# data[].attributes.headline
Putting it all together - Rich Task Assessment

# data[].attributes.subject
Putting it all together - Rich Task Assessment

# data[].attributes.body
The following link gives some examples of a Rich Task assessment (Speaking and Listening) for a Year 9 Japanese class that meets the Year 9 / 10 band of the Japanese curriculum (ACARA, 2019). Students are provided with curated speaking and listening resource to help practise these skills. All content provided is 'in bounds' (i.e. names, nouns, numbers etc) and will use during the assessment by students and myself (Wiliam, 2011). The Rich task involves students role-playing at a Japanese department store and buying and selling items based on their lists. Other macro skills such as reading and writing are also needed to create the shopping list and write down the responses.

Speaking Assistant

Writing Practice

Assessment Rubric

Quizlet Shopping Vocab list

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that an integrated ICT or 'blended' approach for content delivery, in conjunction with elements of TPRS and CLIL during classes, could keep students connected and informed with rich assessment tasks and language acquisition (Education Queensland, 2000). I have come to realise that by offering students a 'snapshot' of what is possible in Japanese through innovative pedagogies, innovative curriculum, conducive environments, and contemporary theories – I have a chance of engaging them to explore further and learn new parts of Japanese language and culture that they might not have considered and differentiate tasks bases on their needs and abilities (Tomlinson, 2014).

Despite having limited time throughout my placement to trial all the elements of CLIL and TPRS, plus ICT usage; I can see the benefits of a blended pedagogical approach for teaching languages, with many of my language students in across the 7 - 10 classes that I was teaching. However, in order to improve my own practice and to understand their complexities, I will need to likely study CLIL and TPRS throughout my career at a post-graduate level to gain a deeper understanding of how I can integrate it more effectively to improve student' outcomes (Thompson & McKinley, 2018).

# data[].attributes.headline
TPRS used to teach Japanese using 'The Large ship' (Video)

# data[].attributes.subject
TPRS used to teach Japanese using 'The Large ship' (Video)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Japanese Movie talk TPRS: おおきい　ふね　ookii fune (the big boat)

# data[].attributes.headline
CLIL in Action for lesson planning and curriculum planning (Video)

# data[].attributes.subject
CLIL in Action for lesson planning and curriculum planning (Video)

# data[].attributes.headline
Instruction for language learning [TPRS]

# data[].attributes.subject
Instruction for language learning [TPRS]

# data[].attributes.body
Teaching Proficiency through Reading and Storytelling [TPRS] is an input-based approach for teaching languages that focuses on the systematic instruction of vocabulary within a highly comprehensible, personalized and contextualized manner within the principles of Second Language Acquisition [SLA] (Fuller, 2002; Fleishman & Roy, 2005). TPRS rose to prominence in the mid-’90s as an American framework model for teaching foreign languages, focusing more on oral connections (Ray & Contee, 2004). The framework breaks down lessons into three distinct phases [Step 1 - Establish meaning/context] , [Step 2 – Spoken Class Story], [Step 3 – Reading to whole class] backed by a teacher-led enquiry technique called ‘Circling,’ which involves asking students simple questions about an introduced topic in the target language (Ray & Contee, 2004).

This can include vocab, grammar, past and present / future tenses of verbs and adjectives. Students' first language is used as a reference point for their understand and they use inferencing and analysing processes to create the connections (Bloom, 1956). Staying 'in bounds' is also important for TPRS instruction to provide students with a safety net, this is demonstrated by using words that only students know, or immediate translating new words on the board and using them in a contextualised sentence for them to try out (De Costa & Samari, 2015).

# data[].attributes.body
Blended learning is a pedagogical approach in which language students can learn (at least in part) through the delivery of content and instruction via an online LMS (i.e. Compass) and other forms of digital media. Over the course of the unit, students gain some element of student control over the pathways and rate that they can learn at (Iowa State University, 2019). This could allow my students to create a customized and integrated approach to their learning. Blended learning is often combined with a flipped-classroom approach to teaching, to save time and homework elements of a course are reversed. This approach supports the framework outlined by the Department of Education (2019) for Multimodal Literacies that support various learner styles and abilities, Langauge students can view short videos or other multimedia content asynchronously before my classes (link to history/shopping unit) - the time used in class is instead used for activities based around the content (or module) instead of introducing first.

