The Effects of Embedded Learning on Students’ Performance in EFL Classes, Foundation Year, College of Education, Tishk International University

Kanar Zirak Haseeb Chicho; Lanja Abdulrazzaq Dabbagh

doi:10.25212/lfu.qzj.5.1.14

Authors

Kanar Zirak Haseeb Chicho Department of English Language Teaching, College of education, University of Tishk International, Erbil, Kurdistan Region, Iraq
Lanja Abdulrazzaq Dabbagh Department of English, College of Languages, University of Salahaddin, Erbil, Kurdistan Region, Iraq

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25212/lfu.qzj.5.1.14

Keywords:

Embedded Learning, EFL classroom, speaking, motivation, activities

Abstract

This research paper addresses the effects of Embedded Learning on students’ performance in EFL classes. The first chapter is the introduction containing the aims, research question, and hypothesis. Chapter two is the literature review of the study which contains definitions of embedded learning, benefits of embedded learning, previous works on embedded learning, the importance of embedded learning in EFL classes. Chapter three is the conclusion. The paper is experimental. The participants are 42 students of foundation in the college of education, Tishk International University. The aim of the paper is to highlight the role of the Embedded Learning approach in improving speaking skills. Students of the foundation have experimented with embedded learning strategies. The data is collected from pre-post-tests. This study will affect teachers and students to investigate more about improving speaking skill through embedded learning.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Badke, W. (2010). Why information literacy is invisible. Communications in Information Literacy, 4, 129–141

Chamot, A. U., & Keatley, C. W. (2003). Learning strategies of adolescent low literacy Hispanic ESL students. Paper presented at the 2003 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

De La Paz, S., & Graham, S. (2002). Explicitly teaching strategies, skills, and knowledge: Writing instruction in middle school classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 687–698.

Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Towards better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38, 181–199

Grenfell, M., & Harris, V. (1999). Modern languages and learning strategies: In theory and practice. London: Routledge.

Hanline, M. F., Nunes, D., & Worthy, M. B. (2007). Augmentative and alternative communication in the early childhood years. Young Children, 62(4), 78–82.

Hart & Risley, 1968; Horn et al., 2000; Pretti-Frontczak & Bricker, 2004).

Horn, E., & Banerjee, R. (2009). Understanding curriculum modifications and embedded learning opportunities in the context of supporting all children’s success. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40,406-415

Horn, E., Lieber, J., Li, S., Sandall, S., & Schwartz, I. (2000). Supporting young children’s IEPgoals in inclusive settings through embedded learning opportunities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 20, 208-223.

Hsiao, T.-Y. (2004). Testing a social psychological model of strategy use with students of English as a foreign language. Psychological Reports, 95, 1059– 1071.

Hunter, K. (2004). The efficacy of embedded instruction for students with developmental disabilities enrolled in general education classes. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 6, 214–227.

Kashinath, S., Woods, J., & Goldstein, H. (2006). Enhancing generalized teaching strategy use in daily routines by parents of children with autism. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49(3), 466–485

Leonard, B. R., & Daoust, P. M. (1994). Enhanced small group instruction using choral responding and student interaction for children with Autism and Developmental Disabilities. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 99, 60–73.

Lieber, J., Horn, E., Palmer, S., & Fleming, K. (2008). Access to the general education curriculum for preschoolers with disabilities: Children’s school success. Exceptionality, 16(1), 18–32

Losardo, A., & Bricker, D. D. (1994). Activity-based intervention and direct instruction: A comparison study. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 98, 744–765.

Macaro, E. (2001). Learning strategies in foreign and second language classrooms. London: Continuum.

Morgante, J. D. (2002). Embedding and distributing constant time delay in circle time and transitions. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 22, 14–25

Mulligan, M., Guess, D., Holvoet, J., & Brown, F. (1980). The individualized curriculum sequencing model (I): Implications from research on massed, distributed, and spaced trial training. Journal of the Assocaition for the Severely Handicapped, 5, 325–336

Odom, S. L. (2009). The tie that binds: Evidencebased practice, implementation science, and outcomes for children. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 29, 53–61

Olivares-Cuhat, G. (2002). Learning strategies and achievement in the Spanish writing classroom: A case study. Foreign Language Annals, 35(5), 561–570.

Parker, M. A., & Schuster, J. W. (2002). Effectiveness of simultaneous prompting on the acquisition of observational and instructive feedback stimuli when teaching a heterogenous group of high school students. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37, 89–104.

Pretti-Frontczak, K. L., & Bricker, D. D. (2004). An activity-based approach to early intervention (3rd ed.). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

Pretti-Frontczak, K., & Bricker, D. (2001). Use of the embedding strategy during daily activities by early childhood education and early childhood special education teachers. InfantToddler Intervention, 11, 111-128.

Sandall, S., Hemmeter, M. L., Smith, B. J., & McLean, M. E. (2005).DEC recommended practices: A comprehensive guide for practical application in early intervention/early childhood special education. Longmont, CA: Sopris West.