FOSTERING LITERACY PRACTICES IN EFL LEARNERS …repository.udistrital.edu.co/bitstream/11349/6278/1... · This action research attempts to ... as well as supporting students within

Running Head: FOSTERING LITERACY IN EFL LEARNERS 1

FOSTERING LITERACY PRACTICES IN EFL LEARNERS THROUGH

COLLABORATIVE INQUIRY

Mónica Liliana Sánchez Alfonso

Universidad Francisco José de Caldas

School of Science and Education

Master in Applied Linguistics to the Teaching of English

Bogotá, Colombia

2017

FOSTERING LITERACY PRACTICES IN EFL LEARNERS

2

FOSTERING LITERACY PRACTICES IN THE EFL LEARNERS THROUGH

COLLABORATIVE INQUIRY

Mónica Liliana Sánchez Alfonso

Thesis Director:

Carlos Rico Troncoso PhD.

A thesis submitted as a requirement to obtain the degree of

M.A. in Applied Linguistics to the Teaching of English

Universidad Francisco Jose de Caldas

School of Science and Education

Master in Applied Linguistics to the Teaching of English

Bogotá, Colombia

2017


3

Note of Acceptance:

Thesis Director: ___________________________________

Carlos Rico Troncoso PhD.

Juror: __________________________________

Name:

Juror: __________________________________

Name:


4

Acuerdo 19 de 1988 del Consejo Superior Universitario

Artículo 177: “La Universidad Distrital Francisco osé de Caldas no será responsable por las ideas

expuestas en esta tesis”.


5

Acknowledgements

I want to thank my academic advisor Doctor Carlos Rico Troncoso for his valuable

support, guidance and advice during the accomplishment of my research study. I also want to

thank all my professors of this M.A. for their committed work, knowledge and guidance. Thanks

to my beloved parents, sister, niece, nephew and friends for their support and encouragement to

accomplish this academic and professional endeavor.


6

Abstract

This action research attempts to foster literacy practices in a group of third graders by means of

collaborative inquiry of socio-cultural knowledge present in the students‟ school community.

This study was conducted in a private, catholic school in Bogotá, Colombia, as an opportunity to

consider another pedagogical proposal that pertains to the process of developing literacy practices

from a socio cultural perspective within an inquiry-based learning environment. Throughout the

pedagogical implementation, students used multiple modes of language and literacy to explore

and make meaning of the historical and human assets within their school community. This

qualitative study followed grounded theory, as the framework for data analysis and the

instruments for data collection were artifacts, field notes and journals. The results showed how

the inquiry-based learning approach provided language learners with opportunities and

environments to develop multimodal literacy as a social situated practice to co-construct socio-

cultural knowledge. Such experiences positioned students as owners and agents of their own

language and literacy learning to make meaning with regard to their previous knowledge and the

new information they found through their collaborative inquiry projects.

Key Words: Literacy, inquiry, multimodality.


7

Table of Contents

Chapter 1 ......................................................................................................................................... 9

Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 13

Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................................... 14

Research Question .......................................................................................................................... 21

Research Objective ......................................................................................................................... 21

Justification .................................................................................................................................... 21

Chapter 2 ....................................................................................................................................... 25

Theoretical Framework .................................................................................................................. 25

Literacy ........................................................................................................................................... 26

Literacy as Social-Situated Practice ............................................................................................... 29

Multimodal Literacy ....................................................................................................................... 31

Inquiry ............................................................................................................................................ 34

Collaborative Inquiry ..................................................................................................................... 37

State of the Art ............................................................................................................................... 42

Chapter 3 ....................................................................................................................................... 62

Research Design ............................................................................................................................. 62

Type of study .................................................................................................................................. 62

Research Setting ............................................................................................................................. 66

Participants ..................................................................................................................................... 68

Data collection and Techniques ..................................................................................................... 68

Instruments ..................................................................................................................................... 69

Field note. ....................................................................................................................................... 69

Role of the researcher ..................................................................................................................... 70

