a pretest at the beginning of grade 8 before the subjects had been exposed to the treatment in order to minimize the effect of prior knowledge. However, this pretest would not have controlled for knowledge learned outside of the classroom during schooling. Furthermore, a covariate is not a substitute for random sampling. Even with a good covariate, I could not assume that the effects were 108 caused by the treatment. In order to make this assumption, I would have had to randomly assign subjects, including teachers, and determine a covariate for every possible external factor relevant to the treatment. However, even matching subjects on key variables such as years of language study is problematic because confounding variables may be overlooked in the matching process. Randomly assigning subjects to second language learning conditions is a dream research design that has not yet been achieved (Reynolds 1991). On the other hand, ethnographic analysis is limited in that findings are difficult to generalize and there is a danger of overlooking social factors relevant to second language acquisition (Gaies 1983). Despite its limitations, field research is very important because it holds practical implications for education. Laboratory research alone is not sufficient because similar studies conducted in a laboratory and a field setting have yielded different results (Ellis, 1994). There is a need for further research of a longitudinal nature. Students who performed worse on posttest 2 than on posttest 1 appeared to experience language loss over the retention interval. This implies that they have not achieved the objectives of the language course because they have not learned as well as those who did not experience as much loss. However, because a second measure of motivation was not administered with the second posttest, it is not clear how the students' motivation and perseverance to continue learning the language would affect their acquisition of the language in subsequent courses regardless of language attrition and exposure to the language during the retention interval. 109 More research is needed to determine how time can be best used to facilitate learning. It is not clear how longer classes affect the development of communication strategies. Perhaps macroclasses would be more effective at certain age levels for language learning if there were more field trips, guest speakers and exposure to French outside of the classroom. The present study measures FSL achievement based on a certain definition of language and based on a certain definition of time. Yet, the Ministry of Education (1994) FSL documents claim that educators must recognize individual learning styles and differences. We can see that the FSL learning environment is becoming increasingly multicultural in Vancouver and that students are bringing more and more definitions of language to the classroom. It would be interesting to investigate the question second language learning for those different cultural groups. Culture is defined through language, therefore the purpose and definition of language will vary according to culture. A future research question might be how the time and space of the FSL classroom can be scheduled in order to best facilitate the success of different multicultural learners. Pedagogical Recommendations While conducting this study I found that many teachers are reluctant to participate in educational research. There is always a fear of the unknown, therefore it is important that teachers, such as myself, who have conducted research in schools, share their experiences with other teachers to make them feel more comfortable being involved in research. It is time well spent because schooUbased research is a valuable tool for improving the education system. "It is an accepted fact that when individuals conduct 110 research about their own procedures and their own settings, they are more apt to be swayed by the results" (Heron, 1983, p. 81). Teachers can also consult the university in their district if they would like to set up a self-study or self-research team in their school in order to gain support for innovation, reform and change leading to an improved education system. Being involved in change is the first step toward successful change. However, in reality, we are busy people and the advantages of change can get lost in the system. Therefore, it is vital that teachers seek inservice arid support for any educational innovation in which they are involved. For example, Modern Languages Education at the University of British Columbia is currently offering FSL methodology courses throughout the province on the communicative approach to teachers to help them adjust to the new requirements of the 1994 Core FSL Curriculum. In addition, Barbara Gauthier, the district principal of Modern Languages circulated a survey to language teachers in Vancouver on December 6, 1994, asking them to comment on the type and structure of inservice needed to implement the 1994 Core FSL Curriculum at the secondary level. This is a step in the right direction, however, it is important to continue assessing inservice needs after implementation. If possible, teachers should be exposed to the new learning situation on a trial basis which is non-threatening, perhaps over the summer. Finally, having learned from my experiences as a teacher-researcher, I would like to offer some suggestions for teachers who would like to pursue a graduate degree in education or who would like to conduct a school-based research project. The following is a list of things that I would do differently if I were to do this project all over again: I l l I would 1. apply for an educational leave from work and study full time. 2. work with another student on a joint project 3. ask for more outside support in terms of funding. 4. keep a journal 5. make the study known to the public in order to improve cooperation of parents and staff. 6. take more time and care in soliciting participants as I did not anticipate the lack of cooperation which I encountered. 7. audio record the text of the study and have it transcribed 8. start by establishing a consistent pretest score 9. code all participants and measures from the beginning 10. use SPSS (statistical program) right from the beginning to input my data 11. use a baseline group of students who have never studied French before to account for the incidental knowledge tested by the measures and the guessing factor. 112 References Anisfel, M , & Lambert, W. (1961). Social psychological variables in learning Hebrew. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 63, 524-29. Bahrick, H. P. (1979). Maintenance of knowledge: Questions about memory we forget to ask. Journal of Experiment Psychology: General. 108. 296-308. Bahrick, H . P. (1984). Semantic memory content in permastore: Fifty years of memory for Spanish learning in school. Journal of Experiment Psychology: General. 113. 1-29. Bahrick, H. P. (1987). Functional and cognitive memory theory: An overview of some key issues. In D.S. Gorfein and R.R. Hoffman (Eds.), Memory and Learning: The Ebbinghaus centennial conference (pp. 387-95). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Baxter, T. (1993, April). Reshaping School Structure. Snap Shots. 