Naturally, facilitating an environment for a blended approach for my students requires a few key elements:

Explaining to students my expectations of their role in this teaching format (i.e. they are responsible for accessing it outside of school).

Creating a well-organized online course space (i.e. using a Canvas course structure)

Implementing and using a universal system such as Dropbox, Google Drive, Quizleet or Compass (LMS) to ensure that unit content is accessible to a diverse learner group (i.e. those with illness, disability, other disruptions).

Develop high-quality multi-media resources

Creating videos that are short that keep students' attention (no longer than 5 mins in length).

Creating online assignments and that support Rich-task assessments to accompany videos and other information

Creating meaningful online classroom activities to engage language students in their learning and allow them to apply it.

# data[].attributes.headline
Thinking about language acquisition - The need for students to engage in Japanese within the digital and the real world

# data[].attributes.subject
Thinking about language acquisition - The need for students to engage in Japanese within the digital and the real world

# data[].attributes.body
Identified by the School Curriculum and Standards Authority as one of six (6) key languages in Australia, (along with Chinese, Italian, Indonesian, German and French); the teaching of Japanese has become crucial in building upon the already established intercultural bonds between Australian and the people of Japan (ACARA, 2019). The future ‘pivot’ towards Asia will have a cascading impact on the future generations of young students, and this intention is demonstrated within both the current forms of National and State education curriculums. The cross-curricular capabilities of: ‘Australia’s Engagement with Asia,’ ‘Intercultural Understanding’ and ‘Ethical Understanding' offer an insight into the shared roles that Australia and Japan play and the embedded content that is taught in the Japanese Language area (ACARA, 2019).

Delivering this reality requires teachers to provide digital experiences that students can connect with and adheres to what ACARA outlines as the ICT Capability within F -10 and across all Learning Areas (ACARA, 2019). Although in during my language placements, I have seen teachers at times struggle to use technologies that are 'transformative' for students' learning (Leask & Prachler, 2013), and while 'gamification' can be useful for engaging many student types - it might not help them acquire and retain macro skills in a real-world context, nor help them acquire the language at a suitable level (Kapp, 2012). This is despite ICT needing to be used in our Australian teaching standards (AITSL) of 2.6, 3.4 and 4.5 - which all involve elements of professional practice that require the usage of digital technologies to support student learning (AITSL, 2019).

However,  while many the grammatical mechanics of the Japanese language are often taught throughout the 7 -12 Years - I have also observed many mannerisms, social norms, kinetic and body movements that are unique to the Japanese, not taught. This is largely due to Australia's geographic location and distance from Japan, thus many cultural scenarios need to be 'simulated' and modelled to students in both practice and context (DET, 2019). As students often struggle to see the relevance with the skills that they are acquiring and under the current framework - it is important to create and facilitate tasks that connect the social scenarios within a broader context - as secondary students often miss this when forming a language (Ray & Contee, 2004).

# data[].attributes.headline
Theories for language acquisition and instruction

# data[].attributes.subject
Theories for language acquisition and instruction

# data[].attributes.body
While adapting pedagogical approaches such as CLIL and TPRS and a flipped / blended model for delivery for language learning could allow language students to be far more prepared and interconnected to assessment tasks due to the interconnectivity and opportunities that Information Communication Technologies [ICT] can bring in supporting a wide range of students and learner types (Leask & Pachler, 2013). Facilitating different learner types is also critical due to multiple intelligences and the various ways in which students can present in their engagement and learning (Duchesne & McMaugh, 2016). I have come to understand that I will need to utilise a range of different pedagogies and frameworks (below) in order to respond to my students learning styles. I have selected these as a part of my PD / PL, and to further improve my ability to respond to my students' disengagement and needs (Churchil et al., 2016).

