reflective practices: positioning as efl...

Reflective practices: Positioning as EFL learners.

1

Reflective Practices: Students’ Positionings as English Language Learners

Christian Camilo Bernal Gonzalez

“A thesis submitted as a requirement to obtain the degree of M.A in Applied Linguistics to

the TEFL”

Thesis Director: Clelia Pineda Báez (PhD)

Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas

School of Science and Education

Master’s in Applied Linguistics to the TEFL

Bogotá, Colombia

2018


2

Note of acceptance

Thesis Director: ____________________________

Professor: Clelia Pineda Báez (PhD)

Jury: ____________________________

Professor:

Jury: ____________________________

Professor:


3

Acuerdo 19 de 1988 del consejo superior Universitario.

Artículo 177:

“La universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas no será responsable por las ideas

expuestas en esta tesis”


4

Acknowledgements

“Cultivate your hunger, before you idealize

Motivate your anger, to make them all realize

Climbing the mountain, never coming down

Break into the contents, never falling down”

Akeboshi, Wind

I wish to express my profound gratitude to Nelly Johanna Infante Forero, who has always

supported and encouraged me to work harder in this academic process. Thanks to my students

for being enthusiastic, authentic and motivating. I sincerely thank my professors and classmates

from the M.A. program, who showed me different and useful ways of facing difficulties with a

great smile upon their faces. A special appreciation to my thesis director, Doctor Clelia Pineda

Báez for her support, inspiration and motivating guidance to develop top quality research

practices. I also express my gratitude to Zoraida Revelo and Professor Harold Castañeda-Peña,

for their support and motivation when health issues became a threat to begin my Master´s degree.

Finally, yet importantly, I also want to thank Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas for

offering me the opportunity to grow both personally and professionally since I studied my major.


5

Abstract

This qualitative descriptive and interpretative study was developed to characterize and

comprehend the meaning students assigned to the experiences they lived as students in an EFL

context by means of reflective practices. The main objectives of this study were to unveil the

positions that students enact during the implementation of a self-assessment language portfolio in

an EFL classroom and to specify how those positions are shaped when developing self-

assessment practices. Conversational interviews and video recordings were the main source of

data collection. Findings suggest that reflective practices serve as a tool for student to express

and define positions as English language learners. Students’ positions were attached to past and

present experiences inside English classes, and emotions were crucial when defining positions.

Results also suggest that reflective practices allowed students to become analyzers of their

proficiency as English learners taking into account that proficiency levels proposed by the

Common European framework are the foundations of the English curriculum proposed at their

school. Reflective practices in the English classroom allowed discussion and feedback among

students and between the teacher and the students and favored giving students a voice to express

their views about EFL teaching and learning practices.

Key words: students ‘positioning, identity construction, reflective practices.


6

Table of Contents

Chapter 1 ……………………………………………………………………………………….1

Statement of the problem ………………………………………………………………………1

Chapter 2 ……………………………………………………………………………………….10

Theoretical framework …………………………………………………………………………10

Positioning theory …………………………………………………………………………......10

Positioning, Discourse and Identity …………………………………………………………..14

Identity ………………………………………………………………………………………..18

Identity and Language ………………………………………………………………………..20

State of the art ………………………………………………………………………………...23

Chapter 3 ……………………………………………………………………………………….33

Instructional Design ……………………………………………………………………………33

View of Language ………………………………………………………………………….....34

Teaching methodology ……………………………………………………………………....36

Instructional objectives …………………………………………………………………….....42

Chapter 4 ……………………………………………………………………………………….43

Research design ………………………………………………………………………………..43

Type of study ………………………………………………………………………………...43

Context …………………………………………………………………………………….....44

Participants …………………………………………………………………………………...45

Data collection instruments …………………………………………………………………..46

Chapter 5 ……………………………………………………………………………………….49

Data analysis …………………………………………………………………………………...49

Research question ………………………………………………………………………….....49

Research objectives …………………………………………………………………………...49


7

Initial coding …………………………………………………………………………………50

Focused coding ………………………………………………………………………………51

Axial coding …………………………………………………………………………………51

Reflexive voices ……………………………………………………………………………..53

Analyzers of their proficiency …………………………………………………………….....61

Emotional learners …………………………………………………………………………...68

Chapter 6 ……………………………………………………………………………………….73

Discussions and implications …………………………………………………………………..73

Personal implications ………………………………………………………………………...79

Limitations …………………………………………………………………………………...80

Questions for further research ………………………………………………………………..80

References ……………………………………………………………………………………...82


8

Table of Figures

Figure 1. CEFR proficiency levels ……………………………………………………………7

Table 1. Structure of the intervention ……………………………………………………….38


9

Table of Appendixes

Annex 1: Self-assessment grid …………………………………………………………………86

Annex 2: Lesson plan sample (lesson 1) ……………………………………………………….87

Annex 3: Lesson plan 4 ………………………………………………………………………...88

Annex 4: Assessment criteria CEFR …………………………………………………………...89

Annex 5: Consent letter sample ………………………………………………………………..90

Annex 6: Initial coding sample ………………………………………………………………...91

Annex 7: Axial coding sample …………………………………………………………………93

Chapter 1

Statement of the Problem

Introduction

This study analyzes how participants, as members of a relatively coherent speech

community (understood as a secondary grade in a private school), understood their language

learning process as expressed in their beliefs, opinions and perceptions about such process. Self-

assessment practices about the implementation of the Common European Framework Reference

in the development of an EFL curriculum served as the platform for students’ reflections

My interest in developing this research was to unveil positions students enacted when

implementing reflective practices inside an EFL classroom. Positions in this study are framed in

the analysis and understanding of their reflections, perceptions, attitudes, roles, points of view and

beliefs in students while being part the implementation of CERF as a Foreign Language Policy.

This allowed me to unveil the repercussions of the policies on students’ academic and personal

development, as these International Language policies conduct, direct and guide English

curriculum, teaching practices and institutional goals to be achieved by students. Students’ voices

served as the primary source of information for unveiling their positions.

In this document, I include the justification for decisions taken while I conducted this study,

the corresponding statement of the problem with a description of the population and setting. I also

include the research question and research objectives. The second chapter relates to the theoretical

framework and includes a state of the art on positioning, identity and language learning. The third

chapter describes the instructional design; particularly the reflective process needed to facilitate

the data gathering, as well as the lesson plans and activities for this purpose. Finally, in the research


2

design I describe the type of study selected considering the objectives and research interests, a

larger description on the participants, data collection instruments, and the units of analysis for the

data analysis stage.

The problem

The curriculum implemented in the school where this study took place was designed in

consideration of the parameters and proficiency standards listed in the Common European

Framework Reference, which are also related with the course books and materials used in the

teaching practice. Each one of the levels offered by the institution (from preschool to eleventh

grade) must accomplish the domains described by each of the proficiency levels listed in the

Common European Framework Reference; nevertheless, neither parents nor students have been

instructed in the content of the proficiency levels listed in the Common European framework of

Reference, how Proficiency examinations may benefit academic processes and why these

Proficiency levels are used as reference for English teaching and learning in the school.

At the end of their academic process, i.e. when students finish their secondary education

and receive their academic diploma, eleventh graders are expected to demonstrate a level C1

according to the proficiency levels of the Common European Framework Reference through the

presentation of an international examination (stated in the School Educational Institutional

Project); to this concern it is important to establish that English teachers in the institution are not

certified as C1 proficient, and level C1 was established as a school requirement at the end of

2016, year in which participants of this study were in tenth grade.. In July, 2016, the school

decided to implement a diagnostic exam with all the population to track students’ performance

and proficiency, as well as to confirm if tenth and eleventh graders were ready to present the C

level international examinations offered by Cambridge. After analyzing results provided by


3

Cambridge examiners, it was reported that students were not meeting the criteria suggested in the

school curriculum for them (B1 for Tenth graders and B2 for Eleventh graders). This first

phenomenon suggested that there was a possible breakdown between the objective and goals

intended by the institution after the diagnostic exam and the results obtained by students.

At the school, there had been no previous session in which the English teachers gave

feedback to students related to their results in the international examinations, because this

examinations are taken by the students at the end of the academic year, and as soon as the next

year begins teachers are required to merely deliver certificates to students. After the

implementation of the diagnostic exams, and having the results and their interpretation by the

Cambridge Examiners, my decision was to socialize these results with students. The socialization

was conducted with tenth and eleventh graders in two different sessions. Eleventh graders

expressed their concern about the low results, and their preoccupation related to the fact that

obtaining a C level is a requirement for receiving their diploma. Tenth graders did not express

any initial concern or interest in the results obtained in the diagnostic exam, which may be

explained by the fact that tenth graders had not received previous information on proficiency

levels, and, likewise, were unaware of the decisions implemented by the school in terms of

international examinations and graduation requirements.

Tenth graders’ lack of concern to the results they obtained in the diagnostic exams

became my concern. Therefore, I decided to conduct an informal talk with them. I asked students

what they thought about those results, considering the following year they were obligated to

demonstrate a C level in an International Examination. In this informal talk, students did not give

any opinions or made any comments about that situation. They only indicated that they did not

want to make any comments because previous English teachers did not accept their opinions


4

about the English classes. After this talk, I pondered over two issues: 1) students were not

allowed to reflect upon what happened inside English-language classrooms, and 2) it is possible

that students did not know how to express their perceptions and opinions about their own

language learning process. In one of the English classes where students were writing biographies

(proposed in the class syllabus to practice narrative tenses), I asked students to write about the

process they have had at school in terms of language-learning following the proficiency levels

proposed by the Common European Framework. In this exercise, students expressed different

opinions about the exams, about the C level proposed in the curriculum, and the English classes

themselves. The following statements called my attention and were the point of departure to

propose this research project:

“¿para qué Cambridge?; ahora salieron con el cuento de que toca ser C1. Luego los

profesores no son C1? Eso es puro negocio para ellos, y yo pues perdiendo inglés”

(Student 1, tenth grade)

“Cambridge? What for? Now they are telling us we must have a C1 level; are not teachers

in that C1 level? It is just a business, and I fail in English classes”

(Student 1, tenth grade)

“Yo entré acá y nunca me dijeron nada un C1; eso ya vino después con eso del

bilingüismo, pero pues eso es para los pequeñitos. Yo me imagino que no soy bilingüe,

pero me enseñan inglés”. (Student 5, tenth grade)

“I registered in this school, and they never told me anything about that C1 level; that

came with Bilingualism, but that process is just for the little kids. I think I am not

bilingual, but they teach me English” (student 5, tenth grade)


5

My concern was that students lacked knowledge about what the curriculum at the school

implied in terms of Language proficiency levels, and how those are affecting their academic

progress and language learning and curriculum implementation in their school. These aspects led

me to think about the need to open spaces for them to express their views, while developing

autonomy and motivating them to learn this language.

Autonomy in language learning is important because as Benson (2001) states it is “about

people taking more control over the purposes for which they learn languages and the ways in

which they learn them” (p.1). It is my contention that students need to be aware of the programs

they follow at school and the interests behind those programs. As English teacher in the school,

following the guidelines in the curriculum which aim to develop critical thinking in the classes,

and simultaneously, develop their autonomy in relation to approach the purpose, possible

relevance and influence in their academic process. I decided to use self-assessment in the form

of reflective practices to fulfill these purposes considering those are proposed for monitoring and

reflecting about the language learning process while accomplishing proficiency levels in the

Common European Framework of reference. Self-assessment is defined as “the involvement of

students in making judgments about their achievements and the outcomes of their learning”

(Boud & Falchikov, 1989, p. 529) and “identifying standards and/or criteria to apply to their

work and making judgments about the extent to which they have met these criteria and

standards”. (Boud, 1995, p.4).

As my intention was to have students talk about their role and views about learning a

foreign language, I decided to take this as an opportunity to examine how they positioned

themselves in this learning process. For the purpose of analyzing the position students may have


6

while being part of the English-learning, the following research question and objectives were

proposed:

Research Question:

What do reflective practices in the EFL classroom inform us about students’ positioning while

responding to a school curriculum based on international proficiency levels?

Research Objectives:

1) To unveil the positions that students enact during the implementation of a self-

assessment language portfolio in an EFL classroom

2) To specify the way students’ positions are shaped when developing reflective practices.

Rationale

The Council of Europe in its official document for the Common European Framework

Reference for languages highlights clear procedures learners must follow to accomplish the goals

proposed, as well as the objectives and aims that directly relate to cultural awareness and social

competences. The document establishes that the Common European Framework Reference is

intended, in terms of learning processes to raise “the learner’s awareness of his or her present state

of knowledge; self-setting of feasible and worthwhile objectives; selection of materials; self-

assessment” (p.6). The document itself suggests monitoring, fostering and reflecting upon

learners’ perspective about the language learning process, and what tools are available for this

purpose.

On the other hand, the Common European Framework Reference for languages establishes

the proficiency levels learners must demonstrate, as follows:


7

Figure 1. CEFR proficiency levels. Taken from Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of

reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment

Common European framework or Reference delimits the curriculum, the pedagogical

practices and assessment implemented in the school where this study took place, which means it

may directly influence students´ learning environment, students´ view of language and teaching

practices inside the classroom.

Benson (2007) offers solid arguments about the importance of autonomy practices in

language learning and different perspectives that depart from a mainstream view of autonomy.

The author uses Holliday´s (2003) arguments about the existing link between autonomy

processes and social features, in the sense that autonomy lies in the social worlds of the

individuals, which they bring with them from lives outside the classrooms. The analysis of

learners´ perceptions, points of view and opinions in terms of the language learning process and

how it relates to their daily experiences is expected to be prime source of information to unveil

how the CEF practices a mise en scene to enable students to reflect upon their own practices.

Bearing in mind ideas mentioned before, I consider it important to conduct this study as a

means to a critical reflective view of students´ language learning processes. The aim of going

beyond the instrumental application of International Standardization policies, such as the CEF is


8

to unveil and analyze the social dimension of the application itself, using students´ introspections

and discussions as well as offering students tools and procedures to foster reflection practices; it

is worthy to have a deep view of how implementation of International language policies impact

Colombian language learners, considering that the implementation of these policies implies not

just a curricular adjustment, but a complex transformation of classroom and institutional dynamics

in order to ensure an assimilation of the proficiency levels in context.

