Analyzing a faculty learning community strategy based on a process-genre approach supported by videos to develop the writing competence of English teaching students

Análisis de una estrategia de comunidad de aprendizaje docente basada en un enfoque de proceso y género respaldado por videos para desarrollar la competencia de escritura de estudiantes de pedagogía en Inglés

ABSTRACT

The primary purpose of this inquiry is to analyze the impacts of a teaching and learning strategy designed and implemented by a Chilean Faculty Learning Community (FLC) intended to develop the writing competence of student-teachers of an English Teaching Program. The FLC-led strategy was implemented through an eight-step cycle based on the process-genre approach and supported by educational videos. FLC members guided this cycle during writing sessions at the four levels of the English Linguistic Competence course at Universidad Católica de Temuco. The FLC implemented this experience to address the challenge of serving diverse students’ learning needs and meet the requirements of the national English proficiency standards required by the Chilean Ministry of Education. The FLC examined this experience focusing on students’ writing tasks results and their perceptions of the use of videos in the process, oriented by an impact and evaluation framework of teaching innovations and an action research design. The ages of trainee English teachers who participated in this innovation range between 18 and 22 years old. Students’ writing tests results were analyzed and compared to the suggested CEFR outcomes per level. Moreover, students shared their perceptions towards the use of videos through focus groups. Results show that most students improved their writing performance, especially in content and organization. Furthermore, students perceived that videos helped them contextualize their writing process and contribute as a support resource embedded in classroom activities. Overall, this experience helped the FLC members identify changes resulting from the innovations and areas of improvement.

Keywords:
Active Teaching/learning strategies; Improving classroom teaching; Process-Genre Approach; Initial teacher education

RESUMEN

El propósito principal de esta investigación es analizar los impactos de una estrategia de enseñanza y aprendizaje diseñada e implementada por una Comunidad de Aprendizaje Docente (CAD) de Chile intencionada para el desarrollo de la competencia de escritura de los estudiantes de Pedagogía en Inglés en formación. La estrategia liderada por la CAD se implementó a través de un ciclo de ocho pasos basado en el enfoque de proceso-género y que se apoyó de videos educativos. Los miembros de la CAD guiaron dicho proceso durante las sesiones de escritura de los cuatro niveles del curso de Competencia Lingüística en la Universidad Católica de Temuco. La CAD implementó esta experiencia para abordar el desafío de atender las diversas necesidades de aprendizaje de los estudiantes y cumplir con los requisitos de los estándares nacionales de dominio del inglés requeridos por el Ministerio de Educación de Chile. La CAD examinó esta experiencia centrándose en los resultados de las tareas de escritura de los estudiantes y sus percepciones sobre el uso de videos en el proceso, bajo la guía del marco para la evaluación e impacto de innovaciones docentes y empleando un diseño de investigación acción. Las edades de los profesores de inglés en formación que participaron en esta innovación oscilan entre los 18 y los 22 años. Los resultados de las pruebas de escritura de los estudiantes se analizaron y compararon con los resultados sugeridos del MCER por nivel. Además, los estudiantes compartieron sus percepciones sobre el uso de videos mediante grupos focales. Los resultados muestran que la mayoría de los estudiantes mejoraron su desempeño en la competencia de escritura, especialmente en los ámbitos de contenido y organización. Además, los estudiantes percibieron que los videos les ayudaron a contextualizar su proceso de escritura y que contribuyen como un recurso de apoyo integrado en las actividades del aula. En general, esta experiencia ayudó a los miembros de FLC a identificar los cambios resultantes de las innovaciones y las áreas de mejora.

Palabras claves:
Estrategias activas de enseñanza/aprendizaje; Mejora de la enseñanza en el aula; Enfoque de género-proceso; Formación docente inicial

1. Introduction

Higher education is experiencing a transformation process in terms of scope and diversity, derived from students’ access massification (cf. Altbach et al., 2009:10). Most high-income and middle-income countries will soon exceed the 50% Gross Tertiary Enrolment Ratio (GTER) mark, and Chile has been part of this trend (cf. Marginson, 2016:416). Consequently, universities face challenges with greater participation from formerly under-represented student groups (cf. Crosling, 2008:9).

Thus, there is growing attention worldwide towards the quality of teaching, as institutions seek to promote sound practices that improve their graduates’ skills (cf. Henard, 2009:21). There is a need to involve all students in teaching and learning activities to help them thrive (cf. Quaye and Harper, 2015:2). According to Biggs (1999:58), a more diversified class brings a teaching challenge for faculty to create a teaching/learning context that addresses different needs and where all students engage in higher-order tasks.

English Pedagogy Programs in Chile illustrate this scenario. In this respect, a critical factor is a low level of Chilean students’ English language proficiency throughout K-12, which becomes an issue when students enter different English Teaching Programs at Chilean universities. Consequently, this scenario creates challenges for the faculty to help students meet the graduation expectations set by the Chilean Ministry of Education.

Studies on K-12 students’ proficiency in Chile show that although learning English is compulsory in the school system from the fifth to the twelfth grade, EFL Chilean learners do not develop the academic literacies required at the university level (cf. Arancibia, 2014:154). Moreover, in 2017, three out of ten students in the eleventh grade (high school) achieved the learning outcomes expected at the eighth grade (cf. Agencia de Calidad de la Educación, 2017:8). Experts believe that some factors that could potentially explain those results are the following: the low number of hours dedicated to learning English in the curriculum, insufficient English teacher preparation, and a lack of possibilities for students to speak in English in the classrooms (cf. Agencia de Calidad de la Educación, 2017:8).