Ethical Issues .................................................................................................................................. 71

Chapter 4 ....................................................................................................................................... 73

Instructional Design ....................................................................................................................... 73

Curricular Platform ........................................................................................................................ 73

Vision of Curriculum ..................................................................................................................... 75

Vision of Learning ......................................................................................................................... 76


8

Vision of Language ........................................................................................................................ 77

Vision of Classroom ....................................................................................................................... 78

Pedagogical Intervention ................................................................................................................ 78

Chapter 5 ....................................................................................................................................... 94

Data Analysis and Findings ............................................................................................................ 94

Data Management .......................................................................................................................... 94

Data analysis Framework ............................................................................................................... 95

Data analysis Procedure ................................................................................................................. 95

Findings ........................................................................................................................................ 100

Social Situated Multimodal Literacy Practices ............................................................................ 100

Chapter 6 ..................................................................................................................................... 135

Conclusions .................................................................................................................................. 135

Implications .................................................................................................................................. 141

Limitations ................................................................................................................................... 142

Further Research .......................................................................................................................... 144


9

List of Figures

1. Structured questionnaire to students .......................................................................................... 19

2. Mind map:Theoretical Constructs. .............................................................................................. 26

3. The spiral of knowing. ............................................................................................................... 38

4. Research cycles ......................................................................................................................... 66

5. Authoring Cycle. ........................................................................................................................ 80

6. Students‟ exploration of their school community. ..................................................................... 81

7. Spider web as the result of brainstorming upon the school community. ................................... 82

8. Students‟ questions upon the History of the School Community. ............................................. 83

9. Students doing an interview. ...................................................................................................... 84

10. Oral presentation of the School History Museum. ................................................................... 84

11. Third graders experiencing collaborative inquiry process. ...................................................... 85

12. Publication and Oral presentation of the Liceo Cervantes Timeline in the institutional

magazine. ........................................................................................................................................ 87

13. Students' learning outcomes ..................................................................................................... 88

14. Students' new inquiries based on human assets of their school community. ........................... 89

15. Students interviewing to their Physical Education teacher ...................................................... 90

16. Students write and edit their biographies. ................................................................................ 91

17. Students read their biographies and presented them to the whole school community. ............ 92

18. Students write their learning outcomes in the KWL Chart. ..................................................... 93

19. Open coding stage .................................................................................................................... 97

20. Axial coding stage. .................................................................................................................. 98

21. Selective coding stage. ............................................................................................................. 99

22. Categories and subcategories. ................................................................................................ 100

23. Student Artifact:Interview in pairs frontside. ......................................................................... 103

24 . Student Artifact:Interview in pairs backtside.. ...................................................................... 104

25. Student Journal: Describing unquiry experience .................................................................. 105

26. Student Artifact: Multimodal Representations ....................................................................... 106

27. Student Artifact: Multimodal texts and expository texts ....................................................... 108

28. Students doing an interview throug a local source of knoweldge .......................................... 113


10

29. Students‟ language learning and literacy events. ................................................................... 114

30. Oral presentation of the Liceo Cervantes timeline. ................................................................ 118

31. Student Artifact: KWL Chart ................................................................................................. 119

32. Students as owners of their inquiries...................................................................................... 120

33. Student Journal: Describing inquiry experience .................................................................... 125

34. Student Journal: Describing inquiry experience .................................................................... 126

35. Student Artifact: Timeline ...................................................................................................... 126

36. Student Journal: Expressing feelings ..................................................................................... 127

37. Students‟ Journal: Explaining inquiry choices……………………………………………...129

38. Student artifact: KWL Chart………………………………………………………………..131

39. Students‟ artifact: Publication of the Timeline……………………………………………...132

40. Students‟ artifact: KWL Chart……………………………………………………………...133


11

List of Tables

1. Curricular Grid of English Area. ................................................................................................ 16

2. Curricular units and text types accomplished ............................................................................ 80


12

List of Appendices

Appendix A: Semi-structured interview to EFL teachers ............................................................ 154