2(4), 1-3. I • B C Ministry of Education. (1988). The Royal Commission on Education in British Columbia. Victoria, B.C.: Queen's Printer. B C Ministry of Education. (1990). The National Core French Study. Victoria, B.C.: Queen's Printer. B C Ministry of Education. (1993). School Profiles. Victoria, B.C.: Queen's Printer. B C Ministry of Education. (1994a). The 1994 Core French Curriculum Guide. Victoria, B.C.: Queen's Printer. B C Ministry of Education. (1994b). The Kindergarten to Grade 12 Education Plan. Victoria, B.C.: Queen's Printer. Brophy, B. (1978). Semestering and the teaching-learning situation. Canadian Journal of Education. 3(3). 47-54. Burden, F. (1993). Business education and the Copernican timetable. BC Business Education Annual. 5(2). 15-16. Burianyk, D., Clayton, R., Dressier, J., Graf, G., Labonte, R., Melville, B., & Metzger, G. (1994). B C Principals' and Vice-Principals' Association secondary school project summary report: Changes in scheduling practices in BC Vancouver. BC: BC Principals' and Vice-Principals' Association. Busch, D. (1982). Introversion-extroversion and the EFL proficiency of Japanese students. Language Learning. 32. 109-32. 113 Canadian Parents For French. (1994, November). Is immersion working? Canadian Parents for French British Columbia, p. 1. Carey, S. T. (1984). Refections on a decade of French immersion. The Canadian Modern Language Review. 41(2). 246-259. Carey, S. T. (1991). Languages, literacy and education. The Canadian Modern Languages Review. 47(5), 839-842. Carroll, J. M . (1990). The Copernican plan: Restructuring the American high school. Phi Delta Kappan. 71(5), 358-365. Carroll, J. M . (1994). The Copernican plan evaluated: The evolution of a revolution. Phi Delta Kappan. 72. 105-113. Chapman, P. (1994, November 16). Axe looms over long vacations. The Province Newspaper, p. A6. Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language classrooms: Research on teaching and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Coleman, D. (1983). Academic calendar change impact on enrollment patterns and instructional outcomes. Paper presented at the Annual Forum of the Association of Institutional Research, Toronto, Ontario. Corder, S. D. (1978). Language distance and the magnitude of the learning task. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 2, 27-36. Crookes, G. (1992). Theory format and SLA theory. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 14, 425-49. Cummins, J. (1981). Bilingualism and minority children. Ontario: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. Demster, F.N., & Ferris, R. (1990). The spacing effect: Research and practice. Journal of Research and Development in Education. 23(2), 97-101. Dulay, H. , Burt, M . , & Krashen, S. (1982). Language two. New York: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 114 Ely, C. (1986). An analysis of discomfort, risktaking, sociability, and motivation in the L2 classroom. Language Learning, 36. 1-25. Forehand, L . , and Watkins, J.F. (1979). A scheduling modal for today's high school. Phi Delta Kappan. 6(10), 749-50. Gaies, S. (1983). The investigation of language classroom processes. Teaching English as a Second or Other Language Quarterly. 17, 205-18. Gardner, R. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitude and motivation. London: Edward Arnold. Gardner, R. (1991). Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. In A.G. Reynolds (Ed), Bilingualism. Multiculturalism. and Second Language Learning. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Gardner, R., & Lambert, W. (1959). Motivational variables in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology. 13, 266-272. Gardner, R., & Lambert, W. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury. Gardner, R., Lalonde, R., & MacPherson, J. (1985). Social factors in second language attrition. Language Learning. 35(4). 519-540. Gardner, R., Lalonde, R., Moorcroft, R., & Evers, F. (1987). Second language attrition: The role of motivation and use. Journal of Language and Social Psychology. 6(1), 29-47. Gardner, R., Smythe, P., Clement, R., & Gliksman, L. (1976). Second-language learning: A social psychological perspective. Canadian Modern Language Review, 37, 510- 525. Genesee, F. (1976). The role of intelligence in second language learning. Language Learning. 26. 267-80. Gliksman, L. , Gardner, R., & Smythe, P. (1982). The role of the integrative motive on students' participation in the French classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review. 38. 625-647. Gorgensen, G. (1993). Case study and assessment of an implementation of the Copernican timetable at New Westminster secondary school. Unpublished master's thesis. Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC. 115 Gorgensen, G. (1994, March). The Copernican timetable - a year later. Snap Shots. 4(2)19-20. . Hammerly, H. (1989). French immersion, myths and reality. Calgary: Detselig Enterprises. Heron, B.(1983). The quarter high school calendar on trial. National Association of Secondary School Principals Bulletin. 67, 80-82. Jean, G , Muscovich, B., & Hartley, B. (1991). Entre Amis 1: Teacher's Guide. Scarborough: Prentice-Hall Canada. Karweit, N. (1984). Time-on-task reconsidered: Synthesis of research on time and learning. Educational Leadership. 41. 32-35. Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis. Issues and implications. London: Longman. Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1993). How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lindsay, B. (1993, April). A staff unites for change. Snap Shots. 2(4), p 6. Long, M . (1983). Native-speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics. 4. 126-41. Lukami, Y. (1972). Motivation to learn and learning proficiency. Language Learning. 22, 261-272. Macmillan, J., & Schumacher, S. (1989). Research in education: A conceptual introduction. London, England: Scott, Foresman and Company. Mannings, L . (1993, June). L .V. Rogers Senior Secondary school horizontal timetable. _ Teachers of Home Economics Secondary Association. 33(5). 14-15. McDicken-Jones, K. (1994). Retention and motivation of FSL among students of varying abilities. Unpublished master's thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC. Mclnnes, C. (1994, October 29). Immersion Pioneers Do Not Regret It. The Globe and Mail Newspaper, pp. A1-A9. Moore, D., & McCabe, G. (1989). Introduction to the practice of statistics. New York: W.H. Freeman. 116 Naiman, N. , Frohlich, M . , Stern, H. , & Todesco, A. (1978). The good language learner. Research in education series. Toronto: The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. Raphael, D. (1986). Debunking the semestering myth. Canadian Journal of Education. 11(1), 36-52. Reynolds, A. G. (1991). The cognitive consequences of bilingualism. In A.G. Reynolds (Ed.), Bilingualism. multiculturalism. and second language learning (pp. 145- 177). Semb, G. B., & Ellis, J. A. (1994). Second language learning. Knowledge taught in school: What is remembered? Review of Educational Research. 64(2). 253-86. Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 13. 275-98. Smythe, P.C., Jutras, G.C., Bramwell, JR., & Gardner, R. (1973). Second language retention over varying intervals. The Modern Language Journal. 17(8). 400-405. Snow, M . A., Padilla, A. M . , & Campbell, R. N. (1988). Patterns of second language retention of graduates of a Spanish immersion program. Applied Linguistics. 9(2). 82-197. Strong, M . (1983). Social styles and second language acquisition of Spanish-speaking kindergarteners. Teaching English as a Second or Other Language Quarterly, 17. 