I expected to offer participants and the institution where the study was conducted a critical

reflective analysis of how the CEF implementation influences the learning process of the

community, the perceptions students have had inside of this process, and possibilities to use that

analysis to understand the roles enacted for students while CEF is implemented.

The study was conducted in a Catholic, private, boys-only school located in Chapinero.

The school is currently undergoing transformations with the aim of transforming itself into a

bilingual school. As part of this process, students attend six hours of English class per week in

secondary levels to reach the standards set by the Common European Framework Reference. The

school is also a “Cambridge English School”, and a “Cambridge Examination Centre” (both

classifications given by Cambridge University Press to schools that use textbooks and International

examinations designed and purchased by them). The school has established in its curriculum that,

by the time students graduate, they must certify a C level of proficiency in accordance the Common

European Framework Reference for Languages.

This study was developed with students that were in Eleventh grade (aged 14 to 16). They

were students who had been in the school for more than 6 years. Eleventh graders were placed at

A2, B1and B2 proficiency levels according to a diagnostic exam conducted by Cambridge

University Press in 2016. In this research I was interested in analyzing how students perceived


9

themselves as English-language learners inside a curriculum based on Language Proficiency

levels designed and proposed by the Common European Framework Reference.

Following the guidelines proposed by the Discourse Analysis within the educational

contexts research area, this study attempts to unveil and analyze students` positionings about the

implementation of the Common European Framework Reference through reflective practices. I

consider it is pertinent to develop this research proposal considering the increasing application

and adaptation of foreign language policies in Colombian educational settings, and the need to

understand how these foreign policies are perceived by language learners themselves, as well as

how reflective students are in terms of their duties, responsibilities and roles as part of an

English-language learning process that involves International Standardization.


10

Chapter 2

Theoretical Framework

This chapter presents the main theory that supports the project. It aims at describing the

tenets behind positioning and identity theory and to show how these two aspects are revealed in

individuals’ interactions with others; the primary sources of the discussion are led by considering

self-positionings, self-perception as English language learners and identity construction while

being learners of English as a foreign language The chapter also includes a brief state of the art

on the study of these two topics in the language-education field. For the purpose of this chapter is

important to mention that reflective practices are considered as the pedagogical tool

implemented, and not a theoretical foundation of the study.

Positioning theory.

The term position is part of the discursive psychology field. It is defined by Harré (2003)

as episodes of social interaction characterized by unfolding structures of meaning related to

social rules, conventions and costumes. The term “positions” refers to the patterns of beliefs in

the members of a community. Harré (2003) argues that positions are social in the sense that “the

relevant beliefs of each member are similar to those of every other” (p.4). While being part of an

academic community (i.e. a classroom) students follow a certain patterns of beliefs determined

by the curriculum, the school philosophy and, for the case of this study, the proficiency levels

students must accomplish. Proficiency levels become social as they determine common linguistic

features students must have in a shared language.


11

(Van langenhove, 1999) affirms that: “positioning can be understood as the discursive

construction of personal stories that make a person´s actions intelligible and relatively

determinate as social acts and within which the members of a conversation have specific

locations” (p. 16). The author highlights the importance of the dynamics of social episodes and

how these social episodes contribute to the social group. A social episode is understood in Harré

& Sabat (2009) as a sequence of events in which individuals get engaged, having some principles

of unity; these episodes do not just include behavior, but also the feelings, thoughts of the

individuals involved in the episode. Participants define the episodes, establishing rules and

behavior patterns, but also the patterns and rules in the episodes shape individuals

Having “the other” as a constant reference in the definition of positions and the

perceptions each actor in the social interaction has about that “other”, Harré (2003) also proposes

the term indirect positioning, referring to the act of giving the other a place or position with

statements or attributions. These attributions delimit the behavior of features of the person

affected by the speech act.

To analyze the relationships between human interactions and social behavior (two

important elements present in the process of positioning), Harré (2003) establishes the need to

focus in two theories: reversal theory and positioning theory. Reversal theory refers to the

motivations that a person has as an option when facing different social situations and the

motivations each person has when facing and responding to external stimulus (situations).

According to Harré (2003), “reversal theory establishes that these motivational responses come

in pairs of opposites, and that one cannot accomplish both motivational responses at the same

time, giving place to choices” (p 18). The motivational responses are named as:


12

1. The domain of goals and activities. These refer to the way people define and decide how

to respond to goals proposed in everyday situations. Harré (2003) proposes the opposites

definitions of achievement/enjoyment for representing how to approach to the goal, achievement

being associated with the satisfaction of having success in future goals, and enjoyment the

satisfaction the person feels on short-term goals.

2. The domain of rules and conventions. This domain refers to how social agreements

regulate the individual, or how individuals remove social rules and agreements to get their

individual objectives.

3. The domain of transactions. This domain refers to the emotional transactions that take

place among individuals with others and with themselves. For example, power and love are

emotions involved in the transactions referred in this domain, defining power as the sense of

competition an individual has when interacting with others, especially when using skills that

allow the individual to feel superior to the others. On the other hand, love refers the caring sense,

in which the individual gains satisfaction by feeling empathy for the other, and by being sensitive

towards the other.

4. The domain of relationships, in which individuals decide if personal interests and goals

are the most important issues in respect to social agreements, or if they decide to act with others

without thinking about personal goals. This can be defined under the terms ‘individuality’

(satisfaction comes from doing things by one´s individual purposes) and ‘transcendence’

(satisfaction comes from being aware of the other, taking care of what happened to the other and

being unselfish). When referring to personal interactions, people position themselves according

to the style adopted, especially to achieve successful communication. Depending on the


13

motivational style selected in each interaction, individuals can enact a specific position with

others.

Positioning theory and reversal theory work together to understand how people construct

meanings about the situations in which they find themselves. The main objective of taking the

postulates of Harré (2003, 1999) as a reference is to analyze how to combine the externally

imposed rights, duties and obligations (positioning theory) with the internally generated wants,

purposes and values of reversal theory, when analyzing students ´interactions and performances

during the implementation of CEFR curriculum.

Harré’s theory about positioning (2003) describes how emotions and positionings are

related, as well as two levels of positioning when social interactions take place. Harré (2003)

affirms two levels of positioning can be evidenced in social interactions. In the first level

individuals locate themselves and others within an essentially moral space by using several

storylines, understood as the conversational history and the sequence of things already said

which emerge in the interaction between individuals (Harré, 1996b) and categories, mostly

performed in an unconscious way. In the second level of positioning, the first level of positioning

is questioned and negotiated. When these negotiations are intentional, this is what Harré calls

deliberate self-positioning.

After establishing these levels of positioning to understand social interactions, it is

paramount to refer to the importance of emotions in positioning. According to Harré (2003)

“emotions are understood from the social constructionist approach as discourse (discourse as the

systematic, coherent set of images, metaphors that construct an object in a particular way)” (p.

31). Harré (2003) mentions the importance of the construction of emotions through language as

language becomes the mechanism by which individuals manifest their experiences and feelings


14

related to particular episodes, and by interaction among members of a group those experiences

and feelings, which are shared and attached to similar experiences in different individuals, are

named under common codes such as “love”, “hate”, “like, “dislike”.

I consider the theory about emotions and positions proposed by Harré (2003) relevant as it

offers tools to analyze students’ perceptions, beliefs and points of view regarding the effects of a

CEFR environment. This is important to develop a further analysis because of its academic

implications and the repercussion it has on students’ socio-cultural environment. The students in

my project were male and, in this respect, Harré (2003) mentions the difficulties male individuals

face when expressing and socializing emotions in social interactions. This is, in part, due to the

preconceptions society establishes about how men must express their life experiences, denying

them the right and opportunities to show themselves as sensitive individuals, who are able to

experiment emotions as frustration or sadness in the presence of other men, risking their roles of

dominance and possible superiority.

Positioning, discourses and identity

Adjei’s (2013) theoretical revision emphasizes the relevance of positioning and

intertextuality in discursive interactions and meaning making processes. The author also

discusses the importance of having positioning theory as a reference to develop discourse

analysis studies, mainly because researchers are able to conceptualize context and culture for

social interactions. Adjei (2013) summarizes Davies and Harré’s (1990) ideas about discourse

and positions by expressing:

Discourses of people are grounded in subject positions so that when participants in a

social interaction take up particular positions, they see and interpret the world from and


15

through that chosen strategic position in terms of images, symbols, metaphors, values,

story lines and the socio-cultural concepts available to them within a given discursive

environment in which they are positioned (p.2).

According to Adjei (2013), people strategically draw on available interpretative

repertoires of discourses to negotiate and construct meanings in social interaction. When

analyzing social interaction, it is imperative to examine discourses as they reflect processes of

negotiation, the way people represent their beliefs, express their attitudes and values.

It is important to establish a link between positioning theory and identity, which is

another relevant construct developed in this section. For this purpose Davies and Harré (1990)

make a further and deeper analysis on positioning theory, focusing on the development of the

personhood in the framework of the discursive practices.

First, Davies and Harré (1990) clarify the term discursive practice as “all the ways in

which people actively produce social and psychological realities” (p. 3). In this sense, discourses

are institutionalized uses of the language, and may occur at different levels, such as disciplinary,

cultural and political levels. Discourses may be developed around specific topics, and individuals

express their experiences and perceptions according to the realities they have lived. Davies and

Harré (1990) presented an example about interactions about adolescent girls, in which Frazer

(1990) establishes that

actors’ understanding and experience of their social identity, the social world and their

place in it, is discursively constructed; the girls’ experience of gender, race, class, their

personal-social identity, can only be expressed and understood through the categories

available to them in discourse (p.3)


16

The force of each discursive practice is determined on the provision of subject positions;

that is to say that when a person has a specific position, the perception of realities is determined

by a series of concepts, metaphors, and storylines relevant in the discursive practices in which

individuals are positioned. Thus, “individuals emerge from the process of social interactions as

changing subjects that are shaped for the different discursive practices they participate” (Davies

& Harré, 1990, p.3).

Discourses become an emerging and progressive element that comes from constant

interaction, and vary depending on the individuals, the context and the situations in which they

are produced. Considering these aspects, each discursive practice gains relevance as it provides

subject positions, which involves a repertoire of concepts and a location for the individual that is

using that specific repertoire of concepts. When individuals assume a personal position, they

interpret the world and the experiences lived from the perspective that the position enacted offers

“in terms of the particular images, metaphors, storylines and concepts which are made relevant

within the particular discursive practices in which they are positioned” (Davies & Harré, 1990, p.

4).

Through social interactions, individual appears as one who is being constructed and

reconstructed by the different discursive practices taking place, as he/she begins to live in the

core of the elements mentioned before stories are constructed, which are the experiences the

individual set to make meaning of the world. Davies and Harré (1990) affirm that “stories are

located within a number of different discourses, and thus vary dramatically in terms of the

language used, the concepts, issues and moral judgements made relevant and the subject

positions made available within them” (p.5).


17

Discursive practices, context, social interaction and the positions subjects take are key

elements in Davies and Harré’s (1990) consolidation of positioning theory, and in their

understanding of personhood. Davies and Harré (1990) state that individuals are constituted by a

personal identity and a personal diversity, being constantly positioned in a conversation and “that

very same person experiences and displays that aspect of self that is involved in the continuity of

a multiplicity of selves” (p.5).

As the development of the personhood is determined by the process of interpretation of the

world, and the perspective the individual has about situations, Davies and Harré (1990) claim

that the following process is necessary:

1. Learning of categories which include and exclude individuals in a group. (For instance,

in a family the concepts “mother”, “father”, or in a school “students”, “teacher”).

2. Participating in different discursive practices in which meanings are assigned to learn

categories. (If the individual is at the school, for example, to be involved in discursive

practices framed by academic topics)

3. Self-positioning in terms of the categories and storylines. This involves positioning

oneself as if one belongs in one category and not in the other (taking position as

student/teacher, good student/bad student, and collaborative/autonomous learner in

academic contexts)

4. Recognition of the individual as having the characteristics that locate oneself as a

member of a subgroup – (meaning individual develop emotional attachments to the

position enacted, identifying themselves as part of the rules and duties involved in that

position).


18

In the process described above, the role of language is crucial for the individual to enact a

position. When the individual is inside a group, language allows the construction of categories

and concepts that lead to a further identification of that individual with specific characteristics of

a group, which quite possibly are shared with other members. Discourse becomes the scenario

“whereby selves are located in conversations as observably and subjectively coherent

participants in jointly produced storylines. There can be interactive positioning in which what

one person says positions another. And there can be reflexive positioning in which one positions

oneself.” (Davies & Harré, 1990, p.7).

Identity

According to the poststructuralist perspective, identity is considered as a continuous and

constant construction of individual features guided by the context, and emerging in discourses

produced in social interactions (Miyaharay, 2010). In other words, rather than being a mere

category or a personal characteristic, identity is social, a learning process, and a local–global

interplay (Wenger, 1998, p. 163). Concerning the influence of implementing foreign language

policies beyond academic contexts, and the way culture is attached to language (the English

language for the purpose of this study), the theory developed in the field of identity offers

arguments about the possible relationships between language and identity, and how to link the

positioning theory with English-language learning based on the proposal that, by social

interactions, storylines and students´ experiences inside English classroom identities as English

language learners may be constructed.

Pavlenko and Blackledge (2004) develop their definition of identity on the idea that it is

constructed and validated through discourses individuals have access at a specific location and


19

time (Davies & Harré, 1990; Harré & Langenhove, 1999). For Pavlenko and Blackledge (2004)

language and identity are related as they are mutually constitutive. First, language provides the

individuals with terms and linguistic meanings by which identities are constructed and

negotiated; second, ideologies of language and identity guide individuals to use linguistic

resources to index their identities and to evaluate this process in others.