For this reason, Initial English Teacher Education became an essential component of the Chilean government strategy (cf. Kamhi-Stein, Díaz, and de Oliveira, 2017:109). The Chilean Ministry of Education has sought different ways to increase English learning throughout the system. Chile is one of the countries where English learning impacts policy-making (cf. Kamhi-Stein, Díaz and de Oliveira, 2017:120). Chile is also one of the countries that have created and sustained national English Language Learning Programs (cf. Stanton and Fiszbein, 2019:7). More specifically, the Chilean Ministry of Education (MINEDUC henceforth) has had a significant role in shaping the English language curriculum and teaching for all schools across the country. Moreover, MINEDUC provides guidelines to support curriculum design that contributes to developing cognitive and professional skills, raising interest in different cultures, and easing access to knowledge` (cf. Ministerio de Educación de Chile, 2016:16).

However, the English learning goal has been far-reaching. Some experts suggest a lack of qualified English teachers in the Chilean educational system and low English proficiency in Chilean students when they enter English Pedagogy programs (cf. British Council, 2012:18). Other aspects relevant to this issue are poor accreditation results of some institutions that train future English Teachers, the lack of homogenous graduate profiles among universities, and the need for ongoing and mandatory English certification processes (cf. British Council, 2012:10).

The Center for Improvement and Experimentation and Pedagogical Innovations (CPEIP in Spanish) oversaw the creation of standards for Initial Teacher Education to address some of the challenges mentioned above. These standards were created to adjust or balance the way Chilean universities train future English teachers and meet the country’s needs (cf. Abrahams and Silva, 2017:115). These standards encompass a set of dimensions that future Chilean English teachers should accomplish during the program and which are to be assessed through MINEDUC’s National Initial Teaching Evaluation. For instance, some of these standards address criteria that emphasize understanding the school curriculum and its objectives, the students’ characteristics and learning needs, English teaching approaches and methods, and the teacher’s commitment to ongoing professional development (cf. MINEDUC, 2013:10). In this regard, pedagogical and disciplinary standards are available to guide future teachers’ processes in a global society, including English language competence, aligned with the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR henceforth). In this context, the CEFR works as the basis for “language syllabuses, curriculum guidelines, examinations” (Council of Europe, 2001:1).

According to Stanton and Fiszbein (2019:5), Latin American countries, including Chile, have made progress by creating standards for their English Teachers; however, these countries might still be struggling in the process of enforcing or evaluating these standards. Therefore, Faculty in English Teaching programs is compelled to find strategies that help students advance towards these requirements; for instance, developing writing skills in this context might represent a significant challenge.

Faculty involvement is critical in any innovation process. Hence, the OECD promotes bottom-up initiatives developed by Faculty who significantly reflect on teaching to contribute to education quality (cf. Henard, 2009:11). Scott and Scott (2014:511) extend this idea, sharing that Faculty can rapidly recognize and implement actions for improving teaching and learning quality. Therefore, this article focuses on analyzing a strategy designed and implemented by a Faculty Learning Community in an English Teaching Program. This community is formed by academic staff from the English Teaching Program at Universidad Católica de Temuco and an educational developer from its Center for Teaching Development and Innovation. This community goal is to improve instructional practices to support students’ learning. The strategy developed by this community, informed by the Chilean context, the process-genre approach, and the literature concerning educational videos, seeks to develop student teachers’ writing competence at an English Pedagogy Program in Chile across four levels. Therefore, the research question of this inquiry is: what are the impacts of an FLC-led strategy to develop the writing competence in an English Teaching Program from the students’ perspective?

To analyze this experience, the FLC drew from evaluation and impact framework, created to assess pedagogical innovations devised by FLCs at Universidad Católica de Temuco. One of the primary impetus for this framework was to capture changes to guide the creation of rich evidence to inform Faculty, educational developers, and institutional stakeholders. This framework encompasses impact categories (Faculty, Students, Students Learning Assistants and the Organization), impact variables informed by Chalmers and Gardiner’s (2015:66) framework (reactions, beliefs, change in practice, learning outcomes, and organizational change), and a variety of performance indicators (input, process, output, and outcome).

Among the impact categories that belong to this framework, “the students” is the most relevant one for this study. Members are interested in analyzing the experience from their students’ lenses. As impact variables, the community chose to explore: changes in students’ writing (learning outcomes) and students’ perceptions concerning educational videos (reactions).

Although embedded in the Chilean context, this FLC experience could potentially inform best practices in Initial English Teacher Education programs concerning pedagogical innovations to approach the needs of diverse student teachers intended to meet standards supported by national policy. Therefore, we seek to contribute to the empirical experiences of the English Pedagogy Initial Teacher Education programs, specifically those regarding developing writing skills through innovative approaches and resources developed by Faculty in specific settings. Improving students’ learning quality can emerge as part of a more in-depth analysis of teaching from a critical perspective concerned with social practice and a systematic and reflective inquiry that aims at faculty development (cf. Kember and McKay, 1996:528). In this inquiry, we seek to engage teacher education faculty interested in reflective practices from innovation processes.