241-58. Traverso, H. P. (1991, October). Scheduling: From micro to macro. The Practitioner. 18(1), 1-8. Turner, J. (1993, April). Howe sound pilots new timetable. Snap Shots. 2(4), p. 3. Uzawa, K. (1994). Translating and writing processes of adult second language learners. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia, Vancouver. Weltens, B., Van Els, T., & Schils, E . (1989). The long-term retention of French by Dutch students. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 11. 205-16. Whitla, K., Bempechat, J., Perrone, V., & Carroll, B. (1990). The Masconet Regional high school renaissance program: The first implementation of the Copernican plan: Final report of the Harvard Evaluation Team. Boston: Harvard University, Department of Educational Research. 117 Willet, J. B. (1989). Some results on reliability for the longitudinal measurement of change. Implications for the design of studies of individual growth. Journal of Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, 587-602. Willis, S. (1993). Are longer classes better? Update, 35(3), 1-3. Yoshitimi, A. (1992). Towards a model of language attrition: Neurobiological and psychological contributions. Applied Linguistics, 3(2), 293-318. 118 Appendix A The Vancouver School District Unless otherwise indicated, the socio-economic and demographic information provided was generated from the 1991 Census Statistics Canada. According to the Ministry of Education's latest School and District Information Profiles for 1992-1993, the Vancouver district has been statistically identified as being demographically similar to Richmond, North Vancouver, Burnaby, Surrey, Delta, Greater Victoria, West Vancouver and New Westminster. There are 110,520 families comprised of an average number of 1.1 children living in the Vancouver District. Of these families, 15.4% are single parent. This statistic is noticeably higher than similar districts. In 1986, 16.5% of Vancouver's population over 15 years of age had a university degree. The provincial average is 9.5%. In residential districts, the average income per person over 15 was $18,530. This is high compared to similar districts. As of March 1993, the proportion of children under 19 in Vancouver on Income Assistance was 15.2%, which is higher than the provincial average of 12.8%. Of the Vancouverites over 15, 10.8% were unemployed. In the Vancouver district, 45% speak a language other than English at home (19.5% of which is Chinese) higher than the provincial average of 21.6%. In 1988, of the 18,228 international immigrants to Vancouver, 12,805 (70.2%) came from Asia, with 4839 (26.5%) of these coming from Hong Kong. Despite the fact that nearly half of the school district population is considered English as a Second Language (ESL), Vancouver students achieved better than the provincial average in 9 out of 11 subjects on the 1994 Provincial exams. Exam averages in Geography and Communications were only slightly lower. Vancouver District students received 17.3% of 119 provincial scholarship funds, despite representing only 10% of the province's student population. 120 Appendix B Lord Byng Lord Byng Secondary School is situated on a nine acre site at the western end of the Vancouver Peninsula at 3939 West 16 avenue. The school serves the northern part of Dunbar, West Point Grey and the western end of Kitsilano. Lord Byng is situated in a well established, single family residential area zoned RS- 1. According to the 1991 Census-Statistics Canada, 40% of the residences are rented and 60% are owner occupied. The ethnic origin of the area's population is predominantly European but that is gradually changing. In 1969, 62% of the people immigrating to British Columbia came from Western Europe and the United States. By 1993, 75% of BC's immigrants were coming from Asia. Education and income levels of the area are higher than the city average. The April 1994 student population of Lord Byng was 988. This includes 97 ESL students, 20 international students, 24 Byng Satellite students, and seven special education students. The September 1701 submission to the Ministry of Education identified 175 gifted students and seven students with special needs. Twenty six percent of Byng students live outside the school boundary area, but elect to attend Byng. There are 22 different primary languages spoken by Byng students. Seventy percent of Byng students speak English as their primary language. Twenty percent of the students are Chinese speaking. The Chinese are the fastest growing ethnic group in the school. From 1991 to 1994, the ESL population at Byng grew from 40 to 100 students. One percent of the students speak French and Korean and the remaining 18 languages are each spoken by less than six students. 121 In 1992-1993, the student attendance rate was 99.1% and the graduation rate was 85.3%. 122 Appendix C Templeton School Templeton Secondary School is situated on the east side of Vancouver at 727 Templeton Drive on 8.01 acres adjoining a Vancouver Parks Board community center. There are 70 regular classrooms and seven portables. It is a single family residential area zoned RS-1. A high percentage of the working age population in the area claim Unemployment Insurance. In 1990, 30% of the student population transferred out and an additional 30% transferred in indicating that this is a transient district. An estimated 67% of the community's population do not speak English at home compared to the district's average of 38% and the provincial average of 19%. Approximately 49% of the students at Templeton speak a first language other than English, 33.8% of whom speak Mandarin or Cantonese. The student attendance rate for 1992-93 was 98.8% compared to the district average of 97.3%. In 1993, 66.1% of the grade 12's graduated compared to the district average of 75.7%. More students entered post secondary institutions than the district average and success rate on grade 12 provincial exams was comparable to the provincial average. Enrollment in 1992-93 totaled 1107 students. .... HARVARD UNIVERSITY FACULTY O F ARTS & SCIENCES OFFICE OF INSTRUCTIONAL RESEARCH SHANNON HALL AND EVALUATION 25 FRANCIS AVENUE Dean K. Whitbi, Uirector CAMBRIDGE, MA 02138 (617) 495-153S October 21, 1994 Dear Ms. Oakley. I'm sorry that I haven't responded to your queries at an earlier date, but as you can guess., my days are filled with local requests which simply must be answered first. I have now pulled all of the files on the Masconomet project and find little that you do not already know. The internal consistency of the questionnaire per se was not investigated. While we prepared copious numbers of co-variance tables to eliminate the traditional and renpro differences in math and reading, we made no reliability or validity checks on questionnaires found in the appendices A or C of the Carroll volume. I believe that on two of the instruments used in this work reliability measures were developed: first on the motivational measures as found in Appendix B drawing on the work of Prof. Bempechat (see the Weiss-Bempechat reference^ and secondly on in-depth testing activities described in appendix H by Unger and Goodrich [see the David Perkins reference]. Simply to illustrate our co-variance controls and T Test procedures I have attached two (of approximately 200) pages of typical output. Many years ago when 1 was a graduate student, I constructed some of these