Charaudeau (2009) discusses the relationship between linguistic identity and cultural

identity, thusly, illustrating two important aspects in this area: how individuals build relations

among themselves when they are part of a single group (cultural identity), and the way

individuals are attached to a culture by sharing linguistic features (domain of a language).

In relation to identity, Charaudeau (2009) analyses the perceptions that individuals develop

when creating their own identity, and how those perceptions contribute to build a community.

Charadeau (2009) states that:

being yourself, in a first moment, is perceiving yourself different from the other, and if

there is a reason, try not to be the other. In this way, belonging to a group means not to

belong to other groups, and the search for their own group, regarding that belonging to a

group individuals are also searching the different (p. 55).

Individuals need to recognize how different they are from others to perceive themselves

and position themselves in relation to others. When this process takes place, individuals track

commonalities in that process to belong to a community, additionally, the classification of

groups takes place, setting the stage for the development of group identification.

When individuals face the challenge of belonging to a group and develop an individual

recognition, Charaudeau (2009) proposes two processes that the individual develops: attraction

and rejection towards the other. Charadeau states that in the attraction process the individual


20

tends to state questions that lead to the analysis of the self-identification, such as “how different

is the other?”. This helps individuals to discover themselves as incomplete, and with need of

interaction. Charaudeau´s (2009) rejection process states that the difference can be a “threat” for

the individual, leading to possible questions such as “what makes the other superior to me?” or

“what make the other more perfect that me?”, and “to what extent their arguments are more valid

than mine?”. When this reasoning from the individual standards of self-perception and social

interaction begins, the individual evaluates what features each one on the members of the group

develop on their own (singularity) and what features are built to belong to a social group.

When individual build communities, one of the key aspects that determine their belonging

to a group or community is the linguistic features they share. Language becomes a crucial factor

that sets a group identity, mainly because all the members that share that language can

communicate among themselves, but also because communication makes that specific group

different to other groups that share different languages.

Charaudeau (2009) states that the notion of linguistic identity is validated for two different

discourses: language is necessary for the construction of a collective identity that grants social

cohesion in a community, and, due to language, social integration takes place, while it becomes a

symbol of identity. The second discourse is related to the history of the group, and how sharing a

common history develops solidarity among members of the community and how individual

identities build that group history.

Identity theories and Positioning theory articulate in analyzing how social interactions

shape individual features of a subject in a specific community; development of identities are non-

static, dynamic and influenced by the discourses led and enacted by the different members of a

community. For the purpose of this study, Identity theories and Positioning theory allow to


21

reflect, analyze and unveil how discourses enacted inside English classrooms, under the

parameters, academic guidelines and proficiency levels proposed by the Common European

Framework of Reference may shape, influence or transform students of English as a foreign

language, and how students react, refer and perceive those parameters and academic guidelines,

as well as appropriate and reject them for their academic, personal and motivational objectives.

Identity and language

Norton & McKinney in Atkinson (2011) offer an approximation to the link between

language and identity as they state that language contributes to define identity through

interactions. Inside classrooms, the existence of interactions is undeniable, and language

becomes the engine that activates exchange of perceptions, ideas and interpretations of realities

among the members of the classroom as community.

Norton (2000) uses the term identity “to reference how a person understands his/her

relationships to the world, how those relationships are constructed across time and space, and

how the person understands possibilities for the future” (p. 5). In this statement, Norton states

that when learners speak, they are negotiating and renegotiating their sense of self in relation to

the social world, which reaffirms the importance of discourses and language in identity

development.

Based on poststructuralist theory, Norton (2000) establishes three characteristics of identity

relevant to second language acquisition. Firstly, the multiple nature identity has in consideration

of the multiple backgrounds of individuals in terms of experiences and social conditions.

Secondly, identity changes over time (which means that individuals have a personality that may


22

be modified throughout his/her life depending on the experiences lived). Finally, identity is a site

of struggle because personality is shaped by social interactions and the language exchange taking

place among individuals of a group of learners and the different positions an individual can enact

in different social situations.

Members of the community that speak is those who establishes their own position and re-

shapes their identities through interaction with others, as well as establishing hierarchical

identities among speakers.

Riley (2007) focuses his attention to the fact that language is one of the main resources that

makes the construction of society possible. Language becomes primordial for creating conditions

inside a group, and for implementing the necessary acts to establish relationships among subjects

and coordinate actions in the group. Riley (2007) proposed the term communicative practices for

the linguistic forms used to coordinate actions among members of a group, clarifying that these

practices should be understood as the ways the members of a specific group use linguistic

resources. Subjects do not just communicate messages through communicative practices but also

identity features. Inside groups, speaking and communication establish membership, as

individuals share commonly agreed upon codes and concepts.

In this regard, Riley (2007) suggests that such membership is consolidated by certain

linguistic patterns shared by the members of a specific group. The author proposed a

questionnaire as a practical exercise to understand the role of language and discursive practices

in the consolidation of membership to a specific group. Questions considered aspects such as if it

is possible to identify features such as race, social status or occupation by merely listening the

accent of a person in the country. The author also asked if there are special forms in a country for

referring to different people (children, employers), what manners people display when they talk


23

at mealtimes, and what gestures people have for agreement, giving thanks or greetings. The

intention was to demonstrate that a person can validate the membership in a group by sharing

linguistic patterns, and can interact with other subjects who share the same linguistic patterns as

the social group. Communicative practices among group members allow them to set common

features that make them part of the community in which the interactions take place. While the

communicative practices reveal what individual, linguistic features are produced in order to

express and develop individual identities while establishing such group membership

State of the Art

This section synthetizes pieces of research that included positioning theory and identity in

connection to learning a foreign language, particularly English. The main goal is to present a

comprehensive view of what has been done in this field and compare and contrast the findings

and methodologies used. The following studies are organized in consideration of the

geographical location where they were developed: first, studies developed in Europe, Asia and

North America; then, studies developed in South America.

Denned (2011) conducted a study with two blended classrooms to analyze students´

positioning and instructor´s positioning following the theories proposed by Harré and van

Langenhove (1999) and Davies and Harré (1999). The categories used to analyze the interactions

between the instructor of blended classes and students were categorized in: Positioning and

student perceptions of instructors, where students readily characterize facilitators as leaders with

power and knowledge, relying on a well-known traditional instructor role out of both economy


24

and consistency with the membership role they play in a class as students. Denned (2011) states

that teachers, as facilitators, tend to change their identities depending of the context they were

working, in spaces with focus on the teacher or the student, and spaces with interaction

teacher/student. All teachers have the same amount of participation in their different contexts,

and their presence varied in relation to the different classes depending on their engagement with

students.

Dennen (2011), examining the research and the application of theories from Harré and

Langenhove (1999), and Davies and Harré (1999), concluded that it is important to analyze the

role of the person in charge of leading the educational process and possible interactions with

learners. The author also points out how discourse, as selected and performed by each actor in

the interaction, models perceptions, beliefs and construction of identities. For this study is

relevant to take into account how teachers’ management of the Common European framework as

the guiding discourse inside the English classroom may influence students’ perceptions,

experiences and opinions.

Gao, Jia and Zhou (2015) developed a mixed-methods research to trace EFL learning

motivation and identity development of Chinese students during their university undergraduate

years. This study was conducted with students from 5 different universities in Beijing, aged

between 18 and 22 years old, who had Chinese as L1. Data collection was developed through

questionnaires, students’ journals (in English) and interviews in Chinese with some participants.

The study concludes that students showed notable changes through their EFL learning process in

a Chinese context and that as they increased the contact with the L2 (English) for academic

purposes, they integrated the L2 in common social interactions, whether the interactions occurred

with people with the same nationality or students from other countries.


25

The study highlights the constant influence of L2 learning in the individual development of

identities, especially in social interactions and everyday situations, such as entertainment,

watching movies and T.V. series, boosting confidence when having access to these contents by

means of English. Participants manifested that English made them feel part of a global

community, and served as a useful way to codify information that could be found in several

languages. The authors suggested that further study on L2 identity and EFL contexts is

necessary. This justifies the need to analyze, through students’ perceptions and self-positioning

what are the influences of L2 learning processes in Colombia.

Martin (2010) carried out an instrumental case study to analyze how participants

demonstrated and developed agency through social interactions and discourse, and how they

positioned themselves in science classes. The study was conducted with three girls in a year-

seven science class in Australia. The class was filmed during four weeks using multiple cameras,

and fixing microphones to the participants selected for gathering data, taking the form of

transcripts and analyzed as social acts (conversations and speech produced by participants). In

terms of positioning from the participants, the study showed that there were moments that

participants re-positioned themselves, depending on how much responsibility was required for

the academic tasks developed in the science classes, especially when developing group activities.

The focus of the study was on the girls’ agency in the science classes, and it showed that

the participants chosen were positioned as competent students in that class. Martin (2010) stated

that the analysis of the storylines (experiences and experiences students expressed about a

situation) depended on how the participants developed social interactions, beyond their

competence in the academic subject.


26

The research showed that the perception about duties, responsibilities, and how students

positioned themselves while learning a foreign language becomes relevant.

Yoon (2008) examined regular classroom teachers' views of their roles with regard to

English language learners (ELLs) and the relationship between their teaching approaches and the

students' reactions and positioning of themselves in the classroom. The findings for each

teacher's case are presented in three sections: the teachers' stated beliefs, their teaching practices,

and the ELLs' participatory behaviors. The study shows that the teachers' pedagogical

approaches and their interactions with the ELLs were based on their positioning of themselves as

teachers for all students, as teachers for regular education students, or as teachers for a single

subject. The teachers' different approaches were connected to the ELLs' different participatory

behaviors in classroom contexts that positioned them as powerful, strong students or as

powerless, poor students. Even highly interactive classroom contexts with hidden power

relations inadvertently positioned the ELLs as isolated.

Yoon states that the most relevant factor to ELLs' engagement in learning is the teachers'

approach to the students, but not in terms of the teachers' specific methods. According to the

author, culturally relevant pedagogy (Ladson-Billings, 1995) offers support for the conviction

that the teachers are the most important factor in promoting students' opportunities to learn. It

seems evident that what ELLs need is not only effective teaching methods but also teachers who

care and are sensitive to their cultural differences and needs.

Menard-Warwick (2008) developed a discourse analysis study to work on two situations of

gendered positioning taking place during a unit on employment in adult English as a Second

Language program in California. The social positioning analyzed in this research was taken from

a bigger ethnographic study at the Community English Center and a California ESL program


27

designed for immigrants. The study focused on students’ perspectives on how other social

contexts shaped their L2 learning and their identities (Menard-Warwick 2004, 2005, 2006). Data

was collected through observations, written reports and class audiotapes. The authors stated that

when teachers provide a space for critical reflection in ESL classrooms, they facilitate learners’

re-constructions of L2 voices that facilitate the reflection on the identities that society is

assigning them. This research is quite meaningful to the purpose of this project, mainly because

offers a perspective on how to allow participants to express opinions, and how those opinions

and experiences can be transformed into insights that shape the procedures and implementations

of foreign language policies, as well as how this implementation shape students ‘identities.

Classroom interactions become an important source of data for this project, as participants take

different positions during interactions (active, passive, neutral).

Vetter (2010) carried out a 5-month qualitative study to investigate how one high school

English teacher situated students as readers and writers in daily classroom interactions. The

author used a micro-ethnographic approach for this study that focused on how people acted and

reacted to each other within classroom language and literacy events and discourse analysis

framed around positioning theory was used to interpret classroom interactions. Data was

collected by the researcher who acted as a participant-observer for a period of 5 months. Data

sources included expanded field notes, interviews with teacher and students, and video and audio

recordings of the interactions in the classroom. Vetter presents three positions evidenced from

the teacher observed. The procedures followed by her were accurate to position and engage

students in the classroom in regards to three different aspects: the development of students´

agency, the empowerment inside the classroom, and students being aware of how teachers´ race,

class, and gender shaped her pedagogy and classroom interactions.


28

Vasilopoulos’ (2015) qualitative collective case study examined L2 identity construction

and negotiation in Korea. The researcher wanted to investigate how English shapes self and

social identity while using English in day-to-day interactions. Data collection procedures

included open-ended questionnaires, in-depth interviews, and purpose homogenous sampling

techniques. The study was conducted with 10 Korean adult bilinguals (participants have

knowledge of English and Korean and have lived abroad for over 4 years). Participants

expressed the need for having more opportunities to speak English in Korea, not just in the

academic contexts, mainly because English is not an official language in Korea, thus limiting the

range of communication in English. They expressed that they preferred to have communication

in English because it helps them to improve their proficiency in L2.

Participants also manifested that when Korean classmates asked them to have full

communication in English, it was not a comfortable situation, due to lack of effectiveness by the

interlocutors (Korean classmates) with a lower proficiency in the L2. Participants affirmed that it

was necessary to reduce the complexity of words and grammar structures used in these

interactions when talking with their Korean classmates, while, most of the time, they were the

only ones speaking, with no responses from their classmates, leading to confusion and

misunderstandings.

In this regard, participants preferred to communicate with L2speakers who have lived

abroad and demonstrated high proficiency levels because it made them feel as if they were in real

communicative situations. Using English to communicate with family and friends became an

obstacle. The participants expressed that speaking in English was perceived as showing off, and

that at the beginning they felt embarrassed for using English in Korean contexts.


29

Virkkula and Nikula’s (2010) case study on identity construction in EFL contexts with

Finnish engineering students working in Germany focuses on discursive identity construction of

users of English as Lingua Franca (a concept used by researchers to clarify that the focus of the

study is not on contexts in which English is the mother tongue, rather when English is used as a

common language for non-native speakers). The study analyzed the stories of seven Finnish

engineering students between 21 to 26 years old who attended an internship of 6 months in

Germany in 2003 relation to their language and language learning and used poststructuralist

theories of identity (Pavlenko & Blackledge 2004), as well as Norton´s (2000) views of language

learner´s identity construction.

The researchers found that, when participants referred to language skills, they described

themselves as having poor skills in English, using their performance at school as a reference;

besides the idea of measuring proficiency levels with certain standards in order to be considered

“good” is evident when referring to evaluative discourses at school. Moreover, in regards to

language skills participants kept a constant emphasis on grammar rules and tenses as the standard

for measuring how proficient they were as speakers of English as a foreign language.