2. FLC-led strategy: theoretical background

Writing is sometimes recognized as the most challenging skill (cf. Nunan, 1999:22; Tillema, 2012:59). Writing competence as a subset of English language competence involves producing genres, rhetorical features, and language-specific abilities (cf. Wolfe-Quintero et al., 1998:65). However, students can improve their writing composition with the appropriate teaching strategies (cf. Katilie, 2013:34). There are three main teaching approaches for writing development: the product approach, the process-oriented approach, and the genre-based approach.

The product approach underscores the use of form and syntax. Moreover, this approach focuses on rhetorical drills; it was often used along with audio-lingualism (cf. Rusinovci, 2015:700). Hence, as pedagogical practices evolved, this writing approach was replaced by the process-oriented approach.

The process-oriented approach focuses on how a text is written. The outcome does not play a significant role in this approach. A process-writing cycle is robust and offers guidelines to developing students’ writing skills through the stages of pre-writing, drafting, evaluating, and revising (cf. Ur, 2012:160). Most importantly, process-oriented approaches conceptualize the writer as the creator of the text and emphasize the cognitive processes involved in writing (cf. Flower and Hayes, 1981:367). The process-oriented approach is also student-centered, which could be advantageous because it shows a problem to solve, allowing students to visualize the writing functionality (cf. Flower and Hayes, 198: 367). Writing is no longer seen as requested but as a necessity to the writer. This fact facilitates establishing a purpose that makes the generation of ideas efficient (cf. Flower and Hayes, 198: 368). Saavedra and Espinoza (2019:79) developed a study in a Chilean Initial English Language Teacher Education Program using the process-oriented approach. In this experience, pre-service teachers perceived that the process-oriented approach enhanced their writing and reflection skills.

The third approach to writing development is the genre-based approach. This approach focuses on the social context in which writing is being produced. ‘Genre’ is defined as a communication event in which the participating members have a set of shared communication goals (Swales, 1990:45). It is based on the principle that any genre has several characteristics and features, such as a) genre has a particular communication event, b) genre has a specific purpose (goal-oriented), c) genre is different and various in accordance to its typical features, d) each genre has limitations and rules including content, physical form, and shape, and e) every genre belongs to a particular discourse community (Swales, 1990:48). Firkins, Forey, and Sengupta (2007:3) elaborated a more comprehensive way of developing a genre-based approach. The authors propose three stages a) modeling a text, b) joint construction of a text, and c) independent construction of a text. In the first stage, the function of the text is explained, and its purpose is clarified. In the second stage, students are encouraged to work with the text to become aware of vocabulary usage, text structure, and grammatical patterns, and in the third stage, students write independently.

Based on a mixture of the last two approaches, the process-genre approach takes a diversified perspective, including the strengths of the genre and process approaches. As Rusinovci (2015:704) states, the process-genre approach allows a more in-depth exploration of text models. The process-genre model suggests explicit instructions in each stage by providing a particular genre input (Badger and White, 2000:159). According to these authors, this approach can also be contextualized to real-life situations.

Overall, research has contributed to enhancing the writing quality in different aspects and has offered guidance in identifying learning gaps that might be explored. Improving English teaching and learning experiences has also been approached from a more generic perspective since an increasing number of initiatives seek to improve writing teaching quality through technology (cf. Henard, 2009:79). For instance, educational videos are essential as a content-delivery tool, helpful when considering cognitive load, student engagement, and active learning (Brame, 2016:1). Moreover, videos show promise as a medium to communicate content and transform pedagogical methods; however, Fyflied et al. (2019:4) warn that using videos should not be regarded as transformative per se. Videos can be directed towards different outcomes. Some videos can show factual and procedural content, directly instruct, provide examples, show real-life practices and contexts, show complex procedures and trigger better practices (Winslett, 2014:489).

Some recommendations for video design are that they have to be brief and linked to specific learning goals (Brame, 2016:3). Audio and visual elements complement the process, and signaling is used to emphasize content (Brame, 2016:3). Besides, videos need to be integrated into a didactic model that allows exchanging content to reach learning goals and be followed up by questions and assignments that actively involve students in the learning process (cf. Brame, 2016:5).

3. Method

Design

Following the study’s purpose, which is to analyze an FLC-led strategy, based on a process-genre approach and supported by educational videos in trainee English teachers, we used action research to achieve a deeper understanding of the student perspective with a focus on their writing results and perceptions towards the use of videos. As the quality of teaching and learning is of utmost importance, action research projects have become a valuable space to empower faculty development (cf. Kember and McKay, 1996:528). More specifically, this is a practical action research design that analyzes local practice and involves action plan implementation (cf. Creswell, 2018:576). This design is appropriate to inquire about practice improvement in Initial Teacher Education (cf. McAteer, 2014:45).

This deeper understanding can be achieved through qualitative and quantitative data analysis (cf. Creswell, 2018:174). Concerning quantitative data, descriptive statistical analysis of a writing test for each Linguistic competence course was used to identify students’ writing performance at the end of the term in which the strategy was implemented. As qualitative data, focus groups based on grounded theory were developed to characterize students’ perspectives towards educational videos as part of the course’s pedagogical innovation.