coefficients but I found them to be of link help in improving the items or the data that was collected. My energies, especially of late, have been focused on analyses which simply help me to interpret data (the co-variance controls being an example). There maybe now useful internal consistence checks that would be useful; if so let me knowfor we are continuing this work. Good iuck in your work Barbara B. Carroll, Senior Consultant Lesley E. Blaltelock, Administrative Assistant 124 Appendix E Student Questionnaire * Please print your name (last name, first name), and student number in the space provided on the data form. * After you have completed the questionnaire, please feel free to use the space provided to write any other feelings and comments you may have. If you would like to comment immediately after answering a specific question, feel free to do so directly on the questionnaire. Thank you. * FOR T H E QUESTIONS BELOW, PLEASE USE A PENCIL TO FILL IN C O M P L E T E L Y T H E APPROPRIATE CIRCLE ON T H E D A T A FORM. FILL IN ONE CIRCLE PER QUESTION. T H A N K YOU. 1. Are you: A) Female B) Male 2. How many years of French did you take in elementary school? ( fill in E if you were in an immersion program ) A. 0 B. 1 to 2 C. 3 to 4 D. 5 or more E. immersion 3. Which school do you go to: A) Lord Byng B) Templeton IF Y O U ANSWERED "A" TO QUESTION 3, PLEASE ANSWER QUESTIONS 4 T H R O U G H 13 AND OMIT QUESTIONS 14 AND 15 IF Y O U ANSWERED "B" TO QUESTION 3, PLEASE ANSWER QUESTIONS 14 A N D 15 AND OMIT 4 THROUGH 13. . 4. I would prefer a 60-minute French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 125 5. I am satisfied with the 2-hour French class period. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 6. In my opinion, the 2-hour French class seems to be just like 2 French classes put together. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 7. Students in the 2-hour French classes get to know each other better than students in a 1-hour French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 8. I think a 2-hour French class is better for learning than a 1-hour French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 9. A 2-hour French class is better because I have more time to learn. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree \ 10. A 2-hour French class is more fun than a 1-hour French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 11. I do a better job of projects in a 2-hour French class than in a 1-hour French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 12. I think that I will forget more French by taking it for only half the year than if I took it all year. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 126 13. I think that 2-hour French classes should be continued for grade 8's next year. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree L O R D B Y N G STUDENTS PLEASE GO TO QUESTION 16. OMIT #14 A N D #15. 14. In my opinion, a 60-minute French class seems to be a little too short at times. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 15. I think a 2-hour French class would be better for learning than a 1 -hour French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 16. I feel that I can talk to my French teacher about any questions I may have about my schoolwork. A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E . Never Always 17. I feel that I can talk to my French teacher about things not related to schoolwork. A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E. Never Always 18. I feel my French teacher individualizes the French classes to meet my academic needs. A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E. Never Always 19. I feel my French teacher cares about me. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 127 20. I feel my French teacher knows me personally. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 21. I worry about my French test scores/grades. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 22. The amount of time that I spend on French homework after school on average is.... A. 0 - 15 minutes B. 15-30 min. C. 30 min - 1 hour D. lhrormore 23. The amount of time I spend every day studying something French which was not specifically assigned as homework is... A. 0 - 15 minutes B. 15 - 30 min. C. 30 min - 1 hour D. lhr or more 24. I enjoy doing my French homework. A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E. Never Always 25. I feel that I receive a consistent amount of French homework on the days that I have French class ( as opposed to having none one class, but a considerable amount the next class, etc.) A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 26. I feel responsible for my French schoolwork. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 27. I feel comfortable voicing my views, concerns or questions in French class. A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E. Never Always 28. I feel comfortable participating in French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 29. My French class utilizes materials taken from other sources other than the textbook. (Worksheets, videos, newspapers, magazines etc.) A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E. Never Always 30. I feel challenged by my French schoolwork. A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E. Never Always 31. Overall, I enjoy every French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 32. In general, I enjoy my teacher's lessons for every French class. A. Strongly . B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 33. In my French class, I work in small groups. A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E . Never Always 34. In my French class, students give presentations. A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E . Never Always 35. In my French class, I get the opportunity to speak French. A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E..Never Always 36. In my French class, I speak French. A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E . Never Always 129 37. In my French class, the teacher speaks French. A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E . Never Always 38. We have class discussions in French. A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E. Never Always 39. My French teacher presents material in class in lecture format. A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E . Never Always 40. My French teacher assigns independent projects. A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E. Never Always 41. My French teacher gives us time to do homework in class. A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E- Never Always 42. Generally, I am satisfied with the amount of material that is covered in French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 43. Generally, I am satisfied with the extent to which we explore and practice topics in French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 44. Overall, I understand the material being taught in French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 130 45. Overall, I think the subjects covered in French class are interesting. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D ; Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 46. In general, I feel that what I am learning in French class is, or will someday be, useful. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 47. I am able to concentrate for the entire length of my French class without being disruptive. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 48. In general, I am cautioned by my teacher concerning my behaviour in class. (Talking, Being tardy, Cheating etc.) A. Almost B. Frequently C. Some of the time D. Rarely E . Never Always 49. If you have a job, how many hours a week do you work? (If you do not have a job, please leave this question blank) A. 0-5 hours B. 5-10 hrs C. 10-15 hrs D. 15-20 hrs E . over 20 hours 50. How many hours a week do you spend on extracurricular activities, for example playing on a sports team? (If you are not involved in any extracurricular activities, please leave this question blank) A. 0-3 hours B. 3-6 hrs C. 6-9 hrs D. 9-12 hrs E. over 12 hrs 51. I believe there has been a change in the teaching and learning processes in my French class this year. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 52. I feel more responsible for my schoolwork and learning in French class this year. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 131 ******************************************************** When you do well in French, it could be due to several reasons. Read each reason below, and rank order the four reasons. Put an "A" next to the most important reason, a "B" next to the second most important reason, a "C" next to the third most important reason, and a "D" next to the fourth most important reason. 53. How lucky I am. 54. Effort, or how hard I try. 55. Natural ability, or how smart I am. 56. How easy the course work is. ************************************************************************ When you do poorly in French, it could be due to several reasons. Read each reason below and rank order the four reasons. Put an "A" next to the most important reason, a "B" next to the second most important reason, a "C" next to the third most important reason, and a "D" next to the fourth most important reason. 57. Natural ability, or I'm not smart enough. 58. Effort, or I didn't try hard enough. 59. How difficult the course work is. 60. How unlucky I am. 61. In your opinion, how easy or hard is French? A= Very easy B= Easy C= Quite difficult D= Difficult E= Very difficult 62.1 enjoy French. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 63.1 would like to work at a job that lets me use French. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 64.1 am good at French. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 65. It's important to know French in order to get a good job. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 66.1 really want to do well in French. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 67.1 look forward to taking more French. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 68.1 would like to improve in French. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 69. It is difficult to catch up on missed work when I am absent in French. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 133 P L E A S E USE T H E FOLLOWING SPACES TO INDICATE FURTHER WEAKNESSES AND STRENGTHS OF YOUR FRENCH COURSE OR A N Y OTHER COMMENTS THAT Y O U M A Y H A V E . STRENGTHS OF M Y FRENCH COURSE: WEAKNESSES OF M Y FRENCH COURSE: MERCI ET BONNE CHANCE!! 134 Appendix F Teacher Questionnaire 3|C ?|c 3|c 3JC )|C 5|C 3JC 3|C 3|C 3|C 3JC S|C 3JC 3JC 9JC *JC 3|( ?fc 3fC 3(C ?§C 3|C 3JC 3fc }|C 3§C SJC 3JC 3JC p|C 3JC 3(C S$C j|C 3§C 3|C 3JC 3JC 3JC )JC S|C #JC 3|C 3|C S|C 5J( j|C ?|C }fC 3fC 9|( }|C 3JC 9JC 3fC 3JC 3JC 3|C 5JC 9JC 3JC 3(C * Please fill in your name ( first and last names) in the spaces provided on the data form. * After you have completed the questionnaire, please feel free to use the space provided in the "Write-in Area" to write any other feelings and comments you may have. FOR T H E QUESTIONS BELOW, PLEASE FILL IN T H E APPROPRIATE CIRCLE ON T H E D A T A FORM. THANK YOU. 1. I teach at... A. Lord Byng B. Templeton *IF Y O U ANSWERED "B" TO QUESTION #1, PLEASE OMIT QUESTIONS 2 TO 7 AND GO TO QUESTION #8 2. How did you feel about the 2-hour French classes in September 1993? A. Very positive B. Positive C. Neutral D. Negative E. Very Negative 3. How do you feel about the 2-hour French classes now? A. Very positive B. Positive C. Neutral D. Negative E. Very Negative 4. I am satisfied with the manner in which information about the 2-hour French classes was disseminated. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 5. I am concerned that the 2-hour French classes may eventually be a threat to my job. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 6. Teaching 2-hour French classes has increased my workload. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 7. Teaching 2-hour French classes has increased my level of stress. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 8. I am confident that my students will remember the most important elements of the French material that I am teaching. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 9. I am confident that I will be able to cover the French 8 curriculum by the end of the 1993/94 school year. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 10. I am satisfied that my students are gaining a good understanding of the French subject matter. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 11. I am satisfied with the level of intellectual involvement of students in my French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 12. I am satisfied with the responsibility my students take for learning French. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 13. I am satisfied with the level of maturity of the 8th grade students. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 136 14. I am satisfied that students are challenged to think independently in my French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 15. I am satisfied by the level of interest shown by my French students in their education. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 16. I am satisfied with the quality of my relationships with my French students. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly • Agree nor Disagree Disagree 17. I am able to assess my French students' learning needs to my satisfaction. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree Disagree 18. I am confident I know the strengths and weaknesses of each of my French students. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 19. I am satisfied with the flexibility in the French curriculum to adjust for individual student learning needs. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 20. I am satisfied with the thoroughness with which students complete their French homework. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 21. How many hours a week, on average, do you expect your students to spend on French homework? A. 0-1 B. 1-2 C. 2-3 D. 3-4 E. 4 or more 137 22. How much of what is taught do you expect your French students to remember three years from now? A. 0-20% B. 20-40% C. 40-70% D. 70-85% E. 85-100% 23. How many times a week do you use group activities in your French 8 class? A. 0-1 B. 2-3 C. 4-6 D. 7-9 E. 10 or more 24. How many times a week do you use cooperative learning? A. 0-1 B. 2-3 C. 4-6 D. 7-9 E. 10 or more 25. What percentage of your French 8 lessons contains learner-centered activities? A. 0-10% B. 10-20% C. 20-30% D. 30-40% E. 40% or more 26. How many fieldtrips will you have taken your French 8 class on this year? A. 0 B. 1 C. 2 D. 3 E. 4 or more 27. For what percentage of the class do you speak French? A. 0% B. 0-20% C. 20-40% D. 40-60% E. 60% or more 28.1 am satisfied with the amount of interaction that I have with my colleagues. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 29.1 am satisfied with the amount of staff development that is available to me as a teacher. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 30.1 am satisfied with the amount of interaction between administration and staff. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 138 31.1 am satisfied with the amount of input I have in school decisions. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree Nor Disagree Disagree 32.1 am satisfied with the level of support and encouragement I have received for my French program. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree Nor Disagree Disagree 33. Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of my experience as an educator. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree Nor Disagree Disagree 34. French is respected as a subject matter in school. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree Nor Disagree Disagree 35.1 am satisfied with the amount of time provided for planning. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 36.1 am satisfied with the amount of time provided for meeting with colleagues. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 37.1 am satisfied with the level of parental involvement at my school. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 38.1 am satisfied that my French students, generally, are learning as much as they should this academic year. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 139 39.1 am satisfied with the sizes of my French classes. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 40. In my opinion, the timetable that is most conducive to acquiring a second language is... A. 60 min. B. 75 min. C. 120 min. D. 120 min E. Other 3Xweek 2/3Xweek 3Xweek 5Xweek 10 months 10 months 5 months 10 weeks AFTER Y O U H A V E COMPLETED T H E QUESTIONNAIRE, PLEASE F E E L FREE TO U S E T H E WRITE-IN AREA TO WRITE A N Y OTHER FEELINGS AND COMMENTS THAT Y O U M A Y H A V E . T H A N K Y O U . WRITE-IN AREA: 140 Appendix G Parent Questionnaire After you have completed the questionnaire, please feel free to use the space provided in the "Write-In Areas" to write any other feelings and comments you may have. Thank you. * For the questions below, please fill in the appropriate circle on the data form using a pencil. Thank you. 1. Person responding is... A. Mother B. Father C. Stepmother D. Stepfather E. Other (legal guardian) 2. My child attends... A. Templeton Secondary B. Lord Byng Secondary If you responded "A" to question #2 please go to question # 9 and omit questions 3 to 8. '(f sfr ' f ' ' I ' ' I ' ^ ' t ' ' I ' 'ff '1^ ' t ' ' I ' ' I ' ' I ' ' I ' 1̂̂  ' I ' ' I ' ' I ' ^ ' i ' ' I ' '(f ' i ' ' l ^ ^ ^ 4 * 'Is sfc jfc s(e s}c sfc s|c s|c s|c s|c s(c s{c s|c s|c s|c s|c sfc sfc sfc s|c 9|c sfc s|c sfc jfc s|c ?fc jjc sfc s(c s|c sfc sfc 3. Information about the 2-hour French 8 classes was communicated to parents in a timely way. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 4. Information disseminated about the logistics of the 2-hour French classes was clear (ie.. How it would work). A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 6. I am satisfied with the way the school is communicating to parents the progress of the 2-hour French classes. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 7. Knowing what I know now, I would support my child's decision to enroll in a 2- hour French class next year. A. Yes B. No 8. Lord Byng's decision to change from a 1-hour French 8 class to a 2-hour French 8 class was a source of tension in my family. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 9. I am satisfied with my child's performance in French class thus far this year. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 10. I am satisfied with my child's attitude toward his or her French schoolwork this year. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 11. I am satisfied with the way French is being taught this year. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 12. This year, I have seen improvements in my child's general attitude toward French. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 13. I see improvements this year with my child's general satisfaction with French. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 14. I am satisfied that my child's individual learning needs are being met in French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 15. I feel that the French teacher knows my child well. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 16. I am satisfied with the depth of instruction in my child's French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 17. My child takes responsibility for his/her own learning. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 18.1 am satisfied with the amount of French homework my child receives. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 19. I am satisfied with the size of my child's French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 20. I am satisfied that my child will retain what he/she has learned in French class this year. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 21. I am satisfied that my child is mastering the material taught in French class. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E . Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree 143 22. The way in which my child's French class is taught fits in with the educational philosophy of the school. A. Strongly B. Agree C. Neither Agree D. Disagree E. Strongly Agree nor Disagree Disagree ********************************************* AFTER Y O U H A V E COMPLETED THE QUESTIONNAIRE, PLEASE F E E L FREE TO U S E T H E SPACE PROVIDED IN THE "WRITE-IN AREAS" TO WRITE A N Y OTHER FEELINGS AND COMMENTS Y O U M A Y H A V E . THANK Y O U . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I | C * 4 C * * * * 1 | C ^ ^ ) | C ) | C ! | C ^ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * WRITE-IN AREA: Appendix H P o s t t e s t FRENCH 8 EPREUVE ORALE * EACH STUDENT WILL BE ASKED 2 QUESTIONS FROM EACH UNIT. * PLEASE ROTATE THE QUESTIONS SO THAT STUDENTS DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE THEY WILL GET ( WHEN GIVEN THE CHOICE "OR" ). * IT IS NECESSARY TO SHOW THE STUDENT THE VISUALS PROVIDED FOR EACH QUESTION. * PLEASE USE THE MARKING SHEET PROVIDED FOR EACH STUDENT TO GIVE YOUR EVALUATION OF EACH RESPONSE. * EACH ORAL INTERVIEW WILL BE TAPED. PLEASE BEGIN THE TAPE WITH THE WARM-UP QUESTIONS. * EACH INTERVIEW SHOULD TAKE APPROXIMATELY 5 MINUTES. *********************************************** MARKING SCALE: COMMUNICATION /10 PRECISION OF GRAMMAR /5 PRECISION OF VOCABULARY /5 PRECISION OF PRONUNCIATION /5 TOTAL /25 REMEMBER: F o l l o w i n g t h e p h i l o s o p h y o f t h e ENTRE AMIS program, e v a l u a t i o n i s p a r t o f t h e l e a r n i n g p r o c e s s . Throughout t h e program, s t u d e n t s a r e encouraged t o e x p e r i m e n t w i t h new l i n g u i s t i c elements i n t h e i r q u e s t t o communicate. More p o i n t s a r e g i v e n f o r t h e i r a b i l i t y t o communicate t h a n f o r p r e c i s e use o f t h e language. S t u d e n t s a r e n o t p e n a l i z e d f o r e x p e r i m e n t i n g w i t h language elements t h a t have n o t been s p e c i f i c a l l y p r a c t i s e d i n t h e program. ***************************************************************** BEGIN WITH THE FOLLOWING GENERAL WARM-UP QUESTIONS: NO MARKS TO BE GIVEN HERE. 1. D i d you s t u d y F r e n c h i n e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l ? F o r how many y e a r s ? Which s c h o o l ? 