Participants defined themselves as “not good”, and they also expressed that they did not use

English in everyday situations, while denying having access to ‘real’ spoken interactions, as they

did not consider school to be a real context for language use. After participants travelled abroad,

interviews showed that they positioned themselves as users of English rather than incompetent

learners. Their choices in terms of standards to measure proficiency (grammar rules) changed to

using English in daily life. Participants made emphasis on language use as meaning construction

over form guided by grammar rules.


30

León (2016) analyzed ninth grader’s positioning through bullying inside English classes.

The author illustrates how the environment is quite important in order to analyze students

‘positions towards bullying practices, how teachers become reflective upon students’ perceptions

and beliefs not possible to evidence in regular classes by merely observing students, and how to

implement innovative procedures, as in this case narratives, in order to make students reflect

upon several situations happening inside the English classes.

León (2016) describes two different attitudes in participants: positioning themselves as

rejecters of distasting bullying manifestations by considering them bad habits, or becoming

pacifiers in the middle of conflicts. There is concise positioning to keep engaged with academic

activities to achieve goals for life, overcoming difficulties associated with the bullying episodes

that have affected their lives.

Garcia’s (2016) discourse research on learners´ identities when producing digital identity

texts in the EFL classroom focused on the EFL learners positions in a specific subject worked on

a Primary Education degree at a Spanish university.

Digital Identity Texts (DIT) were implemented as a motivational tool in which learners

have autonomy to design and organize their thoughts, opinions and beliefs related to English

language learning. The study analyzed 51 DIT following a Positioning perspective (reflexive and

interactive positioning). Participants took several positions through the DIT, usually related to

being competent in a language and being able to speak the language. Also, they referred to this

lack of motivation to the initial learning process of the language, because they felt that they were

not able to produce organized and long spoken speech.

Participants also positioned themselves as “native-speakers”, associating this state as being

the ones who know the language and teach it to the students. Thusly, they presented themselves


31

as dominant in the classes by producing the largest amount of spoken discourse in classes, and

leading interactions with their students.

Castañeda’s (2008) exploratory study analyzes the power relationships in prekinder

students (boys and girls) while being part of a bilingual program (students as English learners),

while producing natural interaction among them. The analysis is framed in the post-structuralist

feminist discourse analysis methodology. The study was conducted in two stages: the pilot study

took place in the ‘Sunrise Kindergarten’ and the main study in the ‘Goldmedal Kindergarten

(names given on purpose by the researcher to ensure confidentiality). The researcher used

Transana, a software created to conduct qualitative analysis, to transcribe content. The video

material was organized into collections, and clips were coded according to the “key analytic

themes” (Coffey and Atkinson, 1996) which were relevant to answer the research questions

proposed in the study, namely, the analysis of the construction of girl-teachers and boy-teachers

and the gendered discourses and comments around gendered text/content.

The findings in this study suggest that discourses of approval represent a source of subject-

positioning for the girls of the Kindergarten, who positioned themselves as being more powerful

and made their experience as learners more comfortable. The study also suggests that the

positions achieved allowed girls to develop social practices that are commonly attributed to boys.

Castaneda (2008) revealed the need of a ‘gender as discourses of multiplicity’ policy

within the EFL curriculum of the Goldmedal Kindergarten. Highlighting the importance of

analyzing why boys had a priority in terms of being listened and attended to when they position

themselves as “naughty and playful”, he emphasized that girls did not experience that same

priority when enacting masculine roles and positions.


32

By analyzing the above-mentioned studies, I realized the importance of discursive

practices in individuals that are facing language learning process, both in countries where

English is accepted in everyday conversations and countries in which learners merely see

English as a foreign language, in expectation of opportunities for practicing it abroad. None of

the studies focused attention on the influence of language policies in learners ‘identity formation,

or possible positions learners may take towards the implementation of language policies. It is

worth analyzing not only the influence of teachers ‘practices (pedagogical and discursive) in

students ‘perceptions and beliefs towards English as a Foreign language, but also how external

agents are also involved in educational contexts, such as language policies implemented in

countries where English is not commonly used in everyday situations.

The studies coincide in the influence of contexts that offer foreign language learners

possibilities of practicing the language with native speakers. A change in learners´ perceptions

about proficiency and importance of learning a foreign language as they discover alternative

ways of using the target language is also a convergent point. Learners of English as a foreign

language position themselves as they gain access to further communication and language use

with native users; while their identities are reconstructed in favor of using English instead of

their mother tongue.

What is not evidenced in the studies are students ´positions from past and present

experiences as language learners, and how those experiences shape their identities and make

them take positions towards the language they are learning beyond the teaching practices. Self-

positioning and reflection about experiences as English language learners become an important

aspect to research. Likewise, how Colombian students’ discursive practices unveil their positions


33

and constructions of identities under the umbrella of the implementation of foreign language

learning policies.

I consider it relevant to foster new alternatives to develop reflective practices in language

learners as these reflective practices allow this research to unveil how learners perceive

themselves inside the learning process and how these perceptions influence academic

experiences inside an English classroom. Learners´ approach to the goals and objectives

proposed by the Council of Europe in the Common European Framework Reference, as adapted

by Ministerio de Educación Nacional for Colombian classrooms, should be considered as

perceptions of English as a foreign language in this particular context are significantly different

from those in European contexts, in which the CEFR was proposed and developed. They are

crucial for research purposed in this study.


34

Chapter 3

Instructional Design

This section introduces the view of education, view of language, instructional objectives,

teaching methodology, activities, role of materials and assessment used in the pedagogical

intervention aimed at implementing self-assessment procedures proposed by the Common

European framework of reference for monitoring and measuring language learners’ progress in an

EFL class with high school students at a private institution in Bogota, Colombia. It is relevant to

present what is my view of education in order to explain how I, as teacher researcher, wanted to

conduct my study. Education in this project is understood as a social process that involves human

beings who have cultural, cognitive, social and behavioral differences that influence and determine

how the learning process happens in the classrooms.

When learning a second language, Ellis (2008) mentions that the learners’ individual

differences must be considered as they become a route that guides their second language

acquisition (SLA) process. Factors such as age, learning style, aptitude, motivation and personality

influence the way learners acquire a language. Individual differences tend to affect the rate and

ultimate success of SLA. Many of these aspects have been considered controversial and it is

problematic to consider how observable they may be. Personal factors that could be considered as

relevant include group dynamics in the SLA classroom (how students feel, especially in

comparison with each other) as well as attitudes to the teacher and course materials (understood

as course books, examinations, multimedia material)

Culture and language learning are two aspects I consider relevant to keep in mind to

illustrate my sociocultural perspective of education and learning; Brown (1980, as cited in Ellis,


35

2008) explains the Acculturation model, which proposes that language learning represents an

adaption to a new culture. Indeed, language is one of its most visible manifestations, determined,

to a great extent by factors such as the social and psychological distance between the learner and

the target language culture. A “good” learning situation occurs when the target language and the

L2 groups consider themselves to be socially equal to the social groups in the target language in

terms of sharing cultural beliefs such as or when the L2 group is anxious to assimilate the target

language. In this sense, how identified or excluded the language learner is perceived by the social

group linked to the language he or she is learning determines if the language-learning environment

is accurate or not or if the learner is going to be successful in the learning process.

It is important to consider that language learning is determined by the local culture and also

that language creates a link between students and a target culture. This approximation of two

languages and two cultures is relevant when analyzing students’ positions, beliefs and perceptions

in the classroom, due to the influence of the foreign language learning process and the

implementation of foreign language learning policies that certainly affect Colombian students.

View of Language

My conception and beliefs are that language is closely linked with culture and the type of

social interactions that take place within that culture. Language, according to Kramsch (1998) “is

the principal means whereby we conduct our social lives. When it is used in contexts of

communication, it is bound up with culture in multiple ways” (p.3). Members of a community or

a social group create experiences through language, and those experiences acquire meaning

according to the language used to communicate to others. Language allows members of a

community to create their identity. Language is a tool by which they share beliefs, traditions,


36

perspectives everyday habits and experiences that are part of a social identity that characterizes a

group. Storylines are experiences that are constructed by social interactions among members of a

community/group, and each individual, by taking part in the exchange of opinions, beliefs and

perspectives assumes a position in relation to own storylines and others’ storylines.

Individual perceptions of realities and experiences are developed and mediated by language,

and language itself creates connections of these perceptions to the development of personhood and

identity, becoming a mediator between the individual and the group. Kramsch (1998) affirms that:

our perception of someone´s social identity is very much culturally determined. What we

perceive about a person´s culture and language is what we have been conditioned by our

own culture to see, and the stereotypical models already built around our own (p. 67).

Students in Colombian educational contexts already have acquired a language and have a

variety of cultural backgrounds that differ from the culture attached to a target language. When

analyzing students’ perceptions and beliefs this must be a key issue to consider because of the

repercussions of the implementation of a language policy that was designed and conceived for the

unification of European cultures and languages. This differs from the context in Colombian

students are immersed.

Tudor’s (2001) functional perspective of the language asserts that language becomes not

only a means to obtain some specific goals (professional or academic), but also is a medium to

establish personal relationships, express emotions and for achieving self-expression. Learners are

social actors in this functional perspective, individuals with feelings and life experiences, and

language is the channel through which they communicate those feelings and experiences.

For the humanistic perspective, language become a tool for reflection, allowing individuals

to externalize feelings, perceptions of realities and the world, and to encourage interaction and


37

cooperation among members of a group. Thus, the focus in a language program should be not just

in developing language competence, but in making language competence an expression for

personal life experiences.

Teaching Methodology

The Council of Europe proposes the European Language Portfolio, an instrument designed

to ensure the development of learners’ autonomy, plurilingualism and intercultural awareness and

competence. It allows users to record their language learning achievements and their experience

of learning and using languages.

The Council of Europe designed and proposed the European Language Portfolio (ELP for

the purpose of this document) for all the countries that are implementing the Common European

Framework and the proficiency levels to achieve the purposes described below. The ELP:

1. Encourages learners to take responsibility for their learning. (Responsible learners accept

that they share responsibility with the teacher for the success of their learning.)

2. Helps learners to understand their individuality and helps them to achieve personal goals

within the group.

3. Helps to make visible progress and increases learner satisfaction. (The descriptors are

relatively easy for learners to understand, so they can see what they are aiming at and when

they have achieved. If learners can observe that they are making progress, they are more

likely to be satisfied).

These premises set forth by the Council of Europe set an accurate space for reflection in terms

of the implementation of the CEF, the self-assessment procedures students follow in English


38

classes and the positions they enact and perform through this process. The Language Portfolio

includes a self-assessment grid, a language biography, and a dossier. These elements are proposed

in order to track, register and archive the activities students develop to measure self-assessment

practices.

Self-assessment grid: The self-assessment grid illustrates the levels of proficiency described in

the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR). It presents scales of

listening, reading, spoken interaction, spoken production and writing activities and allows

language learners to identity what skill they must demonstrate as being competent in the target

language (Annex 1).

Language biography: The language biography contains goals and self-assessment checklists that

explain in detail the descriptors contained in the Self-Assessment Grid. The language biography

usually has a page or two where the learner can reflect and present his or her language and

cultural background.

Dossier: This is a collection of materials and documents that illustrate the experiences and

productions of the language learner that allows the learner to keep record of important progress

in the language learning progress, as well as the learner´s self-assessment.

The objective is to link these elements to the regular curriculum designed and implemented

at the school, which attempts to graduate students with a demonstrable C level of proficiency

according to the Common European Framework Reference for English. Three stages are

proposed in order to generate written reflections, spoken discussions, and individual conclusions

by the participant around the proposed curriculum objectives, leading students to reflect upon

aspects such as the C proficiency level. They must demonstrate the influence of learning a

foreign language following the guidelines suggested in the Common European Framework


39

Reference for languages, and the influence of these guidelines in teaching practices and

pros/cons of this language learning process in their own contexts.

The pedagogical intervention was developed for a three-month timeframe with a group of

eleventh graders. Each task was developed weekly and was linked to the official curriculum

proposed by school for the grades in which the activities were implemented. Spoken discussions

were conducted in the first stage in Week 1, then written conferences were proposed for

following weeks, together with the individual reflections recorded in the self-assessment

portfolios (weeks two to six). For each session a lesson plan was designed in order to establish

class objectives and activities to make possible the implementation of the reflections inside the

school curriculum (Annex 2). The following chart synthesizes the activities proposed and the

order in which they were carried out:

Weeks Unit / Theme Activities Description

Week

1

What is self-

assessment

Focus on

contextualization

of the topic

The teacher starts a discussion with

students to explore previous knowledge

about the term self-assessment. After

that, the teacher presents information

about the language portfolio (definition,

objective, how it works); students write a

first written conference to reflect upon

the previous information in terms of

personal beliefs, points of view and

opinions.


40

Week

2

Focus on

reflection

The teacher presents to the students a

picture of a famous person (Stan Lee-

creator of Marvel Comics) and asks

students for words that describe the

abilities, talents or remarkable features of

Stan Lee. Then emphasizes the self-

assessment related to the proficiency

levels, presenting them with how it is

structured in the Common European

Framework.

After that the teacher asks students to

make groups to discuss and present what

abilities, talents or remarkable features

they must develop or show to be

proficient in English.

Finally, the teacher asks students to

create a cover for a comic, in which they

illustrate how they perceive their

experiences as English learners.

Week

3

Focus on

Individual

verification

The Teacher begins class showing

students a video call “thank a teacher”, in

which famous people give thanks to a

school teacher, and say why they thank


41

that teacher. After that, the teacher asks

students if they have a teacher they

wanted to say thank you, and what are

the reason for giving thanks to the

teacher.

After that, the teacher asks students if

they have a teacher they do not want to

thank or they consider not to be a good

teacher, giving reasons for their answers.