AppendixB: Structured questionnaire to students ....................................................................... 155

Appendix C: Field note layout .................................................................................................... 156

Appendix D: Students artifact ...................................................................................................... 157

Appendix E. Student journal ........................................................................................................ 158

Appendix F: Parent consent form................................................................................................. 159

Appendix G: School consent form ............................................................................................... 160

Appendix H: KWL chart sample .................................................................................................. 161

Appendix I: Workking plan unit one ............................................................................................ 162

Appendix J: Working plan unit two ............................................................................................. 172


13

Chapter 1

Introduction

This study attempts to portray the development of literacy in children of a private school

highlighting three aspects. The first deals with implementation of inquiry-based learning in the

EFL classroom, where literacy instruction goes beyond the traditional foreign language pedagogy

and places students at the center of learning. Second, the importance of language learning that

enact the development of social situated literacy practices for the construction of socio cultural

knowledge present in students‟ school community. Third, the relevance of proposing social

approaches to literacy and leaner-centered methodologies that might nurture EFL teaching and

learning practices, as well as supporting students within the EFL classroom.

The following research is presented in six chapters. Chapter one outlines the problematic

situation, rationale, research question, research objectives and the statement of the problem. The

second chapter addresses the theoretical constructs that support this study as well as some

research done related to literacy and inquiry.

The third chapter presents the research design, the context in which this study took place,

as well as the participants, research methodology and data collection instruments. The fourth

chapter focuses on the instructional design with the corresponding vision of curriculum, learning,

language and classroom; chapter five addresses the data analysis framework, data analysis

process and findings. Finally, chapter six describes the conclusions, pedagogical implications,

limitations and further research.


14

Statement of the Problem

The foreign language curriculum at Liceo Cervantes School perceives English as a foreign

language (EFL) as a subject that students learn through the development of the four

communicative skills: listening, speaking, reading and writing within an intensive schedule of

teaching. As part of this concern, students are instructed to understand grammar structures and

uses of verbal tenses to communicate effectively. On the other hand, literacy is developed

through separated reading and writing tasks according to the weekly schedule. As consequence,

the curricular contents are geared to use the verbal tenses and parts of the speech, which are

rarely related to students‟ reality; and in some way limit what children are capable of doing with

the language. Likewise, students have to identify shallow elements of texts and write structured

sentences with respect to the work units of the textbook.

The previous practices lack of opportunities to bring holistic environments for EFL

learning given the current literacy climate, where reading and writing are disembedded from

personal histories and real-world content, since students have to follow grammar-based activities

within the mandated curricula. Having his scenario, it is relevant to consider sociocultural

approaches to literacy, where third graders are viewed as active readers and writers who draw on

their experiences with their social context to orchestrate opportunities for literacy, collective

engagement and exchanges with one another.

Accordingly, teachers and learners need opportunities to interact in a holistic educational

environment, that allow students to be owners and agents of their own education and their

previous knowledge of both languages (English and Spanish) be part of sources for the

construction of the curriculum. The aforementioned situation, gave me insights to consider the


15

existence of a gap among one of the school purposes, the approach adopted by the English

Language Department and the perspective that EFL teachers have toward literacy, since it is

carried out as a set of steps to write effectively and to identify plain facts of the texts through

inferential reading. In essence, linguistic competences prevail over the importance of using

literacy to act, understand, explore and make meaning of what matters to students within their

socio-cultural milieu.

The previous panorama becomes into a matter of concern for this research, since literacy

instruction seems to be divorced from social approaches that might offer alternatives for students

to understand other ways to use both languages and literacy, as acts to explore other type of

knowledge within their realities. As a response to my concern, I carried out a needs analysis

through interviews to EFL teachers, questionnaires to students and revision of institutional

documents during the first semester of 2015. Such analysis implied a constant reflection and

understanding of EFL literacy instruction within the classroom. Subsequently, the analysis gave

me insights of how Communicative Language Teaching approach (CLT) is adopted by the

English language department, as a way to promote students‟ mastering of English through

listening, speaking, reading and writing skills. As part of the analysis, I found that most of the

practices are language-centered due to the special attention students devote to linguistic forms,

with the purpose of reaching high levels of proficiency in many aspects of the language. In this

regard, Kumaravadivelu (2006) contends that CLT methods portray L2 learning as a language-

centered practice, where tasks are assigned to “draw learners‟ attention primarily to linguistic

forms” (p. 65), thereby L2 occasions for learners to be authors of their own learning are put aside.