English Pedagogy Program at Universidad Católica de Temuco

One of the English Teaching Program curriculum’s main goals is to promote student-teachers’ English communicative competence. In this context, fifth-year students must certify their level of English through a Cambridge international exam. For this reason, most first-year students participate in an initial assessment that places them according to the CEFR levels A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, and C2, ranging from basic levels (A1, A2), pre-intermediate (B1), intermediate (B2) and advanced levels of the English language (C1 and C2). Approximately 50% of the students who enter the program are rated at an A1 or A2 level (basic level). Over the years, this issue has become one of the most significant challenges for the academic staff.

Process-genre Model with Educational Videos in English Pedagogy

The pedagogical innovation led by the FLC was included in all four levels of the Linguistic Competence course of the English Pedagogy Program in 2019. The English Teaching Faculty Learning Community (ETFLC henceforth), led by the English Teaching Program Director, supported this choice as a meso-level strategy.

The writing process under this FLC-led strategy included eight steps. These steps were adapted from a framework suggested by Saavedra and Campos (cf. 2019:79) which considers the process-oriented approach, and Badger and White’s (2000:159) model, which considers explicit instruction for a particular genre input. In the first step, students were invited to watch a selected educational video before attending a class. This video was later analyzed with the course instructor, who facilitated the learning process to raise students’ awareness of each text’s rhetorical moves and vocabulary, grammatical patterns, and language conventions. In the second step, the course instructor assigned a writing task, where students had to analyze a situation. For example, any of the tasks from Cambridge international exams such as this PET task: “your teacher has asked to write a story: your story must begin with this sentence: Jo looked at the map and decided to go left” (Cambridge English, 2016:24). Here, students were encouraged to think about the problem to solve, the audience, and their writing purpose.

Step three involved brainstorming ideas and organizing them in an outline. Step four was devoted to writing the first draft. Afterward, as the fifth step, language assistants gave feedback based on content and communicative achievement criteria, drawing upon standards set by Cambridge Assessment English. Faculty members also provided input based on the text’s organization and help students negotiating meaning through writing as part of the sixth step.

Step seven focused on writing the second draft and considering the language assistant and Faculty’s feedback. Once the second draft was ready, step eight involved the language assistants using a writing editing application to give feedback on the language usage criterion. Regarding this step, only students from the third and fourth years received feedback using this tool. For students from the first and second year of the program, the language feedback was provided by adding “comments” in a Word document. The reason for this decision was to prevent students from feeling overwhelmed by the number of mistakes they may have made in the writing process.

All students used feedback to write their final version of the text. The whole writing process took up to four weeks, with a writing session of two hours weekly. Students were assessed at the beginning, during, and at the end of the process.

Regarding the use of videos, there were two main kinds of videos included in this process. The first kind was a selection of video resources available online, which helped facilitate classroom activities. The second kind was specially created to support the process-genre model. The ETFLC created these videos along with language assistants. To frame this creation process, Faculty established writing sources for each course. The result was a framework that considered the Cambridge exam guidelines, aligned with the CEFR and each level’s learning outcomes (see Table 1).

Table 1
English Pedagogy Matrix for Writing Development. Source: English Pedagogy Faculty Learning Community.

Courses	Texts to write	Videos
Initial Linguistic	Short messages; Note; Email; Postcard; Informal letter	Informal Letter
Competence I		How to write a paragraph
Initial Linguistic	Emails; Informal letter; Story	Story
Competence II
Intermediate Linguistic	Formal emails & letters; Review	Review
Competence I
Intermediate Linguistic	Formal email /letters; Report	Report
Competence II
Advanced Intermediate Linguistic	Formal email /letters; Report; Opinion Essay	Opinion Essay
Competence I
Advanced Intermediate Linguistic	Formal email /letters; Review; Descriptive Essay	Descriptive Essay
Competence II
Advanced Linguistic	Formal email /letters; Proposal; Argumentative Essay Part 1 (Macrostructure)	Argumentative Essay Part 1
Competence I
Advanced Linguistic	Formal letters and emails; Argumentative Essay Part 2 (Cohesion, Punctuation)	Argumentative Essay Part 2
Competence II
Advanced Linguistic	Essays; Reports; Reviews	Videos from previous semesters
Competence III

After designing this writing framework, undergraduate language assistants, who followed the ETFLC guidelines, wrote video scripts for each level. The guidelines included describing a given genre with its corresponding rhetorical moves, allowing students to go back to the information when necessary. After that, the ETFLC members validated the scripts. This process also involved voice recordings by native speakers and an editing and post-editing process. The final stage involved a new validation process carried out by the ETFLC members.

Sample Extract of the Video “How to Write a Story.”

Data Collection Instruments

As part of this action-research inquiry informed by an impact and evaluation framework, the data collection instruments resulted from standardized writing test results aligned with CEFR and focus groups intended to explore students’ perceptions of educational videos.

Writing Tests

English Pedagogy students’ performance was measured using a writing test applied in each Linguistic Competence level at the end of the semester. The participants were first, second, third, and fourth-year students of the English Pedagogy Program (n=175). The writing test was a Cambridge English Test, which is standardized and has been validated internationally. Similar tasks were generally used in the program to assess students because they contribute to a better understanding of their performance.