Finally, the teacher asks students about

the experience of learning English that

they have had during the last two years

(tenth/eleventh grade), asking for

opinions, recommendations. The teacher

focuses the discussion on students’ views

about the curriculum and their

experiences preparing for and taking

international exams

Week

4

Focus on

contextualization

Students are asked to record a video (1-

minute length) where they indicate how

they perceive themselves as language


42

WHAT IS SELF-

ASSESSMENT

IN THE CEF?

learners, in consideration of the

proficiency levels proposed by the

Common European Framework, and the

level required by the institution.

Week

5

Focus on

reflection

Students are asked to write a letter to

themselves from the past, considering all

the experiences they have had as English

learners; they are able to give advice or

suggestions to themselves in the past.

Week

6

Focus on

Individual

verification

Students create a final video, in which

they give recommendations to the school

about how to improve the work

developed at school in terms of English

teaching, taking into consideration all the

experiences they have had as English

learners, and the reflections made during

the five previous sessions.

Table 1: Structure of the intervention

Lesson plans were carried out according to this general structure. A sample of a lesson

plan is included in Annex 3 and a copy of the assessment criteria proposed by the CEF is in

Annex 4. As a teacher, I tried to follow this plan, but it is important to point out that due to the

different activities planned by the school, I was obligated to reduce the actual number of


43

sessions. However, the discussions generated in class and students’ production provided a rich

set of data for the analysis as shown in the corresponding chapter.

Instructional Objectives

The objectives proposed in this project were:

1. To promote students’ self-assessment practices as part of the implementation of a

curriculum based on the CEFR.

2. To foster written/ and spoken students’ production as prime resources to debate and

discuss social issues.

3. To foster written and /spoken students’ production as a means to reflect about CEFR

curriculum


44

Chapter 4

Research Design

This section describes the research design proposed to answer the research question: What

do reflective practices in the EFL classroom inform about students’ positioning while responding

to a school curriculum based on international proficiency levels? The chapter includes the

description of the type of study followed to answer this question, the selection of participants, the

instruments used and the context where the research was carried out.

Type of study

A qualitative descriptive and interpretative study was developed to characterize and

comprehend the meaning students assigned to the experiences they lived as students in an EFL

context, along with language policies being used in the school. Qualitative research is an

approach for exploring and understanding the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social

or human problem. “All qualitative research is interested in how meaning is constructed, how

people make sense of their lives and their worlds. The primary goal of a basic qualitative study is

to uncover and interpret these meanings” (Merriam, 2009, p.24). The interest of a qualitative

study is mainly focus on how individuals interpret experiences, in other words the meanings they

assign to them, and how they construct the world based on these experiences. In this research,

the English as a Foreign Language learning process in the framework of international language

policies became the setting to analyze students´ experiences while learning a foreign language,

how these experiences were lived in a school implementing a curriculum based on international

language policies, and how each individual assigned meaning to these experiences.


45

The discourses produced by individuals and the social interactions that took place in the

classroom were the available sources of data to unveil meanings that the students socially

constructed about their experiences and views on language policies implemented at the school.

Like many other students in Colombia, the participants of this project were situated at a specific

time in which they were required to fulfill certain language standards. It is important to discover

what their voices reveal about the implementation of education policies affecting them.

Context

The study was conducted in a Catholic, private, boys-only school located in Chapinero,

Bogota, Colombia. The school mission stipulated in the PEI (School Educational Project) is to

teach students under the socio-critical perspective to construct a life project that allows them to

transform the society. The vision of the school is to educate students as leaders to impact and

transform society in a positive way. The school has 1000 students and 50 teachers.

It is currently undergoing transformations with the aim at turning into a fully bilingual

school. As part of this process, students receive eight hours of English class per week in

secondary levels, in an effort to reach the standards set by the Common European Framework of

Reference. The school is also a “Cambridge English School”, and a “Cambridge Examination

Centre”, which means it has access to academic and marketing support from Cambridge

University Press. It is stipulated that students must present International Examinations every two

years in order to give account of their proficiency as English learners in accordance with the

Common European Framework Reference. The school curriculum established that, by the time

students graduate, they must certify a C level of proficiency in accordance with the CEFR.


46

The school organizes many cultural events related to the English language and

approximations to cultures in different countries around the world, most of which take place in

English as a Foreign Language. They are planned mainly for and by primary school students and

teachers. These activities usually include cultural celebrations around the world, such as Spelling

Bees, Saint Patrick’s Day, and English Day.

The school curriculum is focused on the principles of Critical Pedagogy, and follows a

socio-constructivist perspective. For the English as a subject, the syllabus, assessment parameters

and evaluations are based on the proficiency levels proposed by the Common European

Framework Reference for language learning, aiming to develop listening, writing, speaking and

reading skills simultaneously.

Proficiency evaluations are implemented by the Cambridge assessment center with

students from third grade, fifth grade, seventh grade, ninth grade and eleventh grade, monitoring

English learners according to proficiency levels (A1, A2, B1, B2, C1) proposed in the Common

European Framework Reference for languages. It is worthwhile to consider that students’

expected outcome is C1. The materials used are books provided by Cambridge University Press,

a publishing house that aims at preparing students for taking proficiency examinations.

Participants

Participants in this study were selected taking into account a convenient and purposive

sampling. Purposive sampling is a set of procedures in which the researcher manipulates their

data generation, analysis, theory, and sampling activities interactively during the research

process (Mason, 2002, p.138). This sampling strategy facilitates researcher´s data generation and


47

testing of theory from the analysis of data (inductive reasoning), instead of using data to test pre-

existing theory (sometimes called deductive reasoning).

This study was developed with a group of 20 students in eleventh grade aged 14 to 16. All

were students who had been at the school for more than 6 years. Eleventh graders attended eight

hours of English class and were placed in A2, B1 and B2 levels according to the examinations

administered at school and are supposed to demonstrate a level C1 at the end of the high school

according to the same examinations.

As a researcher I wanted to follow ethical principles and, therefore, I made sure my

participants were protected at all times. I asked them to participate willingly and to drop out of

the study if they considered it necessary. Also, I protected their identity and used pseudonyms

when reporting the data. I requested permission from the school administration and parents by

means of a consent letter, in which I explained that this research study wanted to explore and

unveil the students’ perceptions and experiences in their language learning process, and how

self-assessment practices could be a tool to foster reflection inside the classrooms. A copy can be

found in Annex 5. Students and / or their parents signed a consent form in which they authorized

the recording of classes and student interviews.

Data Collection Instruments

The instruments proposed to collect data were conversational interviews and video

recordings. These instruments are described below.

Conversational interviews. Conversational interviewing is an approach in which verbal data is

generated by talking about specific topics in an informal way (Given, 2008, p. 127). It facilitates


48

a space in which participants feel free to participate in discussions of different topics without

having hierarchy in the conversations (any person can lead on have an active role in the

conversations). The central activity is generating data through questions and answers, and

researchers set the scene by providing participants with a topic. Interviewers present questions

and follow-up speakers’ answers with requests for explanation. Conversational interviewers

create an informal environment in which participants are respected as equal partners free to share

their understandings concerning the research topic (Given, 2008).

As the main purpose of this study is to analyze students’ perceptions, beliefs and opinions

about their language learning process and how social interactions among participants unveil

positions among members of the group, conversational interviews become an effective and

accurate instrument by which natural interactions in the English classroom can be generated.

Video recordings. Video-recording is a qualitative research method that involves capturing

moving images, with or without sound, to study the visual details of interaction and behavior

(Given, 2008). For the purpose of this study video recordings are used to gather information

about students’ discourses produced during the oral discussions. Also, videos allow to analyze

not just students’ speech, but also what dynamics, reactions and positions occurred while

conducting the sessions, taking into account that through interactions among members of the

group several attitudes can be analyzed. Additionally, individual perceptions about research

topics can be registered through videos. There are two types of video recordings available for

collecting data: (1) researcher-generated and (2) participant-generated recordings. According to

Given (2008):


49

In researcher-generated recording, the researcher chooses the subject and content of the

video. Projects that use researcher-generated recordings are often concerned with capturing

situated social activity in a natural setting such as a classroom, health care environment, or

community space. In participant-generated recording, research participants either directly

control the camera or make the primary choices of what is to be filmed. For example,

“video diaries” may be used to illuminate participants’ identities or lifeworld’s. (p.917)

Both, researcher-generated and participant-generated recordings were implemented in the

process of data collection, to analyze classroom interactions and individual reflections.

The quality of the data collected was revised in various sessions of the M. A. in Applied

Linguistics and English-Language Teaching at the Universidad Distrital. It is important to

remember that the video-recordings were intended to record students’ discourses about the

language policies and the EFL program they had to follow, and that such discourses were

prompted by the self-assessment practices as described in the instructional design.


50

Chapter 5

Data Analysis

In the following chapter, I present all the process conducted after collecting and

analyzing the data to provide an answer to the research questions and objectives proposed in this

research, which is intended to unveil the positions that students enact during the implementation

of a self-assessment portfolio in an EFL classroom and to specify how those positions are shaped

when developing reflective practices. The research question and objectives are:

Research Question:

What do reflective practices in the EFL classroom inform about students’ positioning

while responding to a school curriculum based on international proficiency levels?

Research Objectives:

To unveil the positions that students enact during the implementation of a self-assessment

language portfolio in an EFL classroom

To specify the way students’ positions are shaped when developing reflective practices.

Also in this chapter, I describe what findings emerge from the analysis and what relevant theory

may be proposed in the field of positioning theory, as well as Identity formation and EFL. I

decided to analyze the data gathered using the Grounded Theory Framework proposed by

Charmaz (2006), which allows the researcher to construct theory from the data itself. As


51

Charmaz (2006) states that “grounded theory methods consist of systematic, yet flexible

guidelines for collecting and analyzing qualitative data to construct theories 'grounded' in the

data themselves. The guidelines offer a set of general principles and heuristic devices rather than

formulaic rules” (p.2).

Taking this statement into account, as well as the purpose of this research project, I consider

pertinent the analysis of the data gathered using Grounded Theory. It gives researchers the

possibility to elaborate contributions to theoretical fields, as they analyze in detail participants’

context and experiences. Grounded Theory proposes a series of steps the researcher needs to

follow in order to manage and analyze the data, which are initial coding, focused coding, axial

coding

Initial coding

This is the first step conducted to explore the possibilities in the data; this step leads to

further decisions when defining the core conceptual categories and an initial analysis of

participants’ views of problematic situations is undertaken (Charmaz, 2006).

This is proposed as the first step of the analysis during which the researcher begins to

look at the data and makes comparisons among data sources to propose preliminary theoretical

possibilities that can be discerned. In this step techniques to create initial codes are proposed, as

known as word-by-word coding, line-by-line coding. For the purpose of this study I implemented

line-by-line coding, tracing for relevant ideas as stated by participants, and which kept a

relationship with the objectives of my proposal. In the artifacts, the name or codes used were

selected thinking of the intention that the ´participants might have, in consideration of the


52

language used and the global context of the artifacts produced. An example of the process

followed in this phase is included in Annex 6

Focused coding

According to Charmaz (2006) in focused coding the researcher uses the most significant

or frequent codes found in the initial coding to filter large amounts of data. Data-to-data

comparisons helps develop focused codes and these codes are compered to data for further

refinement.

In this second step, after the initial coding process, a further analysis of longer and more

complex segments of the data gathered is undertaken establishing connections among initial

codes in the different sources of data. In focused coding the idea is to find what codes become

more frequent in the longer segments of the data. In this step, I classified the recurrent and

frequent codes for each one of the sessions conducted in the data gathering, taking into account

that each session had a specific objective and context given to the participants, as well as the

process conducted in the initial coding. A sample of this phase is included in Annex 7.

Axial Coding

This is the third step of the process. In this step, the researcher begins making

connections among the codes previously stated in the initial and focused coding. Charmaz uses

Strauss and Corbin´s (1980) parameters for axial coding, who propose that axial coding gives

answer to “when, where, why, who, how, and with what consequences” (p.125). In this step, the

idea is to create concepts that lead the researcher to answer those questions, and that allow a deep


53

analysis of the data gathered. In this step, I classified the data in six groups (one per each session

conducted); then in a visual chart, I classified the codes that shared some similarities.

In this phase, I used colors to classify the connections made, and assigned one color for

each connections: red (which means students´ experiences while learning English) blue

(students´ perceptions about topics developed) and green (students´ positions towards EFL

learning process).

For giving validity and reliability to the data gathered, methodological triangulation was

used by collecting data using the conversational interviews and the video recordings.

Methodological triangulation involves the use of multiple qualitative and/or quantitative methods

to study the problem. For example, results from surveys, and interviews could be compared to

see if similar results are found. If the conclusions from each of the methods are the same, then

validity is established (Merriam, 2002)

By using these two instruments, I looked for commonalities in the opinions expressed by

participants, as well as coherence in the process of categorization and supporting the explanation

of the categories proposed in this section.

Consequently, to give an answer to the research objectives I propose three categories,

which involve and conceptualize what I found in the data; the three categories were called:

Reflective voices, analyzers of their proficiency and emotional learners.


54

Objectives Categories subcategories

To unveil the positions

that students enact during the

implementation of a self-

assessment language portfolio in

an EFL classroom

2) To specify the way students’

positions are shaped when

developing self-assessment

practices.

Analyzers of their proficiency

Emotional learners

Reflective voices

Let their voices be heard

Taking a role towards

change

Reflective voices

While analyzing the reflections and discussions, one of the recurrent points the

participants manifested was the reflection towards the experiences they have had as English

learners at school, before, during and after being part of the implementation of a curriculum

based on proficiency levels related to the Common European Framework of reference for

Languages. In relation to their past experiences, meaning before the implementation of the

current curriculum, students evoked experiences that they considered were positive, negative,

and that preset their views and perceptions of learning English as a foreign language.