For instance, the table below shows the curricular grid, where literacy is a fragmented

practice aimed to read and write taking into account specific standards. Similarly, literacy within


16

this institutional document responds to linguistic and pragmatic competences that are

contemplated in the national standards, where students have to draw their attention in basic skills

such as identifying, extracting information with respect to the elements of a story (characters,

theme and setting) and write descriptions regarding the basic structure of a sentence. As result,

such activities do not allow students to go beyond the mere learning of linguistic structures and

position themselves as knowledge holders of language and literacy. Furthermore, teachers have to

dedicate lots of time to guide students in following certain steps to write short paragraphs and

assign a grade. (See table 1).

Table 1. Curricular Grid of English Area.

EJES

GENERADORES COMPETENCIAS ESTÁNDARES DESEMPEÑOS CONTENIDOS

LECTURA

SOCIO-

LINGUISTICA

PRAGMATICA

Comprende

palabras y nombres

conocidos y frases

muy sencillas, por

ejemplo las que hay

en letreros, carteles

y catálogos.

Identifica

personajes y su rol

al leer y escuchar

una historia corta.

Alice Adventures in

Wonderland.

Extrae información

general de textos

leídos y escuchados

reconociendo

personajes, lugares

y la secuencia de

eventos.

The Happy Prince

Comprende

información general

y específica de

textos leídos y

escuchados

reconociendo

personajes, lugares

y acciones

desarrolladas en

una historia o texto

corto.

The Selfish Giant

ESCRITURA

LINGÜÍSTICA

SOCIO-

LINGUISTICA

PRAGMATICA

Puede escribir

frases y expresiones

sencillas sobre sí

mismo, o personas

imaginarias; dónde

vive y a qué se

Describe en forma

escrita hábitos

personales

empleando la

estructura básica

de la oración

Descripción de

rutinas propias


17

Additionally, I carried out interviews and questionnaires to teachers and students, in order

to have more insights about my research concern. For instance, one of the EFL teachers described

the way L2 literacy practices were developed in the EFL classroom through a semi-structured

interview. The below excerpt of a teachers‟ interview, shows how literacy is language-centered

and linguistically structured, since the teacher considers that Spanish is not part of students‟

language learning process and their language abilities are underestimated, when literacy is taught

in the class. Additionally, the mandated assessment process of literacy relies on the demand that

writing and reading should be individually developed and follows standardized criteria to meet

the learning expectations.

dedica.

(Sujeto + verbo +

complemento).

Describe en forma

escrita actividades y

rutinas diarias

teniendo en cuenta

las partes básicas de

la oración. (Sujeto

+ verbo +

complemento)

Descripción de

rutinas utilizando el

conector but.

Narra en forma

escrita un evento

por medio de

oraciones sencillas

correctamente

estructuradas

utilizando los

conectores and &

then.

Descripción de un

evento actual

usando conectores

de secuencia and &

then.

Narra en forma

escrita una historia

corta empleando la

estructura básica de

la oración y algunos

conectores de

secuencia (first,

then & finally)

Descripción de una

historia corta con

conectores de

secuencia.


18

In this sense, the literacy process lacks of possibilities for learners to associate language

learning to valuable socio-cultural elements of their school context, because they have to write

according to the established contents as it was described in the previous curricular grid.

Therefore, students‟ voice is not considered as a source to tap their expertise and knowledge of

both languages (English and Spanish) nor the social dimension of literacy learning to

acknowledge students‟ social life, which might bring renewed authenticity to literacy and

language use, promote ownership, agency and collaboration, as features that favor learner-

centered practices and enduring learning experiences. (See the example below).