# data[].attributes.body
CLIL [Content Language Integrated Learning] CLIL - is a radically updated pedagogical approach to language learning that helps students function and interacting within a globalised and multicultural world. The ethos around curriculum planning adheres to the mantra that 'one size does not fit all' and teachers are encouraged to scaffold tasks and facilitate student' learning by focusing on the cognitive and higher-order thinking tasks (Bloom, 1956) through collaborative Group-Based Learning [GBL] (Duchesne & McMaugh, 2016).

CLIL offers a clear progression of knowledge and understanding that is aligned to the curriculum standards and is linked to the macro skills of reading, listening, writing and speaking (Coyle, Hood & Marsh, 2010). Other benefits are that it introduces students to the mechanics of the target language while immersing them through the interests of their subjects such as Art, Physical Education, Language Analysis and Mathematics (Dale, Tanner & Thornbury, 2012). A link to the 4'Cs of Creativity, Critical Thinking. Collaboration & Communication are embedded in the framework (Dalton-Pufffer, Nikula & Smit, 2010), with the aim to improve and ready learners with 21st Century Skills as outline in both Victorian and National curriculums (ACARA, 2019).

# data[].attributes.body
Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority [ACARA] (2019). 7 – 10 Japanese Curriculum. Retrieved 26 Oct 2019 from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/languages/japanese/?year=13667&strand=Communicating&strand=Understanding&capability=ignore&capability=Literacy&capability=Numeracy&capability=Information+and+Communication+Technology+%28ICT%29+Capability&capability=Critical+and+Creative+Thinking&capability=Personal+and+Social+Capability&capability=Ethical+Understanding&capability=Intercultural+Understanding&priority=Asia+and+Australia%E2%80%99s+Engagement+with+Asia&elaborations=false&scotterms=false&isFirstPageLoad=false

Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority [ACARA] (2019). ‘Cross-Curriculum Priorities.’ Retrieved 24 Oct 2019 from https://www.acara.edu.au/curriculum/cross-curriculum-priorities

Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority [ACARA] (2019). General Capabilities. Retrieved 26 Oct 2019 from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/general-capabilities/

Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership [AITSL] (2019). Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. Retrieved Oct 11 2019 from https:// www.vit.vic.edu.au/_data/assets/pdffile/0114/35015/AustralianProfessional-Standards-for-Teachers.pdf

Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook: The Cognitive Domain. David McKay,  New York.

Churchill, R., Godhino, S., Johnson, N. F., Keddie, A., Letts, W., Lowe, K., Mackay, J., McGill, M., Moss, J., Nagel, M. C., Shaw, K., Ferguson, P., Nicholson, P., & Vick, M. (2016). Teaching: making a difference (3rd ed.). Milton, Australia: John Wiley & Sons Australia.

Coyle, D., Hood. P., & Marsh, P. (2010). CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge University Press.

Dale, L., Tanner, R., & Thornbury, S. (2012). CLIL Activities: A Resource for Subject and Language Teachers. Cambridge University Press.

Dalton-Pufffer, C., Nikula, T., & Smit, U. (2010). Language Use and Language Learning in CLIL Classrooms. AILA Applied Linguistics Series.

De Costa, M., & Samari, R. (2015). Traditional Methods Versus TPRS: Effects on Introductory French Students at a Medium-Sized Public University in the Midwestern United States. All Theses, Dissertations, and Other Capstone Projects. 513. Minnesota State University – Mankato.

Department of Education and Training [DET]. (2019). Multimodal Literacies. Retrieved 29 Sept 2019 from https://www.education.vic.gov.au/school/teachers/teachingresources/discipline/english/literacy/readingviewing/Pages/litfocusmultimodal.aspx

Duchesne, S. & McMaugh, A. (2016). Educational Psychology: For Learning and Teaching (5th Ed.). Victoria, Australia: Cengage Learning Australia.

Department of Education Queensland. (2000). New Basics Project Technical Paper (Ver 3.). Brisbane.

Fuller, R. (2002). The Power of Context; Creating Meaning in Language and Thought. How to Use it to Teach Reading.