2. Comment t ' a p p e l l e s - t u ? 3. Comment v a s - t u a u j o u r d ' h u i ? OR Comment c a v a a u j o u r d ' h u i ? 4. Quel j o u r e s t - c e a u j o u r d ' h u i ? OR Q u e l l e e s t l a d a t e a u j o u r d ' h u i ? 5. Quel temps f a i t - i l a u j o u r d ' h u i ? ***************************************************************** m UNIT l : 1. A t o n e c o l e , e s t - c e que l a c a f e t e r i a e s t au p r e m i e r ou au deuxieme etage? OR A t o n e c o l e , e s t - c e que l a b i b l i o t h e q u e e s t au p r e m i e r ou au deuxieme etage? 2. Quel j o u r e s t t a c l a s s e de f r a n c a i s ? OR Q u e l l e m a t i e r e e s t - c e que t u p r e f e r e s ? ************************************************ UNIT 2 1. E s t - c e qu'on se b r o s s e l e s d e n t s dans l a s a l l e de b a i n ou dans l a chambre? OR La f i n de semaine, e s t - c e que t u t e l e v e s t o t ou t a r d ? 2. A q u e l l e heure e s t - c e que t u q u i t t e s l a maison pour a l l e r a 1' e c o l e ? OR A q u e l l e heure e s t - c e que t u r e n t r e s a l a maison a p r e s 1 ' e c o l e ? ***************************************************************** UNIT 3 - 1. Ou e s t - c e q u ' i l / e l l e a mal? 2. Quand e s t - c e que t u t e l e p h o n e s au d o c t e u r ? OR Quand e s t - c e que t u ne v a s pas a 1' e c o l e ? ***************************************************************** UNIT 4 - 1. Quel a l i m e n t v i d e e s t - c e que t u p r e f e r e s ? OR Qu'est-ce que t u aimes manger pour l e p e t i t d e j e u n e r ? 2. Qu'est-ce que t u mets dans un bon sandwich? ***************************************************************** UNIT 5 1. Qu'est-ce que t u aimes f a i r e a p r e s l ' e c o l OR Qu'est-ce que t u aimes f a i r e l e week-end? 2. Qu'est-ce que t u v a s f a i r e c e t e t e ? OR Qu'est-ce que t u v a s f a i r e ce week-end? IHl F R E N C H 8 Y E A R - E N D EXAM N A M E : B L O C K : T E A C H E R : SCHOOL: EXAM R U L E S : ( MARKS W I L L BE DEDUCTED FOR I N F R A C T I O N S OF T H E S E R U L E S ) 1. DO NOT T A L K D U R I N G THE E X A M . 2. I F YOU HAVE A Q U E S T I O N , R A I S E YOUR H A N D . 3 . DO NOT L E A V E YOUR S E A T . 4. K E E P YOUR E Y E S ON TOUR OWN P A P E R . 5 . WHEN YOU F I N I S H THE E X A M , CHECK I T OVER C A R E F U L L Y , TURN I T OVER ON YOUR DESK AND R A I S E YOUR H A N D . BONNE C H A N C E ! ! ! REVIEW TEST - SEPTEMBER 1994 P l e a s e answer t h e f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s . Name: Age: H i g h s c h o o l t h a t you a t t e n d : E l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l t h a t you a t t e n d e d : How many y e a r s o f F r e n c h d i d you t a k e i n e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l : I f you t o o k F r e n c h i n grade 7, what mark ( p e r c e n t a g e %) d i d you g e t ? What mark ( p e r c e n t a g e %) d i d you g e t i n grade 8 F r e n c h ? Who was y o u r g r a d e 8 F r e n c h t e a c h e r ? Ms. Rhodes Mrs. Read Ms. Waters Mrs. Howe Mr. White O t h e r D e s c r i b e any e x p e r i e n c e s you had i n F r e n c h t h i s summer: D i d you watch F r e n c h T.V.? D i d you speak i n French? ^ Do you speak F r e n c h a t home? Ot h e r e x p e r i e n c e s : P A R T 1 - L I S T E N I N G C O M P R E H E N S I O N : A . L I S T E N T O T H E F O L L O W I N G D E S C R I P T I O N S A N D D E C I D E W H I C H A R E A O F A S C H O O L T H E Y A R E T A L K I N G A B O U T . P U T T H E A P P R O P R I A T E L E T T E R O N T H E L I N E . E A C H D E S C R I P T I O N W I L L B E R E P E A T E D T W I C E . (5 P O I N T S ) Ecoute les descriptions suivantes et trouve dans chaque cas de quel endroit de l'ecole il s'agit. Chaque description va etre repetee deux fois. a) le bureau 1. • b) le gymnase 2. c) la cafeteria 3 d) la salle des professeurs 4. • e) la laboratoire de sciences 5. B L I S T E N T O T H E T A P E . A S S O C I A T E E A C H S E N T E N C E T H A T Y O U H E A R W I T H A P I C T U R E B E L O W W R I T E T H E N U M B E R O F T H E S E N T E N C E I N T H E C I R C L E I N T H E R I G H T - H A N D B O T T O M C O R N E R O F E A C H P I C T U R E . E A C H S E N T E N C E W I L L " B E - R E P E A T E D T W I C E . (10 P O I N T S ) '• Kcoute la bande. Associe chaque phrase que tu entcnds a une image sur ta feuille de reponses. I So C. LISTEN TO THE TAPE. AFTER EACH CONVERSATION, CHECK OFF WHETHER THE PERSON IS FEELING WELL OR NOT. EACH CONVERSATION WILL BE REPEATED TWICE. (5 POINTS) Ecoute la bande. Decide, d'apres la conversation, si la personne va bien ou mal. Elle va bien. Elle va mal. 1. • • 2. • • 3. • • 4. • • 5. • • D. LISTEN TO THE TAPE AND DECIDE WHICH SENTENCE BELOW BEST COMPLETES EACH CONVERSATION. PUT THE LETTERS IN ORDER ON THE LINES. EACH CONVERSATION WILL BE REPEATED TWICE. ( 5 POINTS) Trouve sur ta feuille de reponses la phrase qui complete le mieux chaque conversation. a) Non, c'est sa soeur. b) Bonjour. Comment allez-vous? c) A 10 heiires. £a vous va? d) Desole, il n'est pas ici. e) Ne quittez pas, s'il vous plait. I*1 E. LOOK AT THE SANDWICHES BELOW AND DECIDE WHICH SANDWICH EACH PERSON IS TALKING ABOUT. WRITE THE NUMBER OF THE DESCRIPTION IN THE CIRCLE BESIDE THE APPROPRIATE SANDWICH. EACH DESCRIPTION WILL BE REPEATED TWICE (5 POINTS) F. OF THE THREE FOODS THAT YOU HEAR, WHICH ONE IS MOT A JUNK FOOD. CIRCLE THE LETTER THAT CORRESPONDS TO YOUR ANSWER. EACH QUESTION WILL BE REPEATED TWICE. (5 POINTS) Quel aliment, parmi les trois que tu entends, n'est pas un aliment vide? Encercle la lettre qui correspond a ta reponse. I 55L G. LISTEN TO THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS. LOOK CAREFULLY AT THE MAP OF THE • SCHOOL AND INDICATE WHETHER THE STATEMENTS ARE TRUE OR FALSE. EACH STATEMENT WILL BE REPEATED TWICE. Ecoute les enonces suivants. Regarde bien le plan d'ecole et inscris sur la feuille de reponses si les enonces sont vrais ou faux. Chaque enonce va etre repete deux fois. v r a i f a u x 1. 2 . 3. .4. 5. \ \ la classe d'anglais une classe de mathematiques ••'1 la salle des professeurs r. le bureau le gym nase la classe de geographie etd'histoire •'1 le gym nase le gym nase la classe de musique une classe. t j de francais I- I- la cafeteria c t F n le gym nase la classe de religion n une classe de francais r-. la bibliotheque le gym nase le gym nase la classe d'informatique la classe de mathematiques la classe de sciences , ' ' i I' le laboratoire de science c \\ F le gym nase 153 H. HERE IS PHILIP'S SCHEDULE. LOOK AT IT CAREFULLY AND RESPOND TRUE OR FALSE TO THE STATEMENTS THAT YOU HEAR. EACH STATEMENT WILL BE REPEATED TWICE. Void l'emploi du temps de Philippe. Regarde-le bien et reponds vrai ou faux aux enonces que tu vas entendre. Les enonces vont etre repetes deux fois. ?JLso IOJL oo 15 A oo itJi oo nJi oo 20 A oo .37 A 00 9-1A 3o &A oo 1. 2. 3. 4. MJO'JU&nv jjiML, iritis 0>rnU>. ^LA£*TV jU^t t vrai faux vrai faux 5. 6. 7. 