M: What type of writing activities are developed in your classroom?

T: Well, children write sentences using the sentence structure; they have to understand that the sentence

structure has a subject, a verb and a complement.

M: Ok

T: And we are starting to use the connector “and”, so what they do, are descriptions by linking simple

phrases that have the structure I previously told you. Therefore, what they do are short descriptions about

themselves, their relatives, pets or friends.

M: ok, is there any other aspect students have to take into account while writing?

T: To complete the paragraph, they have to bear in mind the information they wrote in the pre-writing.

Because they are so young learners, and they are barely starting to write short paragraphs, it is better to give

them the topic because they start to digress and talk about many things. Therefore, children should take into

account the given topic and think what they want to say about it.

(Teacher 1, Interview, May 4th

, 2015). (See Appendix A to read the whole interview).

Finally, an open questionnaire was administered to students, where they answered

questions in relation to what they usually do and what would they like to do in the EFL class. The

next excerpts show the most relevant answers, where they clearly pose their learning needs with

regard to collaborative work, either in groups or in pairs. Essentially, students‟ suggestions are

the most powerful reason to promote collaborative inquiry and foster literacy as a socially

situated practice, in order to fulfill their wants to create and environment in which they can share

their knowledge and work together. The next excerpts show the answers given by the students.

(See Appendix B to read the whole questionnaire).


19

Figure 1. Structured questionnaire to students. May 5th

, 2015

The previous analysis briefly evidences how the language is portrayed as a system of

related elements to code meaning, where students have to develop linguistic and communicative

skills following grammar structures to respond to the school academic requirements and

standards. Apart from this, the focus on teaching and students‟ learning is invested on reading

and writing, while mastering language structures, without acknowledging the socio-cultural basis

of language as a social fact that emerge from meaning interchanges with others. Thus, the current

school literacy practices prevent meaningful learning environments because they do not take into

account the various ways in which children use reading, writing and language.

On top of that, the grammar-based and mono-modal EFL teaching approaches hinder the

connection of the curriculum to real life of students because there is lack of opportunities for

exploring social and cultural elements of local communities, which might involve children in

meaningful literacy experiences. With this in mind, it is pertinent to bring social approaches to


20

literacy instruction and understand how language learning takes place in socio cultural

environments. In this regard, I consider paramount to value students‟ expectations, experiences

and knowledge background to shape democratic learning practices by means of collaboration and

inquiry practices.

Moreover, it is relevant to provide insights for wider understandings and uses of literacy

as a social practice, in the sense that learners use language to make meaning in their school

community and enhance their potentials as literacy users. In this respect, Vygotsky, (1987) as

(cited in Lee & Smagorinsky, 2000), “children‟s potential for learning is an ever-shifting range of

possibilities” (p. 2), since they are capable of going beyond the mere acts of reading and writing,

as active agents of language from a social dimension. Furthermore, language learning can be a

“more authentic process and not based solely on facts but on learners‟ active engagement” (Clavijo,

2001, p. 34), that is to say that the exploration of school community elements might potentially

encourage third graders to read, write, represent, convey and make meaning with regard to the socio-

cultural sources of their school community.

Furthermore, it is necessary to consider a broader perspective of language learning that

goes beyond the linguistic perspective and allows learners to participate in engaging activities

within the EFL classroom. Such activities might develop learners‟ literacy practices in

meaningful ways, as a gateway to place them at the center of curriculum and foster their natural

inquiry skills based on topics that matter to them, while they assume a role of investigators,

language users and meaning makers. For the purpose of the previous pursuit, I posed the

following question and objectives:


21

Research Question

What literacy practices emerge when third graders inquire collaboratively into their

academic surroundings at a private school in Bogota?

Research Objective

To describe the emerging literacy practices that students might use when they inquire

collaboratively into their academic surroundings.