As positive experiences, they considered that having “good teachers” was a plus when

they began to learn English, because it served as motivational foundations for being “good

English learners”. During the third session of the pedagogical implementation, as part of a

conversational interview, which was recorded, participants’ ´opinions and reflections were


55

collected; students watched a video in which famous actors from United States and England said

thank you to teachers they had in elementary and secondary school, giving reasons for why they

were significant for their life projects. After watching this video, students were asked for a

teacher they would like to say thank you for their significance or importance in their education

process (the question was proposed to make students give opinions and discuss about the

qualities, skills and attitudes of a teacher inside the classroom, and how these features possibly

positioned them towards English-language learning). It is worthwhile to state that the names of

participants and teachers mentioned in the discussions were changed to maintain confidentiality,

and extracts of participants´ interventions are presented in as they originally were produced:

Pereira, one of the participants, answered at this:

“Doris, Doris; was a teacher of first grade; because she could explain what I know now”

The same participant refers to another teacher as “not a thank you”, by saying:

To Rose; not thank to Rose…..I don´t have done anything with this teacher… a waste of

time”

Angara also reflected on their past experiences, and the importance of elementary

teachers in the future:

“Mary; because she have a good teaching and I know the things that she gave us, we can

use it in the future”

Also teachers from other subjects were recognized as influential in their learning

process; Pato and Sua, two participants, who did not focuses on the contents, but on personal

experiences, said:

Pato: “she was a language teacher ….the one we made cry…she was angry and always

had a sleepy voice….I hate having class with her”


56

Sua “we told her that the class was boring…we made a letter, we ask for a new teacher,

when school told her, she cried. After that. The school changed the teacher…”

After these initial discussions, students were asked about English teachers, and if they

remembered a specific one for saying thank you to and why. Immediately 7 participants said

aloud the name of a teacher, who was still working at the school as Bilingual Coordinator (who

will be called “Chloe” in this research). Jacob, one of the participants, demanded to talk about

this teacher, and said:

Jacob: “Chloe, because she had good methodological with students, and also the attitude

that express with students”

Garcho, another participant, referred to an English teacher who was working at school in

2016, and expressed that this teacher became a friend, mainly for giving advices about life

issues, which facilitated commitment with English classes. Garcho said:

“He was a great teacher; I think he is the best teacher that I have; because for me was

not only a teacher, was a friend that help me with my problems, I think he is like a

brother.”

Emotional links with teachers while learning English was a constant experience in

participants, as teachers not only were referenced for pedagogical practices, but also for personal

attitudes towards students. Students gave a position to teachers through discourse, mainly linking

those positions to the emotional affinity/apathy participants had. This is supported by Harré

(2003) when he says that emotions, taking the form of discourse, become a set of images and

metaphors that construct an object. In this particular reflection the teacher became the “object”


57

constructed by the perceptions and emotions participants associated to them, and positioned

under the terms “the best”, “the worst”, “good”, “bad”.

In this discussion, participants discussed and expressed opinions about others ´opinions

related to teachers. Students took positions on what they considered as “good”/”bad” teachers in

discussions, mainly based on their shared experiences and feelings towards the teachers. Adjin

(2013) establishes that discourses become a primordial source to understand how people

represent their beliefs and express attitudes. When participants in this study referred to their

previous teachers as good/bad, they did not just consider random experiences. Rather they

considered experiences that were significant for their learning process, as well as previous

teacher who had had influence in their personal development. Likewise, students positioned

themselves to be able to express their feelings and opinions about teachers, feeling comfortable

to share their experiences, the way they sometimes faced problems with teachers and how these

relationships shape their learning process.

It can be said that students positioned themselves as individuals who are not being heard

about their experiences, and also as individuals who wanted to share what has been happening

inside their English classes, being this meaningful for them... This first moment in which they

have a point of departure for analyzing the whole EFL learning process, sets the stage for a

second phase, which I called in this part “Let their voices be heard”.

Beyond reflecting about past experiences, in the follow-up conversations participants

discussed their current English teacher (in this case, the teacher-researcher), specifically about

their perceptions about their current learning process, and how this process has changed in


58

consideration of the school’s requirement to demonstrate a C1 level by the end of eleventh grade,

and the adaptation of curriculum for this purpose.

Participants positioned themselves as active participants in this reflective process,

expressing ideas and opinions without any concern about possible repercussions inside the

English class. They expressed, according to themselves, weaknesses and strengths in that

process, as evidenced in the followings extracts; Martin, one of the participants, positioned

himself as active participant in this reflection:

Martin: “the last year I think that you were very good, but this year the class is more

boring, or more tired… I do not know... I think that I possibly learn a lot of English, and I do not

learn new things this year…”

In this first moment Martin manifested a mismatch between last year and current year, in

terms of the methodology proposed by the teacher, who has worked with them for two years;

looking for a deeper explanation about his answer, I asked him about the possible causes for the

mismatch he referred to; he answered.

“I think it changed a lot because we have to prepare for the exam FCE, so it had to be a

change and concentrate in the exam”

Another participant, Garcho, makes a comparison between teaching practices of the

teacher-researcher, comparing 2016 and 2017:

“ I think the last year English classes were for making new things, we made videos, we

made new things; this year was more academic, more about FCE, that thing that is all

structure; is boring for us, and we like to create things that give us energy to learn

English”


59

In the previous two interventions, it can be noticed how Martin and Garcho expressed in

a clear way how they perceived the curricular change proposed by school, and how this change

affected them, not just in academic performance but in motivation towards classes. Students

manifested they were more attached to activities that were significant for them, as well as

different, motivating and engaging to the language learning process.

Students undertook video creation activities in 2016, in which they recorded themselves

recreating famous myths and legends from Colombia, as well as from English literature. These

activities made them feel “different” in the sense that their English classes were not like the

others. Possibly this made them identify themselves as innovative. However, with the curriculum

based on Proficiency examinations, they felt they had lost innovation and following activities

they considered “boring”, insignificant and standardized, which they considered to be “common

activities”. Charadeau (2009) states that being yourself is at a first stance related to identify

yourself as different from others. When you belong to a group you must have specific features

that are not shared with any other group, as being in a different group leads to feel individually

different from others. When students began following standardized training for proficiency

examinations, they felt their motivation towards the English class decreased, and their English

class was not the one in which they felt comfortable and motivated.

But also Martin positioned himself as being able to offer a solution for the phenomena he

considered negative, by saying:

“I think we can improve this problem, we can speak more, because for example all the

year essays and essays…and I think that English is more speaking; we need to learn how

to write and read, but speaking is the best way”


60

Martin stated that oral interaction was an important issue to be considered. According to

Harré (2002), positions can be set in social groups by spoken interactions, which allows

members of the social group to communicate their perceptions, opinions and exchange ideas. In a

further scenario, this can be part of the construction of identities and, in our particular case, can

help students to position themselves as learners who find a purpose as active agents while being

in the curriculum, and being part of the process without feeling negative changes or making

comparisons among teachers.

I propose another subcategory called “taking a role towards change”. This is based on

the sixth session of the pedagogical implementation, in which I asked the participants to record a

30-second video giving advice to the institution for making the new changes in the curriculum

more effective. All the participants recorded the video and suggested several strategies for

teaching English at their school according to their perceptions and experiences. The following

extracts from their videos show their ideas:

Martin: “one advice to become bilingual. …it is better for our experience to demand

other classes in English, for example science math…..to have projects from other

subjects in English”

Jacob: “when you are a kid, you learn your mother tongue living it; so English must

be the same way to become bilingual”

Angara: “to implement a bilingual curriculum, for the secondary students, not just

elementary, due to they are close to finish their school life and it can be fruitful for

them”


61

Towers: “I have some strategies in mind to improve the English level in eleventh

grade… to focus in the upper levels, from eighth grade to eleventh grade,

bilingualism for them”

Pato: “not only resources for the elementary grades, but also for secondary students;

it is evident the lack of resources in the upper grades in the last three years”

Pinto: “to develop speaking activities with elementary students, because they are the

future of this school and to be 100% bilingual”

As participants position themselves as active agents (it is important to clarify that in the

school this study took place students and not commonly asked for alternatives, solutions or

opinions about English classes) in the learning process at their school, by proposing alternative

ways to develop classes at school, it is worthwhile to focus on the point that they felt a difference

in how the school focus on strategies and resources for the elementary students. This leads to the

interpretation of another position, as students were placed as passive subjects in the EFL learning

process ( the implementation and adaptation of the curriculum proposed for English Learning at

school was not discussed or socialized with the academic community i.e. students and parents).

In this regard, it can be stated that they found a channel to express meaningful experiences

through the reflective practices developed with students, by reflecting on their own process and

proposing alternatives. Participants felt comfortable and free through the reflective practices to

express what they wanted to transform in the English classes not just for them, but also for their

institution.

Participants used the word “bilingual” as the main objective to improve, and made

emphasis that the strategies they considered necessary to improve were proposed to take


62

bilingual education into account. This can be considered as part of the identity the school shapes

in students in the pedagogical model they offered. As the school’s mission is to become bilingual

by 2021, students are following that objective as the “ideal English learner” for the institution

and for themselves. Riley (2007) affirms that membership is consolidated by certain linguistic

patterns shared by the members of a group. In this specific case, the term “bilingual” acts as a

common pattern to feel part of the institution and to feel capable of offering solutions to

problems participants found as part of their own English learning process.

Analyzers of their proficiency

In the reflective practices, the self-assessment grid (see annex 1) and the proficiency

levels proposed by the Common European Framework (see annex 4) guided students’

‘reflections, taking into account that the main objective of the curriculum proposed for English

learning at their school is to obtain a C level of proficiency. The “Can-Do statements” in each

one of the proficiency levels proposed are compiled in the self- assessment grid. This means the

skills a speaker must have when developing listening, reading, writing and speaking.

Sessions 1 and 4 of the pedagogical intervention were designed to foster reflections

around the self-assessment practices as English learners (see annex 2 and 3). The variations of

confidence students had when expressing their thoughts about their own learning process are

evident in sessions 1 and 4. The conversational interview was conducted with the whole group of

students in session 1 to discuss and record how they understood a self-assessment process, as

well as to introduce the Language proficiency levels proposed by the Common European

Framework reference into the discussions.


63

In session 1 the discussion was conducted following the question-answer pattern. During

the whole conversational interview, the teacher led the discussion. At first stance, students were

positioned as passive agents in the discussion. Afterwards, they were allowed to conduct and

lead the discussions, but students actually required the teacher´s question to keep discussions

going (long silences and whispers among participants, but no interaction to share opinions with

all the group). Students’ ‘thoughts and opinions about self-assessment were linked to school

practices, in which they used a score (from 1.0 to 5.0) to evaluate their learning process, but with

no rubrics, guidelines or parameters that allowed them to guide the self-assessment process.

In the following question-answer sequence, it is evident how the conception of self-

assessment determines the interaction among members of the group as well as assigning

positions among individuals:

Teacher: Angara, how do you evaluate another person?

Angara: depends the person, like when you listen or pay attention when the teacher say

his notes and no more because I pay attention and I don’t care the other people

Teacher: so you just listen to the teacher`s scores

Angara: my scores not the others but in some cases the other.

Jacob: I try to be objective (students make the sound “uichhhhh” mocking at his answer),

in most cases you are being influenced for the friendship that you have.

Harré (2003) proposes the term indirect positioning for having “the other” as a constant

reference in the definition of positions and the perceptions each actor in the social interaction has

about that “other”, referring to the act of giving a place or position to the other with statements or

attributions. But these statements, as evidenced in the last line of Jacob´s intervention, were


64

guided by personal relationships and the individual judgements each student can make about the

other. By assigning a score, each student gave the other a position in terms of academic

performance, but the reference to assign that position was not standardized. Harré´s (2003)

reversal theory refers to the motivations that a person has as an option when facing different

social situations and the motivations each person has when facing and responding to external

stimulus (situations).

According to Harré (2003) “reversal theory establishes that these motivational responses

come in pairs of opposites and that one cannot accomplish both motivational responses at the

same time, giving place to choices” (p. 18). In this case, students made choices when assigning a

score to their classmates, but only taking a single position. This position was taken considering

levels of friendship, or the teacher´s previous assessment, and not mixing several aspects to give

a score.

As friendship was relevant when giving the other a score, further questions were asked to

understand how this “friendship” might influence group dynamics inside a regular English class:

Teacher: for example if you have to evaluate a classmate (students make a hist

“uichhhhh”) do you consider you can evaluate a classmate as Jacob says, being

objective?

Pereira: yes…..no like ..I evaluate him with the friendship

Teacher: so friendship is a factor to make co-evaluation (Jacob says nooooooooo); who

thinks that co evaluation is actually developed because of friendship so if that person is

nice with me has a good score (some of the students raise their hands); Sua what is your

opinion?

Sua: I put the same score the same that he give


65

Teacher: so you repeat the score that the student has in the self-assessment

Sua: yes, “simio no mata simio” (ape not kill ape; phrase from the movie “Planet of the

apes”)

In these reflections, students enacted several positions that are worthwhile mentioning

due to the nature of the comments, which are linked to the analysis they made about their

proficiency. First, being friendship an influential item when evaluating classmates, students

positioned themselves as solidary by not affecting social agreements with an academic score.

Second, individual perceptions and group perceptions positioned students by making them

decide which aspects to consider about how social relationships influenced assessment practices

among the members of the group. Third, proficiency and assessment positioned students as

interactive actors of assessment, as they evaluated the other in correspondence of the evaluation

each ones received.

Discursive practices became influential to express opinion about this particular event in

the classroom dynamics. By using the phrase “ape not kill ape” the participant Sua wanted to

interpret how each individual developed a personhood that affects the group interactions.

Recognizing themselves as part of a group determined certain behaviors and agreements to keep

a harmonic interaction as part of the development of that personhood, Davies and Harré (1990)

affirm that the recognition of the individual as having the characteristics that locate oneself as a

member of a subgroup takes place in the process of building the self. This means the individual

develops emotional attachments to the position taken, identifying oneself as part of the rules and

duties involved in the role. In this particular case, avoiding affecting the academic performance

of the other in English classes negatively is part of the rules and duties to follow in the group. In


66

this first analysis of the discursive practices aforementioned, it was important to focus on how

students perceive assessment inside regular classes, and how they understood the assessment

practice itself; after letting students reflect about this initial process, that is happening in the

regular classes, it is possible to conduct the reflection to the assessment proposed by the

proficiency levels proposed in the Common European Framework of Reference, which guided

English learning at school.