Fleischman, M. &  Roy, D. (2005). “Intentional Context in Situated Natural Language Learning.” Cognitive Machines. The Media Laboratory. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

iiTomo 3 +4 Student Textbook and Activity Book (2nd Ed.) Pearson Australia. ISBN: 9781488657146  https://www.pearson.com.au/products/A-C-Burrows-Y-et-al/A-C-Burrows-Yoshie-et-al/iiTomo-3-4-Student-Book-eBook-and-Activity-Book/9781488657146?R=9781488657146

Iowa State University - Centre For Excellence in Learning and Teaching [CELT]. (2019). Blended and Flipped Classroom. Retrieved from https://www.celt.iastate.edu/teaching/teaching-format/blended-learning-and-the-flipped-classroom/

Kapp, K. M. (2012). The Gamification of Learning and Instruction: Game-Based Methods and Strategies for Training and Education. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Leask, M. & Pachler, N. (2013). Learning to teach using ICT in the secondary school: a companion to school experience. Retrieved 30 Sept 2019 from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com

Ray, B., & Contee, S. (2004). Fluency Through TPR Storytelling: Achieving Real Language Acquisition in School (4th Ed). Command Performance Language Institute, Blaine Ray Workshops. ISBN0-929724-21-6.

Thompson, G., & McKinley J. (2018). Integration of content and language learning: TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching. 1 (PDF). Retrieved 10 Oct 2019.

Tomlinson, C. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandra.

Victorian Curriculum Assessment Authority [VCAA] (2019). F-10 Curriculum. Retrieved 27 Oct 2019 https://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/Pages/foundation10/f10index.aspx

Victorian Curriculum Assessment Authority [VCAA] (2019). Japanese 7 -10 Sequence. Retrieved 22 Oct 2019 from http://victoriancurriculum.vcaa.vic.edu.au/languages/japanese/introduction/scope- and-       sequence#

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded Formative Assessment: Hawker Brownlow, Melbourne: Australia.

# data[].attributes.body
This digital PBL uses Unit 4 from the iiTomo 3+4 Textbook title 'どこでかいものをしますか' that looks at the shopping customs and practices between Australia and Japan. All class activities and assessments [Rich Tasks] (Education Queensland, 2000) meet the outcomes and descriptors outlined in both the Year 9 and 10 bands of the Victorian (VCAA) and the National Curriculum (ACARA). The aim is to create an authentic and engaging learning experience for students to demonstrate their skills using ICT and having 'real world' understanding demonstrated through specific language pedagogies and co-constructed learning (Vygotsky, 1978).

# data[].attributes.body
During my final Ready to Teach placement of Term 3 / 4 of 2019 at a secondary school in the Western suburbs of Melbourne, I encountered varying levels of student' engagement and achievement within the Years 7, 9 and 11 Japanese classes that I taught. This was presented from 4 different elements; And I came to understand that my current Year 9 students were clearly underperforming and not at the Victorian curriculum standard, while my Year 7s are operating at a level that was currently towards the end of the Year 8 band.

This was due to the marked difference in engagement, ability and assessment outcomes between my mainline Year 9s and my Year 7 LEAP class (Learning Enhancement and Achievement Program). Although there was the usage of ICT / BYODs within both of my Year 7 and 9 classes, the curriculum and unit tasks were not written in a way that allowed for a truly transformative and 'integrated' culture of ICT usage during Japanese and other subjects. Many students were also kinesthetic learners and were disengaged as they felt that language learning had become formulaic and 'textbook' in nature.

Another concern was that many students from my mainline Year 9 class were often absent and disconnected - leading to fractured learning of Japanese. This factor played a large part in many students displaying a limited command of the language and application in context, throughout the 5 key macro-areas; viewing, writing, speaking, listening and reading. Students were often unable to connect their own self-interests to Japanese at school and home, nor self-identify to learning the Japanese language, as the school saw them as separate learning areas and not cross-disciplinary. This has a detrimental effect on the senior years of the curriculum, as students often 'drop' Japanese after Year 9, and select another subject that they have more interest in and greater academic understanding of.