Specific Objectives:

To determine the types of literacy processes students develop when working with

collaborative and inquiry-based methodology.

To explore the modes that students use when they develop literacy practices with respect

to socio-cultural elements of their academic surroundings.

To determine how meaning making takes place when children use literacy by means of

collaborative inquiry.

Justification

This research integrates the social dimension of language and an inquiry-based learning

environment to propose literacy instruction as a social experience, rather than an academic

assignment administered to learners. This is why this study arises from a needs analysis process,

where language learning is viewed as a static entity that hinders the role of students as owners

and authors of their own education. In concordance to the previous statement, the present work


22

proposes a shift from traditional language teaching practices to more social experiences that

might lead students through school community-based inquiries to feed their though, and serve as

point of departure to search about topics that matters to students, while they use literacy to

collaboratively construct their own meanings.

As point of departure, I want to highlight the pertinence of the present research to nurture

EFL language learning experiences through the implementation of a pedagogical innovation that

recognizes the socio-cultural dimension of students to contribute to their language and literacy

development turning learning into an enduring and life-long experience. As consequence, the

present research brings new perspectives for teachers of all areas, particularly EFL teachers

because it could help them to address their students‟ needs and interests from their direct context,

considering their suggestions and wants to have a significant language program to develop their

classes. In this sense, inquiry-based approach should be regarded as an integral part of any

learning and teaching practice.

Similarly, this research illustrates language as a local practice, which is pervaded by

social and cultural aspects, as well as “an activity rather than a structure, as something [learners]

do, rather than a system [they] draw on” (Pennycook, 2007, p. 2). In this sense, language propels

the development of appealing literacy practices as social situated acts, through which students

interchange meaning to inquire upon elements of their local context.

Furthermore, this study offers a practical significance for EFL learners, since it allows

them to bring their queries and make meaning throughout inquiry projects, which might nurture

and surpasses their expected language and literacy skills. In this respect, learners are positioned

as knowledge holders, who bring their personal experiences to the classroom, as sources for re-


23

creating the local knowledge of their academic surroundings through diverse literacy modes. On

the other hand, this study lies into an inquiry-based learning approach to make teachers cognizant

and show them one of the myriad ways that language can be intertwined to literacy and allow

learners wondering about socio-cultural elements of their close surroundings.

In this regard, this study is an opportunity for EFL teachers to understand the role of being

facilitators and tie students to the meaningful resources that their social context possesses,

enhance their thinking and promotes endless questioning, among others possibilities that might

renew EFL pedagogy, particularly literacy education. In a similar way, this research highlights

the relevance of adopting inquiry and learner-centered approaches to consider the language

curriculum as “a collaborative effort between teachers and learners, since learners are closely

involved in the decision making process regarding the content and how it is taught” (Nunan,

1988, p. 2).

This study also contributes to the expand EFL pedagogy research, particularly in

elementary levels of education because language and literacy are conceived from a social

dimension, where collaboration and inquiry practices untapped learners‟ inner language abilities

concerning their needs and interests. Similarly, the pedagogical proposal of this research,

suggests a more balanced approach to literacy teaching and learning that emphasizes the

importance of students „engagement and meaningful interactions through inquiry-based

instruction. In this respect, more holistic and democratic learning environments might benefit

EFL learners through meaning-rich activities that embrace their social and cultural resources to

use literacy in meaningful ways.


24

Another relevant aspect of this qualitative research has to do with theoretical and

methodological contributions that an inquiry-based learning brings to foster the use of language

and literacy from myriad perspectives, where learners and teachers co-construct the language

curriculum, taking into account common interest and valuing the knowledge that each student

brings to the EFL classroom. Similarly, this work is an invitation to schools to re-think their EFL

practices and adopt challenges that allow transitions towards more meaningful literacy practices

where learners can be owners and agents of their own learning.

After having informed the statement of the problem and the relevance of this study, I

present the theoretical tenets that support this research in the following chapter.