In session 4 students were asked to record a video, and based on the self-assessment grid

students were supposed to locate themselves in one of the proficiency levels, giving reasons for

their decisions. The purpose of this reflective practice was to make students take a position in

relation to their own learning process and to register how they perceive themselves as part of a

curriculum based on International proficiency levels. Multiple positions were registered, as

participants refer to themselves as follows:

Aconcha: “I do not know if I’m capable of speak quickly; I have improved many things; I

understand the teacher but not recordings; I’m between A2 and B2; the characteristics in

the chart are not related with the characteristics I consider I have”

Darren: “ B1 to C1; I understand every topic the teacher says to me; I can speak about a

lot of topics; learn English can open doors in jobs; I usually see videos in which people

talk about their lives, and it helps me to learn English a lot.”

Moreover, some students reflected on their abilities, but did not mention the proficiency

levels proposed by the CEFR. Rather they focused on difficulties and strengths they identified in

their proficiency.


67

Jacob: “I have to improve a lot in reading; I have a lot of distractions; in my speaking I

already said I do not know a lot of words, but I think I can express ideas, that is a plus. I

think it is a good idea to improve all the tasks”

Pinto:” I think my English level is very low, I have tried to improve, but I could not raise

a good English level; I will not reach a high level, but my objective is to raise a better

level; I’m not the best English student but I think I could do my best.

For these participants, the levels offered in the self-assessment chart were not relevant to

position themselves in terms of performance. They expressed how they perceived themselves

with their own words, and their realities, and pointed out areas in which they felt they needed to

improve, differing from the positions the participant took in the first extract, in which they used

proficiency levels to locate themselves, and not merely focused on what they “can-do”. For

Pavlenko and Blackledge (2004) language and identity are related as they are mutually

constitutive. First, language provides the individuals with terms and linguistic meanings by

which identities are constructed and negotiated. Second, ideologies of language and identity

guide individuals to use linguistic resources to index their identities and to evaluate this process

in others.

In this sense, for these participants, the way they defined themselves, the way they

perceive their performance and the possible solutions they offer constituted their identity as

language learners. Participants used their own repertoire of words and expressions to define

themselves as English-language learners. Even though they had the Can-Do statements

proposed by the Common European Framework reference as a reference, they did not center

their attention on these descriptors, but on their own storylines as English learners.


68

Other participants defined themselves in their videos as students with high and low

proficiency in English language performance. They totally based their self-perceptions on

the proficiency descriptors from the Common European Framework reference and gave

reasons for defining themselves as high/low performers of the language:

Silva: I perceive myself like a disciplined person, that practices a lot, and thanks to

that I improve my skills; I think I am In a B2 level because I can make a conversation

with others; also I can create texts in English with little mistakes of grammar and

vocabulary.

Wayne: I considerate my level of English is A2 or B1, because I do not know the

essential aspects from the good level of English; I don´t know much vocabulary, I

don´t understand multiple texts, for example essays, and in reading I don´t

understand the paragraphs”

Norton (2000) states that when learners speak, they are negotiating and renegotiating

the sense of the self in relation to the social world, which reaffirms the importance of discourses

and language in identity development. In these two cases, the sense of the self was determined by

the description of a language learner given by the proficiency descriptors in the Common

European Framework. As such, these descriptors were the discourse shaping students´ linguistic

features. As students used these descriptors to give themselves a place in the language learning

environment lived at school, these words were the ones that positioned students and students

self-positioned themselves as high/low performers of the language.


69

Charaudeau (2009) states that the notion of linguistic identity is validated by two

different discourses: the first one, when language is necessary for the construction of a collective

identity that grants social cohesion in a community; secondly, when language social integration

takes place and language becomes a symbol of identity. Being a competent user of English,

according to the proficiency descriptors located students in an imaginary group (A1, A2, B1, B2,

C1), and each one of the can-do statements worked as a validation agent to belong to each

imaginary group. When students appropriated the linguistic features that validated membership

of a specific proficiency level, they positioned themselves and acquired those linguistic features

to share common patterns with others belonging to a similar proficiency level.

Emotional learners

During the six lessons developed to explore and record the perceptions, beliefs and

experiences students have about their own English learning process, emotions were present in all

the reflections they had. When they were referring to past experiences inside English classes,

reflecting about their self-image as English learners, and giving opinions for improving English

learning process at school, linking each of the previous aspects with emotions was a constant.

When students built discursive practices (the discourses that refer to significant events in

a person´s life), they use a wide repertoire of expressions to refer to feelings towards teachers,

classes and themselves. Harré (2003) highlights the importance of emotions, understood from a

social constructionist approach as “as the systematic, coherent set of images, metaphors that

construct an object in a particular way” (p. 31) thusly producing discourse that allows individuals


70

to share their experiences and perceptions of their own realities, constructing the English-

language learning process as the particular object mentioned by Harré.

In session 5, the objective was to write a letter to their ten-year-younger selves. The idea

of this letter was for them to give themselves advice taking into account all the experiences they

have lived during their lives as English-language learners. The following extracts give an

indication to what the participants wrote:

Martin: dear 6 years old martin; in 6th , 7th, 8th and 9th grade you´ll take classes with

miss Red, the best english teacher that you ever met; with her you will have good, bad,

fright and embarrassing moments, but with her you can say that you learned English”

Ace: …maybe in this moment you don´t understand the reason I write to you, but

mientras lees esto espero llegues a entender;I know you are scared for the speaking part

to choose your level, but you need to be brave, tomar valor y presenter esa parte”.

Pinto: … in this moment I hate English because the teachers of English me la tenian

montada.

Darren: you started with a dream, was that you wanted to be like your father, you wanted

to be successful and complete all your goals, but with the time you change…

Harré (2003) mentions the importance of the construction of emotions through language.

Language is used as the mechanism through which individuals manifest their experiences and

feelings related to particular episodes. These experiences and feelings are named under common


71

codes such as “love”, “hate”, “like, “dislike” which are shared and attached to similar

experiences in different individuals. In the previous extracts, participants expressed their feelings

towards the English classes to give their past selves advice, as well as positioning themselves as

reflective learners, considering how they felt in specific moments of their language learning

process to be important, and how useful can those experiences could be for themselves.

In the six sessions students were allowed to express themselves freely in discussions

about their past experience as English learners at school. Participants referred to their teachers

considering how they felt, and the emotions they had towards pedagogical practices and

teachers’ attitudes. It is important to highlight that emotions were mediated by the fact that

participants were sharing similar experiences as language learners in the discussions. Harré

(2003) refers to motivational responses among members of a group. Harré refers to a domain in

which emotional transactions take place among individuals and with themselves. In these

emotional transactions, participants of these study recognized similar feelings in others´ speech

while referring to past experiences as English learners, and acquired those feelings for

themselves.

By associating emotions with their experiences as learners, participants transformed self-

assessment practices into discursive practices that positioned themselves as reflective, able to

give opinions without establishing hierarchies or boundaries, and discovering that individual

experiences could be shared by different members of a same group. Self-assessment practices, in

the form of group discussions, conversational interviews and personal reflections were made

vivid through language individual experiences as English-language learners, allowing each

individual to identify with the other, and to identify which of their own features is shared with

others. Riley (2007) focuses his attention to the fact that language is one of the main resources


72

that makes the construction of society possible. Language became primordial in self-assessment

practices for recognizing common conditions inside a group, and for implementing the necessary

acts to establish relationships among the students, and, as evidenced in session 6, in which

students propose solutions for improving English-learning conditions at their school, to

coordinate actions in the group.

Discursive practices produced inside the self-assessment practices became evidence of

how students perceived, interacted and looked for transformation of their realities, as well as

giving them possibilities to gain confidence as part of a community while allowing them to have

a voice inside the classroom in recognition of the differences and similarities among classroom

members. In session 1 of the pedagogical implementation students discussed self-assessment

practices inside English classrooms, and how they felt about having the possibility to evaluate

themselves, and also others (classmates and teachers). During this conversational interview,

some participants expressed how they felt when having the chance of evaluating others:

1) “Teacher: Angara, how do you evaluate another person?

Angara: depends the person, like when you listen or pay attention when the teacher say

his notes and no more because I pay attention and I don’t care about the other people”

2) Teacher: martin ….

Martin: I think that we can evaluate teachers but we can´t put them a score; we can

only say that a teacher is better or….less better eeee (students correct with a boooo-

worse!!!!) worse than another teacher but for example if I put someone a 3, no,

because scores are subjective in some cases.


73

In expressions like “I don´t care about the other people” and “we can only say a teacher is

better or worse that another”, students found in this discussion a neutral place to express how

they felt about assessment process with others, without being judged by their ideas, and letting

the others know their points of view. According to Adjei (2013), people strategically draw on

available interpretative repertoires of discourses to negotiate and construct meanings in social

interaction, in this case the meaning to negotiate is assessment. Discourses reflected processes of

negotiation among students who offered different positions to be interpreted while giving

judgements on others, and are a way people positioning themselves as English learners by

representing their beliefs and expressing their attitudes and values.


74

Chapter VI

Discussions and Implications

This chapter presents the discussion of the findings based on the research question I proposed

related to what reflective practices can inform about the positions students take and enact while

responding to a curriculum based on international proficiency levels. As analyzed in the data, I

found that students enacted several positions, taking into account their past experiences as English

learners, their interactions with teachers and the development of a school curriculum based on the

proficiency levels proposed by the Common European Framework Reference. Regarding the

research objectives, which intended to unveil the positions students enact during the

implementation of a language portfolio, and to specify the way students´ positions are shaped when

developing reflective practices, three categories were proposed. They categorize the positions

enacted by students towards experiences related to teachers and their practices, and how they

perceived themselves as English-language learners considering the proficiency levels proposed in

the Common European framework Reference (CEFR).

In terms of relationships between teachers and students, and how these interactions shape

identities inside the English classroom, Dennen (2011) concluded that it is important to analyze

the role of the person in charge of leading the educational process as well as possible interactions

with learners. The author also discusses the role of discourses performed by each one of the actors

in the conversational interactions model beliefs, perceptions and construct identities. This study

shows the importance of examining the relationships among English teachers and English learners

to determine how it shapes English language learners’ identities. Dennen (2011) pointed out the


75

need to conduct deep analysis on the importance of discursive practices produced by teachers as

positioning agents towards students, being the attitudes, pedagogical procedures and variations on

rapport a tendency when enacting positions inside English classrooms.

When students position themselves as agents of change for several dynamics related

English learning at school, they manifested English offers tools for having access to information,

and refer to bilingualism processes as beneficial for the institution, claiming for more resources

and pedagogical improvements as essential to reach curricular objectives. According to Adjei

(2013), people strategically draw on available interpretative repertoires of discourses to negotiate

and construct meanings in social interaction. In this particular case, solutions to academic

challenges were negotiated and shared by members of the group and led to constructing positions

as solution-proposers giving meaning to this enacted position.

In addition, I found that reflective practices became a relevant pedagogical practice for

students to explore and reflect on their perceptions and experiences about their own learning

process. They also allowed students to use those reflections to propose solutions and take

alternative ways to approach to the English language learning process. Menard-Warwick (2008)

states that when teachers provide a space for critical reflection in ESL classrooms, this practice

facilitate learners´ reconstruction of L2 voices and, consequently, refection on the identities that

society assigns to learners. Through the reflective practices conducted in this study, which made

use of reference proficiency descriptors, students were allowed to identify positions assigned to

them by proficiency levels and compare those with their own perceptions about their learning

process. The also contrasted and judged the conception of “ideal learners” that is usually included

in the discourse of the proficiency levels in the English curriculum.


76

In regard to positioning, the first category proposed is called “reflective voices”. Students

reflected on their experiences before and after the implementation of a curriculum based on

proficiency levels. They reflected about the positive and negative experiences that shaped their

expectations and motivations towards English classes and English learning.

Students used terms such as “good” or “bad” for teachers that were significant or relevant

in their learning process. “Good” teachers were those whose pedagogical practices were

motivating, and teachers who were willing to help them in personal matters. On the other hand,

“bad” teachers were those who did not show interest in developing motivating activities or have

good rapport with them, or who did not consider students’ interests in English learning.

Beyond reflecting about past experiences, participants reflected about their current

English classes and how this process has changed taking into account the school’s requirement to

demonstrate a C1 level by the end of eleventh grade, and the related curricular implementations.

Students manifested they were more attached to activities that were significant for them, as well

as different, motivating and engaging to the language learning process. Concerning the

curriculum they were following in eleventh grade, they keenly felt a decrease in their

engagement with English learning, due to lack of motivation.

Moreover, students not just reflected upon their experiences as English learners, but also

used those experiences to position themselves as sources of solution to different pedagogical

practices they considered relevant when learning English at school. Students actively emphasized

the need to transform pedagogical practices so that go beyond training for reaching proficiency

levels, and foster motivation and creation in the English classes.

Students also positioned themselves as analyzers of their proficiency as English-language

learners. Reflective practices guided by the implementation of a self-assessment portfolio


77

allowed students to position themselves and to reflect if the objectives proposed by the school in

terms of language proficiency respond to their needs and actual performance inside English

classes. For many participants, the proficiency levels (A1, A2, B1, B2, and C1) were the only

reference available to analyze themselves as English learners. They analyzed their skills based on

how accurately they responded to the Can-Do statements included in the CEFR, defining

themselves as high/low performers in the language. On the other hand, a group of students

considered their experiences inside English classes as relevant for defining their proficiency as

English learners, what they can do in the activities proposed in the school curriculum and how

they felt while using the language. In this sense, each student positioned himself as proficient at

different levels, and did not use the other students´ performance or opinions given by others as a

point of reference. Through all this process of analyzing proficiency, students positioned

themselves as active promoters of change, in terms of pedagogical practices and willing to offer

solutions to difficulties faced in the English-learning process.