Focus Groups

The information regarding students’ perceptions was collected through focus groups. The main objective of gathering this data was to know the social meaning developed by students concerning the course’s videos (cf. Canales, 2006:265). Four focus groups were held with eight students from different levels of the program. Following grounded theory guidelines, the questions were posed to promote that student teachers expressed themselves on relevant topics regarding educational videos. The role of the interviewer was limited only to clarifying statements. Permission to record was requested, making clear that any reference that could identify the participants would be omitted.

Data Analysis

Following the conceptual orientations of an evaluation and impact framework and the chosen impact categories and variables, data analysis in this inquiry involved analyzing writing test results applied in Linguistic Competence courses and the students’ perceptions concerning videos.

Students’ Performance in Linguistic Competence Courses

Students’ writing test results were analyzed by Faculty members in charge of each course (called Linguistic Competence) to identify writing proficiency. Content, Communicative Achievement, Organization, and Language criteria were considered with a five-point scale adapted for each level. The scale’s achievement levels were unsatisfactory, unsatisfactory-satisfactory (first transition level), satisfactory, satisfactory-competent (second transition level), and competent. For inter-rater reliability, community members discussed criteria and samples of previous student work in ETFLC meetings.

Focus Groups

Focus group data were processed using grounded theory to identify categories that the actors themselves considered relevant in terms of perception about implementing the process-genre approach supported by videos. The focus groups’ coding was carried out using the Atlas Ti software, version 5.4, in audio format. We established codes that allowed open coding to establish relationships between categories, expressed as axial coding (cf. Strauss and Corbin, 2002:134).

4. Results and discussions

The general analysis of the results focused on two levels. The first one covers the progress in the writing criteria regarding content, communicative achievement, organization, and language concerning writing tests applied at the end of the semester. The second level deals with the students’ perceptions towards educational videos both selected and developed by the ETFLC.

Exit Writing Test Results

The results concerning the five writing evaluation criteria are described below, specifying the information divided by each criterion and providing it according to the students’ level. Each criterion’s status is presented on a five-point scale: ‘Unsatisfactory,’ ‘Satisfactory,’ and ‘Competent.’ Moreover, the ETFLC included transition levels expressed as ‘Unsatisfactory-Satisfactory’ (first transition level) and ‘Satisfactory-Competent’ (second transition level).

Content as a criterion for evaluation was related to the student’s ability to adjust to the writing task by providing relevant information. Figure 1 shows the performance concerning this criterion. Most of the writing tests’ results were at the Satisfactory-Competent and Competent levels, weighing 38%, 45%, 72%, and 53%, respectively. Overall, most students were able to interpret the writing task, highlighting relevant information for the reader.

Figure 1
Content Criteria Results in Writing Evaluations across Different Linguistic Competence Courses. Source: Final Writing Exam English Pedagogy Program.

The communicative achievement criterion relates to language conventions concerning the task and significantly communicating complex ideas. In this sense, Figure 2 shows how this evaluation criterion was more prevalent in the Satisfactory-Competent levels, showing a range between 43% and 55%. The majority of the students could adequately communicate straightforward and complex ideas.

Figure 2
Communicative Achievement Criteria Results in Writing Evaluations across Different Linguistic Competence Courses. Source: Final Writing Exam English Pedagogy Program.

The organization criterion concerns the text’s cohesion as a unit, which implied using discursive markers and organizational patterns to help readers make sense of the text. Figure 3 shows how this evaluation criterion moved towards the Competent level in most of the courses. The percentages expressed an achievement of the criterion that ranged from 48% to 60%, showing that the texts were well organized and coherent, based on the organizational pattern and discursive markers. The only course that showed a Satisfactory-Competent level was Advanced Linguistic Competence.

Figure 3
Organization Criteria Results in Writing Evaluations Across Different Linguistic Competence Courses. Source: Final Writing Exam English Pedagogy Program.

The Language criterion represents the extensive use of pertinent vocabulary and the controlled use of complex grammatical structures. In Figure 4, most students achieved a Satisfactory-Competent level, ranging from 48% to 59%.

Figure 4
Language Criteria Results in Writing Evaluations across Different Linguistic Competence Courses. Source: Final Writing Exam English Pedagogy Program.

Focus Groups

The results showed two semantic networks regarding the use of videos. The first network referred to students’ perspectives about the educational videos developed by the ETFLC and their relationship with writing competence development. The second category approached students’ views concerning the general contribution of all videos used in the course, whether created or selected by the ETFLC. This second emerging category was associated with the incidental benefits of videos.

We identified students’ references to diverse subjects’ vocabulary and grammar and their awareness of text types within the first semantic network. Regarding vocabulary, the students suggested that “even in the subtitles, there were words that we did not know, and we were just like oh, and out of nowhere, we started using new words that we did not know before” (Student [FG3:15]).

Considering grammar, students shared that “it is different, there are formal and informal styles, so for all of us, for me actually, it is easier to use an informal style, because it is how you really talk with your classmate or with anyone, but when it is formal, you have to use certain words, you can’t say this; besides, you can’t use contractions. Those are the ones that are usually taken out in videos; they use a specific structure” (Student [FG2:39]). The previous comment shows that videos produced by the ETFLC allowed students to identify specific formal grammatical features. Besides, the videos helped students’ learning process, especially the grammatical structures that are adequate for certain text types.

Concerning text types, students suggested that videos “are a great contribution because they help us to know how a type of text is really structured, for example, a report” (Student [FG4:19]). The texts in these videos were connected to formal academic contexts, which tended to be unfamiliar or less used in their daily lives.