8 . READING COMPREHENSION. PART 2 15V Choose the letter from Column B which BEST completes the item in Column A. (lO^omte) b C 1 1 5 6 ( 1 ° N C E Q N L Y - W r i t e I e t t e r ™ space provided. 1. Puis-je parler au ciirecteur, s'il vous plait? 2. Ou est le gymnase dans ton £cole? 3. Jean est toujours fatigued 4. Tu veux rester a la maison, Brigitte? 5. Dites a Monsieur Lamontagne de me telephoner. EXaccprd? 6. Aimes-tu du sel sur tes frites? 7. Je~pehse que c'est un tres bon film. 8. Olivier veut̂ aller a la piscine aujourd'hui. 9. Le service est excellent. 10. Fais-tu des cauchemars? B A . Tres bien. Et quel est votre numero de tetepone? B. Oui. II se couche tres tard. C. Oui. Les autobus arrivent toujours a l'heure. D. Oui, fen mets toujours. E. Moi, je ne suis pas d'accorcL F. Non, rarement. G. Un moment, Madame. Ne quittez pas. H. A cote de la cafeteria. I. Oui. J'ai mal a la gorge et je tousse beaucoup. Mais il fait trop froid pour nager! PART 2 - READING COMPREHENSION ^ A . PUT THE INSTRUCTIONS OF THIS RECIPE IN THE CORRECT ORDER. WRITE THE NUMBER IN THE CIRCLE BESIDE EACH SENTENCE. (5 POINTS) Mon sandwich au boeuf prefere Je prends trois tranches de rosbif et je les mets sur le pain. Je prends deux tranches de pain de seigle. j'ajoute de la laitue et je ferme le sandwich. Je mange. ( ^ ) Je mets du beurre sur le pain. PART 3 - WRITING A . ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTION IN FRENCH USING AT LEAST F I V E C O M P L E T E SENTENCES. Qu'est-ce que tu aimes faire les fins de semaine? is6 B. ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS IN FRENCH USING COMPLETE SENTENCES. 1. Comment t ' a p p e l l e s - t u ? 2 . Quelle est ta matiere preferee? 3. A quelle heure est-ce que tu te leves le samedi? 4 . Quels aliments vides manges-tu souvent? 5. Qu'est-ce que tu vas faire ce week-end? C. WRITE A SHORT PARAGRAPH IN FRENCH OF AT LEAST 5 SENTENCES ON O N E OF T FOLLOWING TOPICS. ( 5 POINTS ) Mon ecole (my school) e ^ . my c / o s s e s y f e a c / » e r " S ou Une Journee Typique (A typical day) e-cj. w h a t ' X ao on. a +ypt'ccxj a BONNES VACANCES!!! 157 Appendix I Sample Interview Questions Teacher interview: 1. What do you see as the general highlights/strengths of the French program that you teach? (i.e. class size, motivation, enthusiasm, improved grades, relationships with students and teachers ) 2. What are your major concerns about the French program that you teach? 3. Do you feel that the program is meeting your students' needs for the future? 4. Overall, how would you rate your experience teaching the French program this year? French department head and the grade 8 counselor interview: 1. What do you see as the general highlights/strengths of the French program at your school? 2. What are your major concerns about the French program at your school? 3. Do you feel that the program is meeting the stuents1 needs for the future? 4. Overall, how would you rate the French program at your school? Student interview: 1. What are the strengths of your French class? 2. What are the weaknesses of your French class? 3. Do you think that you remember material better when you take French for 130 minutes for 5 months or 65 minutes all year? Why? 4. Which part of the test did you find the easiest? The most difficult? Why? 158 Appendix J Consent Form A case study of how longer French classes affect student achievement, attitude and retention of material. Student investigator: Susan Oakey (224-4321) Faculty advisor: Dr. Stephen Carey (UBC 822-6954) Dear Parent(s) / Legal guardian, Your position in education is an important one. . As a parent of a child in the Vancouver School System, you are a key person in many ways. You provide an important link between the school and its students. The environment in which your child learns is also very important. The curriculum and how it is scheduled and presented can greatly enhance a student's learning. In addition to being a full-time French teacher at Lord Byng High School in Vancouver, I am doing a Master of Arts degree at the University of British Columbia. My graduate thesis study is concerned with how longer French classes affect student achievement, attitude and retention of material. As the parent of a student enrolled in a double-blocked 2-hour French 8 class at Lord Byng, you and your child are of particular interest to this study. We share a common interest in providing the best education possible to our children. It is on the basis of this common goal that I am requesting the cooperation of you and your child in this study. In May and June, I will observe and videotape the double-blocked French 8 classes at Lord Byng to find out how much cooperative work, group work, individualized instruction, and active discussion and listening takes place. I will also observe the 1-hour French classes at Templeton. Only I will have access to this data. Throughout the study, participants will only be identified through association with the school and French class that they attend. Individual identities will be kept anonymous. Students will fill out a questionnaire at the beginning of this June concerning perceptions of their French course, tapping such issues as teaching styles, classroom activities, perceptions of teachers and motivation. A questionnaire will be sent home to parents at the beginning of this June concerning their perceptions of their child's French course. The questionnaires will take no more than 20 minutes. I have permission to use questionnaires from a similar study done by Harvard University. 159 The students' final exam scores in June 1994 will be analyzed to assess achievement in French. The students will take a review exam in September 1994, to test for retention of material. The exam will take approximately 1 1/2 hours and will be done in French class. There will be an opportunity in September/October 1994 for a voluntary focus group of parents, students and teachers to review and comment on the findings of the study. Your participation is voluntary. You need not sign the questionnaire, and you are assured that your response will remain anonymous and confidential. Your child's participation in filling out the questionnaire is voluntary. Refusal to participate in filling out the questionnaire will not influence class standing. Withdrawal from this part of the study at any time will not influence class standing. Students who do not fill out the questionnaire will do one of the supplementary activities supplied by the program Entre Amis. The school administration and the Vancouver School Board support this study. It is normal professional development. If you have any inquiries concerning the study, please do not hesitate to contact me at 224-4321. Please keep a copy of this consent form for your personal records. Circle the appropriate responses on the second copy, sign your name and send the signed copy to the school with your child by Friday May 20. Thank you for your time and consideration. I received / did not receive a second copy of the consent form for my personal files. signature of parent/guardian I consent / do not consent to my child's participation in this study. signature of parent/guardian

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
China 8 0
France 6 0
Japan 3 0
United States 3 0
City Views Downloads
Beijing 8 0
Unknown 7 1
Tokyo 3 0
Sunnyvale 1 0
Ashburn 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}

Share

Share to:

Comment

Related Items