Charaudeau (2009) analyses individual perceptions, and how these perceptions shape

communities. He states that, at first, individuals perceive themselves as being different from the

other, and, if necessary, try not to be the other. In this order of ideas, Charadeau states that

belonging to a group implies performing the differentiation process explained above. It means

that belonging to a group means not belonging to other groups, and looking for the features and

qualities that make individuals different by being inside a particular group. Students, as analyzers

of their proficiency, reflected about the features that made them belong to a particular group (in

this case each of the proficiency levels proposed by the Common European Framework) while

giving arguments to define and validate their perceptions about themselves as individuals.


78

Students positioned themselves as emotional learners, mainly recognizing the influence

of beliefs, feelings and teachers ‘influence in their English learning process. Students’ discursive

practices were guided by a speech repertoire based on words that define emotions, such as

“hate”, love”, “motivating”, “boring” when referring to English teachers, how they felt during

the process of learning English as a foreign language, and responding to school objectives that

intend to graduate students with a C1 proficiency level. By analyzing these reflections, I can

conclude that teaching practices and meaningful experiences related to the implementation of

International language policies in schools have an impact in students’ motivation and

engagement to English learning, as well as being these language policies active positioners,

conditioning students´ construction of their academic self, and teaching practices inside the

classroom.

Reflective practices allowed students to share experiences and beliefs related to their

English learning process, as well as reflect upon personal goals, perceptions and expectations as

language learners. As part of the implementation of language proficiency levels proposed by the

Common European Framework Reference, the European Language Portfolio attempts to

promote learner´s autonomy, positioning students as agents of their learning (Little, 2009, p. 2).

In this sense, self-assessment practices not only unveiled positions concerning students’ English-

learning process, but also gave them criteria to understand and express how this process

influenced classroom dynamics and language performance.

Reflective practices were shaped as conversational interactions, discussions and spoken

reflections became discourse, and these discursive practices among students provided

information about hidden realities. Davies and Harré (1990) define discursive practices as “all

the ways in which people actively produce social and psychological realities” (p. 3), and in this


79

study the realities in the implementation of a curriculum based on language proficiency levels

provided information to reflect not just on students´ identities construction as English learners,

but also on the influence of teaching practices and attitudes inside English classrooms.

This study allowed me to reflect upon the implications the results might have in the field

of EFL, especially in the implementation of international language policies in Colombian

schools. Undoubtedly, language policies have intended and unintended consequences inside

English classes as they limit teaching practices as curriculum design, pedagogical practices and

materials implemented for English teaching must respond to accomplish proficiency levels, and

depending on the institution, teachers and students are not able to select alternatives for

achieving those goals. Language policies position students, consciously and unconsciously, as

they become part of the school´s identity, and students shape their own identities as English

learners to become part of the institution – while simultaneously facing difficulties and

emotional experiences that create conflict between students’ personal likes, motivations,

expectations and school requirements, objectives and curriculum proposals.

In addition, this study highlights the importance of students’ voices in the EFL context.

Students, as the core of the learning process, are influenced by curricular decisions and

implementations, not to mention teaching practices and attitudes inside the classroom. By

implementing strategies that allow students to become active agents in the educational process,

as well as by taking into account students´ experiences towards implementation of international

language policies, teaching practices can be adjusted in a critical way, in consideration of the

importance of their identity as Colombian citizens and the improvement of teaching practices

that benefit students´ linguistic development and personal development.


80

Personal Implications

As teacher-researcher, I highlight personal and academic implications after conducting

this study. Throughout this study I have reflected upon the influence of international language

polices in my teaching practices, and how these language policies were affecting my own

performance as English teacher. Unconsciously, my teaching practices were changing without

necessarily considering my students’ ‘motivation towards English classes from being an

innovative, creative teacher who developed several activities to motivate students and make them

feel comfortable and engaged towards English, I began to merely implement preset material for

responding to the requirements of international examinations that demonstrate proficiency levels

based on international proficiency standards. My students’ voices allowed me to reflect upon my

practices and my beliefs, especially relating to evaluating if English teaching practices should

just be for accomplishing curricular goals, or if they should also offer students additional tools

for personal interests to motivate them in their learning process.

Second, this study makes me reflect about the implementation of language policies in

educational contexts in which students do not have the resources (methodological, technological,

and locative) to guarantee the accomplishment of proficiency levels implemented by the local

government. How relevant are these proficiency levels for students who position themselves as

not being part of a bilingual process? Or, indeed, or students for whom English is not significant

in terms of life projects or academic development?

Third, as teacher-researcher, I wonder about how my own English proficiency positions

me in terms of how competent I am. As English teacher, I am supposed to be proficient and

competent in linguistic skills such as speaking, listening, reading and writing to ensure an

accurate learning process inside classrooms. However, while writing this document I was


81

advised to contact third-party advisors to improve writing production, due to lack of coherence in

the document. This positioned me as not competent in the language, and made me reflect how

academic institutions perceive and ensure competence as English-language learners, considering

I completed courses of academic writing at university, which positioned me as competent in this

aspect, but when writing this document that position varied from the advisor´s perspective.

Limitations

The major limitation in this study was time. In spite of the fact that eleventh graders were

the students who had enough experience in the English-learning process at the school, they had

to respond to a huge amount of activities and academic responsibilities that consume a lot of

time. Also the school curriculum required me to implement a set of activities to train students to

present international proficiency evaluations, a requirement that made me redesign the

pedagogical implementation needed to develop this study.

Questions for further research

As previously mentioned, one of the relevant aspects of this study was to unveil students

positioning while responding to a curriculum based on international proficiency levels. I consider

that it is important to continue researching into the influence of international language policies in

Colombian educational contexts, and how these language policies influence individuals’ identity

configuration. Moreover, I consider it relevant to analyze the configuration of identities in

teachers who are implementing curriculum based on the international proficiency levels

proposed by the Common European Framework Reference and such identity development may

influence their teaching practices.


82

In addition, I believe that conducting studies about the influence of international language

policies on public education might enrich the field of EFL teaching and learning. Only by

including analysis of how socio-economic variations in public schools influence the impact of

international language polices, can we reflect on teaching perspectives and identities as

Colombian English-language teachers. For these reasons, I would like to propose some questions

that would be useful for further research:

How do international language policies configure Colombian English-language teachers’

identities?

What positions are enacted by students in public school contexts that implement an English

program curriculum based on international proficiency levels?

How do international certifications of language proficiency influence students´ configuration of

identities as English language users?

How do English proficiency positions students when asked to produce academic texts in a

master´s program?


83

References

Adjei, S. B. (2013). Discourse analysis: examining language use in context. The Qualitative

Report, 18(25), 1-10. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol18/iss25/2

Atkinson, D., Bonny, N., & Carolyn, M. (2011). Alternative approaches to second language

acquisition. London: Routledge.

Arnold, J. (2010). Science Students’ Classroom Discourse: Tasha’s Umwelt. Research in Science

Education, 42(2), 233-259. doi:10.1007/s11165-010-9195-0.

Benson, P. (2004). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Harlow:

Longman.

Benson, P. (2007). Autonomy in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 40(1), 21-

40. doi:10.1017/S0261444806003958

Boud, D.J. (1995). Enhancing learning through self-assessment. Kogan Page, London:

Philadelphia.

Castañeda-Peña, H. (2008). Positioning masculinities and femininities in preschool EFL

education. Signo y Pensamiento, 27(53), 314-326. Retrieved from

http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0120-

48232008000200020&lng=en&tlng=en.

Charaudeau, P. (2009). Identité linguistique, identité culturelle : Une relation paradoxale. Le

Discours Sur Les « langues D’Espagne », 21-38. doi:10.4000/books.pupvd.299

Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative

analysis. London: SAGE.

Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning,

teaching, assessment. (2011). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol18/iss25/2


84

Davies, B., & Harré, R. (1990). Positioning: the discursive production of selves. Journal for

the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20(1), 43-63. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5914.1990.tb00174.x

Dennen, V. P. (2010). Facilitator presence and identity in online discourse: Use of positioning

theory as an analytic framework. Instructional Science, 39(4), 527-541.

doi:10.1007/s11251-010-9139-0

Ellis, R. (2015). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Falchikov, N., & Boud, D. (1989). Student self-assessment in higher education: a meta-

analysis. Review of Educational Research, 59(4), 395. doi:10.2307/1170205

Gao, Y., Jia, Z., & Zhou, Y. (2015). EFL learning and identity development: a longitudinal study

in 5 universities in china. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 14(3), 137-158.

doi:10.1080/15348458.2015.1041338

García-Pastor, M. D. (2017). Learners’ identities at stake: Digital identity texts in the EFL

classroom. Language Value, (9), 36-61. doi:10.6035/languagev.2017.9.3

Given, L. M. (2008). The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. Los Angeles:

SAGE Publications., 127-917.

Harre, R., & Parrott, W. G. (1996). The emotions: Social, cultural and physical dimensions.

London: Sage Publications.

Harré, R., & Moghaddam, F. M. (2003). The self and others: Positioning individuals and groups

in personal, political, and cultural contexts. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Harré, R. & Sabat, S. R. (2009). Recent advances in positioning theory. Theory & Psychology.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354308101417

https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354308101417


85

Holliday, A. (2003). Social autonomy: addressing the dangers of culturism in TESOL. Learner

Autonomy across Cultures, 110-126. doi:10.1057/9780230504684_7

Kramsch, C. J. (2011). Language and culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

León, A. (2016). EFL Ninth Graders’ Positioning about Bullying in their Communities through

Written Life Stories in a Public School in Bogotá. (Master´s thesis.) Universidad Distrital

Francisco Jose de Caldas. Bogotá.

Menard-Warwick, J. (2007). Because she made beds every day. Social positioning, classroom

discourse, and language learning. Applied Linguistics, 29(2), 267-289.

doi:10.1093/applin/amm053

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and

implementation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Miyahara, M. (2010). Researching identity and language learning: taking a narrative approach.

Retrieved from http://lrb.info.icu.ac.jp/home/volume-25-2010

Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning: Gender, ethnicity and educational change.

Harlow: Longman.

Pavlenko, A., & Blackledge, A. (2004). Introduction: new theoretical approaches to the study of

negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts. Negotiation of Identities in Multilingual

Contexts, 1-33. doi:10.21832/9781853596483-003

Riley, P. (2007). Language, culture and identity: An ethnolinguistic perspective. London:

Continuum.

Tudor, I. (2008). The dynamics of the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

http://lrb.info.icu.ac.jp/home/volume-25-2010


86

Van Langenhove, L., & Harré, R. (1999). Introducing Positioning Theory. In R. T. Harré, & L.

van Langenhove (Eds.), Positioning theory. Moral contexts of intentional action (pp. 14-

31). Oxford: Blackwell.

Vasilopoulos, G. (2015). Language learner investment and identity negotiation in the korean efl

context. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 14(2), 61-79.

doi:10.1080/15348458.2015.1019783

Vetter, A. (2010). Positioning students as readers and writers through talk in a high school

english classroom. English Education, 43(1), 33-64. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/23017083

Virkkula, T., & Nikula, T. (2010). Identity construction in ELF contexts: A case study of Finnish

engineering students working in Germany. International Journal of Applied

Linguistics, 20(2), 251-273. doi:10.1111/j.1473-4192.2009.00248.x

Wenger, E. (2008). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge:

Cambridge Univ. Press.

Yoon, B. (2008). Uninvited Guests: the influence of teachers’ roles and pedagogies on the

positioning of English language learners in the regular classroom. American Educational

Research Journal, 45(2), 495-522. doi:10.3102/0002831208316200

http://www.jstor.org/stable/23017083


87

ANNEX 1: Self-assessment grid


88

Annex 2: Lesson plan sample (lesson 1)


89

Annex 3: lesson plan 4


90

Annex 4: Assessment criteria Common European Framework Reference


91

Annex 5: Consent Letter sample

Consent Form (Padres de Familia)

Nombre de quien desarrolla el proyecto:

Christian camilo Bernal González

Licenciado en educación Básica con Énfasis en Inglés lengua extranjera

Estudiante de Maestría en Enseñanza de lenguas Extranjeras. Universidad Pedagógica Nacional

Nombre y descripción del proyecto:

Practicas reflexivas: autoevaluación en el marco Común Europeo

Como estudiante de la Maestría en Lingüística Aplicada a la enseñanza del Inglés de la Universidad Distrital francisco José de

Caldas, me encuentro desarrollando un proyecto de investigación en el aula de inglés con el cual pretendo analizar el impacto

de realizar procesos de autoevaluación como herramientas reflexivas en el proceso de aprendizaje del Inglés como lengua

extranjera.

¿Qué ayuda solicitaré de ustedes?

Inicialmente, con el fin de conocer sus percepciones en cuanto a los procesos reflexión que se desarrollan con su hijo al interior

del aula, en algunos casos solicitaré me sea posible realizar grabaciones en el aula de las discusiones y reflexiones de los

estudiantes.

Por otro lado realizaré observaciones durante algunas de las clases de inglés que su hijo o hija recibe en la institución. Es posible

también que algunas de las producciones hechas por su hijo sean observados.

¿Qué haré con la información que recoja

Esta información me será útil con el fin de analizar los procesos de reflexión en torno al aprendizaje de inglés como lengua

extranjera con el fin de elaborar sugerencias que puedan ser útiles para mejorar y optimizar dichos procesos lo cual redundará

en el bienestar de su hijo o hija.

Si decide participar en el proyecto:

- Estaré dispuesto a responder cada una de sus dudas.

- Usted estará en libertad de no continuar haciendo parte del proyecto en el momento en que usted lo decida sin

necesidad de justificar su decisión.

- Las diferentes clases serán grabadas si usted lo autoriza.

- Ni su nombre, ni el de su hijo o hija serán utilizados en el reporte final.

Agradezco mucho su colaboración.

Christian Camilo Bernal González

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - -

Yo, ________________________________________________________ autorizo a mi hijo a participar en el proyecto.

Firma ________________________________________________- Fecha: ________________________________


92

Annex 6: Initial coding sample


93


94

Annex 7: Axial Coding sample

reflective practices: positioning as efl...

Documents