The creation of texts was present throughout the course; it is what the students referred to as ‘creating a draft.’ In this context, the students reported that the videos contextualized the content and made grammatical structures explicit. Consequently, students stated that: “We receive feedback from Faculty because we do not only write one draft, but two or three and the third draft is marked, and the other two are for feedback from classmates or Faculty. Here the video provides the idea; it provides context; it expresses how to do it” (Student [FG4:36]).

Regarding the second network, which concerned the general contribution of selected and created videos, we found that emerging categories were not directly linked to writing development. Nonetheless, they show different elements that contribute transversally to student learning.

Students reported that the videos support incidental learning processes related to the development of listening and speaking skills. Regarding listening, students asserted that “you get used to listening to it and then you can learn from it, you can associate certain words, certain accents with what they say” (Student [FG1:08]). Here, the student established a relationship between improving listening and learning words and English accents. The use of the videos facilitated corrections and consolidation of students’ learning. For instance, students mentioned that “suddenly, due to the accents, there are words that are pronounced differently and you think they were pronouncing it wrong, but not really, it was just another accent” (Student [FG3:44]).

Concerning speaking skills, a student commented: “For example, there are TED talks that help us with intonation and how to cope when giving a talk, to speak to larger groups of people, body language, and everything in that sense” (Student [FG2:04]). Students regarded videos as a model to follow in real communicative settings: “The videos of people talking about any topic help you to know how to express yourself when talking about any topic” (Student [FG3:32]).

Regarding the second semantic network, students valued videos in the teaching and learning process as a resource. However, they did not regard them to be the primary teaching technique: “we see them as a complement; we do not see them as much more than that. They are like a foundation and are not the focus of our classes; obviously, they contribute” (Student [FG4:36]). Videos were a resource that enabled the development of English language skills. However, they were seen as a medium and not the purpose of the process: “they were like a base for us to learn from there because they provided us a clearer idea of what it was going to be [...] so it was like a base from which we could learn more from there” (Student [FG2:08]). This comment supports the idea of video as a medium and complement.

Discussion

The English Teaching Faculty Learning Community (ETFLC) developed a teaching and learning strategy embedded in an action research study and informed by an impact and evaluation framework. The strategy aimed to improve English student teachers’ writing to help students gradually meet the Chilean Ministry of Education standards. These standards set the bar in terms of the country’s needs and encompass the dimensions expected in future Chilean English teachers (cf. Abrahams and Silva, 2017:115; MINEDUC, 2013:10).

A genre-process approach to writing supported by videos was used as a foundation to respond to the challenge of students’ diversity, especially for those belonging to underrepresented groups (cf. Crosling, 2008:9). The ETFLC sought ways to promote teaching quality in a way that helped all students thrive by engaging in higher-order tasks (cf. Biggs, 1999:58; Hernard, 2009:31; Quaye and Harper, 2015:2). These higher-order tasks included developmental awareness of the writing stages, the facilitation of the cognitive processes involved in writing, the solution of problems through writing (cf. Ur, 2012: 160; Flower and Hayes, 1981:367), the acknowledgment of genres, the exploration of text models, and the use of gender input (cf. Badger and White, 2000:159; Rusinovci, 2015:700; Swales, 1990:45).

Keeping in mind the gaps in the Chilean K-12 context (cf. Agencia de la Calidad de la Educación, 2017:8; Arancibia, 2014:154) and the focus on Initial Teacher Education in English teachers education in policy (cf. Kamhi-Stein, Díaz, and de Oliveira, 2017:109), the ETFLC developed a bottom-up initiative at the meso-level from the review of the literature and the lessons learned from an ongoing and situated reflection process (cf. Henard, 2009:21; Scott and Scott, 2014:511). The ETFLC was committed to making a difference in the students’ learning process. Using an impact and evaluation framework and an action research design, members focused on the experience from the students’ perspectives: their performance measured through a writing task and the perceptions towards using educational videos selected and produced by the community. The writing task, aligned with national expectations, evinced the ETFLC’s interest in creating a monitoring system capable of evaluating students’ progress throughout the program (Stanton and Fiszbein, 2019:37).

The strategy used in this experience helped students improve their performance in writing, mostly related to the task’s interpretation, including relevant information and the awareness of using appropriate organizational patterns and discourse markers to fulfill the communicative function. Results are consistent with Rusinovci’s (2015:704) findings, who claim that a genre-based approach allows an in-depth approach to texts. In this sense, the emphasis on the cognitive process allows for the visualization of writing functionality (cf. Flower and Hayes, 1981:367). Thus, writing tasks acquire meaning based on the audience to whom they are assigned, the communicative function expressed in the genre to be written, and a purpose that facilitates the generation of ideas.

Results showed progress in each Linguistic Competence level, emphasizing that being clear about an approach and implementing a systematic process can help attain a greater degree of communicative competence. However, some students did not achieve the expected level in the communication achievement criterion (19%), showing the need to strengthen students’ support to facilitate complex ideas through writing. Moreover, a similar percentage of students struggled with the organization (18%), evincing some difficulties in text cohesion.

Therefore, it is possible to acknowledge the effectiveness of the genre-process approach in the UC Temuco English Pedagogy program for most students as the majority reached satisfactory levels. Genre is a particular communication event with its distinctive characteristics, and it serves the purposes of a specific discursive community (cf. Swales, 1990:45). Consequently, the writing sequence adapted from Saavedra and Campos (2019:79), in conjunction with the proposal of Firkins, Forey, and Sengupta (2007:3), offered theoretical underpinnings for the development of writing production, following the standards required by the Chilean Ministry of Education for English teachers at different levels of the program (cf. MINEDUC, 2014:20).

In this experience, the ETFLC could also recognize that videos became significant for students as a content delivery tool, as suggested by Brame (2016:3). Here, videos complemented and contextualized writing activities; therefore, as Fyfield et al. (2019:3) suggested, videos need to be integrated with classroom activities to be an effective contribution to learning. Videos were also an essential tool to showcase best practices in writing production (cf. Winslett, 2014:489). Students valued how the videos created by the ETFCL provided further insight into the genre, grammar, and vocabulary. The videos raised their awareness of new words, adequate grammatical structures for specific genres, and how texts were structured. Students believed that both created and selected videos helped them develop incidental learning related to their listening and speaking skills.

Moreover, the students’ perspective helped identify the scope of videos’ contributions to the learning process; videos need to be embedded into a clear didactic model to be regarded as useful (Brame, 2016:3). However, further studies would be needed to determine to which extent the videos helped across all four writing criteria. Overall, this inquiry shows that the involvement and reflective work of an FLC can be visible from the students’ perspective.

Conclusion

The English Teaching Faculty Learning Community (ETFLC) at Universidad Católica de Temuco designed and implemented a strategy to develop students’ writing skills, which was also analyzed from the students’ perspective. The innovative strategy was informed by a genre-process approach to writing and supported by educational videos selected and produced by the ETFLC. The students’ angle was informed by an impact and evaluation framework, embedded in an action research design and built from results on an end-of-term writing task and their comparison to expected outcomes for different levels and students’ perceptions regarding the use of educational videos selected and produced by ETFLC members. The analysis of this experience shows progress in most relevant criteria, such as content and language; however, more supports are needed in the organization and communicative achievement criteria, signaling some possible new pathways for exploration for the community. Concerning videos, students valued their contributions to their learning, recognizing these as valuable resources.

The teaching and learning process is intricate and requires constant evolution and attention to students’ needs; therefore, the ETFLC understands that this process is part of an iterative cycle, as informed by the action research literature. We acknowledge that the results are situated in a specific context of a Chilean regional university. Moreover, we believe that some potential future inquiries should include new adjustments regarding the communicative achievement criterion and focus on students’ perceptions of the overall experience. However, we surmise that engaging in processes to analyze a strategy devised collectively is a promising approach to improving teaching and learning from a local perspective, which helps address the needs of English Pedagogy Programs in Chile and beyond.

Acknowledgements

This research was carried out with the support of Universidad Católica de Temuco. Funding code PID 411-4096.

References

• Abrahams, M. J., & Ríos, P. S. (2017). 6.What happens with English in Chile? Challenges in teacher preparation. English Language Teaching in South America, 109-122. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783097982-009
  » https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783097982-009
• Altbach, P. G., Reisberg, L., & Rumbley, L. E. (2010). Trends in global higher education. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004406155
  » https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004406155
• Arancibia Aguilera, M. C. (2014). The design of a rubric to evaluate laboratory reports in astronomy: Academic literacy in the disciplines. PROFILE Issues in Teachers’ Professional Development, 16(1), 153-165. https://doi.org/10.15446/profile.v16n1.37232
  » https://doi.org/10.15446/profile.v16n1.37232
• Badger, R., & White, G. (2000). A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT Journal, 54(2), 153-160. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/54.2.153
  » https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/54.2.153
• Biggs, J. (1999). What the student does: Teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 18(1), 57-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436990180105
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436990180105
• Brame, C. J. (2016). Effective educational videos: Principles and guidelines for maximizing student learning from video content. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 15(4), es6. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-03-0125
  » https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-03-0125
• British Council. (2012). La formación de docentes de inglés en Chile: El desafío de la calidad y la pertinencia PIAP. https://www.piap.cl/seminarios/archivos/1er-seminario/informe-1er-seminario.pdf
  » https://www.piap.cl/seminarios/archivos/1er-seminario/informe-1er-seminario.pdf
• Burt, B. A. (2015). Student engagement in higher education: Theoretical perspectives and practical approaches for diverse populations (2nd edition) ed. by Stephen John Quaye and Shaun R. Harper. Journal of College Student Development, 56(3), 311-313. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2015.0026
  » https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2015.0026
• Cambridge English Language Assessment. (2016). Preliminary for schools Handbook for teachers. For exams 2016 Cambridge English. https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/de/Images/343147-cambridge-english-preliminary-for-schools-pet-for-schools-digital-handbook-for-teachers.pdf
  » https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/de/Images/343147-cambridge-english-preliminary-for-schools-pet-for-schools-digital-handbook-for-teachers.pdf
• Canales, M. (2006). Metodologías de la investigación social Chile: Lom Ediciones.
• Chalmers, D., & Gardiner, D. (2015). The measurement and impact of university teacher development programs. Educar, 51(1), 53. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/educar.655
  » https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/educar.655
• Council of Europe, & Council of Europe. Council for Cultural Co-operation. Education Committee. Modern Languages Division. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Creswell, J. W. (2019). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research EUA: Pearson.
• Crosling, G., Thomas, L., & Heagney, M. (2007). Improving Student Retention in Higher Education: The Role of Teaching and Learning (1st ed.). Reino Unido: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203935453
  » https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203935453
• Firkins, A., Forey, G., & Sengupta, S. (2007). Teaching writing to low proficiency EFL students. ELT Journal, 61(4), 341-352. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccm052
  » https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccm052
• Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365. https://doi.org/10.2307/356600
  » https://doi.org/10.2307/356600
• Fyfield, M., Henderson, M., Heinrich, E., & Redmond, P. (2019). Videos in higher education: Making the most of a good thing. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(5), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5930
  » https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5930
• Henard F (Oecd). Review of quality of teaching in higher education, Institutional Management in Higher Education, 2009; 82. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264079281-en
  » https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264079281-en
• Kamhi-Stein, L. D., Maggioli, G. D., & Oliveira, L. C. (2017). Introduction English Language Teaching in South America, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783097982-003
  » https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783097982-003
• Katilie, N. (2003). Improving students’ ability by using scaffolding strategy in the process of writing at STP Negeri 3 Tolitoli. (Unpublished Thesis). State University of Malang, Malang, Indonesia. In Sundana, G. P. (2017). The use of authentic material in teaching writing descriptive text. English Review: Journal of English Education, 6(1), 81. https://doi.org/10.25134/erjee.v6i1.773
  » https://doi.org/10.25134/erjee.v6i1.773
• Kember, D., & McKay, J. (1996). Action research into the quality of student learning: A paradigm for faculty development. The Journal of Higher Education, 67(5), 528. https://doi.org/10.2307/2943867
  » https://doi.org/10.2307/2943867
• Marginson, S. (2016). The worldwide trend to high participation higher education: Dynamics of social stratification in inclusive systems. Higher Education, 72(4), 413-434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0016-x
  » https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0016-x
• McAteer, Mary. (2014). What is this thing called action research? Action Research in Education, 7-20. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473913967.n2
  » https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473913967.n2
• MINEDUC. (2013). Estándares orientadores para carreras de pedagogía en Inglés . In Estándares Orientadores para Carreras de Pedagogía en Inglés Cpeip. https://www.cpeip.cl/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Est%C3%A1ndares_Ingl%C3%A9s.pdf
  » https://www.cpeip.cl/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Est%C3%A1ndares_Ingl%C3%A9s.pdf
• _____. (2014). Estrategia nacional de Inglés 2014-2030 Ministerio de Economía, Fomento y Turismo. https://www.economia.gob.cl/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/140307-Documento-Estrategia-Nacional-de-Ingl%C3%A9s-2014-2030.pdf
  » https://www.economia.gob.cl/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/140307-Documento-Estrategia-Nacional-de-Ingl%C3%A9s-2014-2030.pdf
• _____. (2016). Bases curriculares 7o Básico a 2o Medio Inicio - Educación Media. https://media.mineduc.cl/wp-content/uploads/sites/28/2017/07/Bases-Curriculares-7%C2%BA-b%C3%A1sico-a-2%C2%BA-medio.pdf
  » https://media.mineduc.cl/wp-content/uploads/sites/28/2017/07/Bases-Curriculares-7%C2%BA-b%C3%A1sico-a-2%C2%BA-medio.pdf
• Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching & learning EUA: Heinle & Heinle Pub.
• Rusinovci, X. (2015). Teaching writing through process-genre based approach. US-China Education Review A, 5(10). https://doi.org/10.17265/2161-623x/2015.10a.006
  » https://doi.org/10.17265/2161-623x/2015.10a.006
• Saavedra-Jeldres, P. A., & Campos-Espinoza, M. (2019). Chilean pre-service teachers’ perceptions towards benefits and challenges of EFL writing portfolios. Profile: Issues in Teachers´ Professional Development, 21(2), 79-96. https://doi.org/10.15446/profile.v21n2.73116
  » https://doi.org/10.15446/profile.v21n2.73116
• Scott, D. E., & Scott, S. (2015). Leadership for quality university teaching: How bottom-up academic insights can inform top-down leadership. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 44(3), 511-531. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143214549970
  » https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143214549970
• Stanton, Sara, & Fiszbein, Ariel. (2019). Work in progress : English teaching and teachers in Latin America. Leadership for the Americas - The Dialogue. https://www.thedialogue.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/white-paper-2019-completo-final.pdf
  » https://www.thedialogue.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/white-paper-2019-completo-final.pdf
• Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (2016). Bases de la investigación cualitativa: Técnicas y procedimientos para desarrollar la teoría fundamentada Colombia: Universidad de Antioquia.
• Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Tillema, M. (2012). Writing in first and second language: Empirical studies on text quality and writing processes DSpace Home. https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/241028
  » https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/241028
• Ur, P. (2012). A course in English language teaching Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Winslett, G. (2014). What counts as educational video?: Working toward best practice alignment between video production approaches and outcomes. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(5). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.458
  » https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.458
• Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H. (1998). Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy, & complexity Honolulu, Havaí, EUA: University of Hawaii Press.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  03 Dec 2021
• Date of issue
  2021

History

• Received
  15 Mar 2021
• Accepted
  23 Aug 2021