25

CHAPTER 2

Theoretical Framework

"There is no more ethical or truly democratic road than one in

which we reveal to learners how we think, why we think the way

we do, our dreams, the dreams for which we will fight, while

giving them concrete proof that we respect their opinions, even

when they are opposed to our own." (Paulo Freire, 1998, p. 40).

As a response to the research question, the present chapter outlines the theoretical tenets on

which the study is based. The social perspective of literacy practices proposed in this paper

addresses the understanding of two theoretical pillars: literacy and inquiry. Additionally, this

chapter includes an overview of research studies that had contributed to the field of literacy and

inquiry practices in elementary and secondary levels of education.


26

Figure 2. Mind map of the theoretical constructs in detail.

Literacy

Literacy had been defined from different perspectives. The traditional view portrays literacy as skills

for reading and writing to decode, retrieve, inference and comprehend information. The past decades

had been marked by other views of literacy. For instance, Scribner (1984) adopts the term

Functional Literacy as the “level of proficiency necessary for effective performance in a range of

setting and customary activities” (p. 9) within a specific context. Thus, according to Scribner (1984),

literacy is based on skills needed to perform daily life activities at work, school and different


27

situations that require us to read or produce written symbols. Such vision implies the

decontextualization of literacy, since it only adheres to traditional pedagogy.

The perspective of literacy within this study, lies on the Socio cultural Theory which intends

to understand how “literacy [goes] in connection to the complex social relationships and cultural

practices of human beings” (Moll, 1994, p.179), that is to say, that literacy is related to learners

social worlds and culture. As consequence, a socio-cultural approach allows this study to link

students‟ school community, language learning, inquiry and collaboration to include a more social

view of literacy, where students‟ previous knowledge of both languages and literacy become into

valuable sources to make meaning of what they inquire.

In tune with my previous statement, literacy is a socio cultural practice where readers and

writers use oral, written and visual language to act, interact, value and make meaning in relation to

concerns present in their social and cultural context. That is to say that, literacy sticks to the

transactional view of reading and writing, where meaning construction processes take place

implying “the interrelation between the knower and what is to be known” (Rosenblatt, 1976, p. 27).

In this sense, being literate within this study has to do with the abilities to construct meaning through

a wide range of language modes and transact with different type of texts.

The previous perspective of literacy also has to do with the manner that the teachers work

within a transactional frame as mediators, who support children in collaborative and individual

academic literacy potentials at school, while valuing and using the richness of the socio-cultural

elements of their community. In this regard, literacy is aimed to provide opportunities and reasons

for learners to use and learn the language through a constant interaction with others in their context,


28

and in cooperation with their peers, to awake a variety of internal processes that to promote “the

zone of proximal development” (Vygotsky, 1987).

As part of the previous statement, literacy is conceived as a socio-cultural tool for meaning

making that children utilize to construct knowledge, as in this particular case, language learning, that

occurs in their daily school-life. Similarly, literacy acknowledges that children of all ages and

background integrate the semantic-pragmatic, syntactic and graphophonic language through

different wide of modes, not only by reading and writing, but also through oral interactions with

peers, visual and oral representations, movement and sounds, which give them insights to infer,

predict, confirm in order to construct meaning. Likewise, literacy within this theoretical framework

is understood as a practice that focuses on multidimensional processes of learners, rather than in

academic results. Such attention is part of children contact with authentic texts for real purposes to

construct and refine their learning through active interpretation and purposeful sense making of the

socio-cultural sources around them.

Additionally, literacy is a bridge to tap the multiple uses that language offers to young EFL

learners and be able to orchestrate several modes of meaning making as an opportunity to strengthen

the connection between the texts, the intended message and their social worlds. Similarly, literacy

acknowledges children potentials for using language through different modes, and with relative ease

in their natural communities. In addition, literacy reminds us as teachers that children do not need

specific instruction to use language, but from a transactional view, children need to value and be

valued for whom they are, what they already know and what they want to know.


29

The two insights of literacy that feed this theoretical framework are literacy as social practice

and multimodal literacy, which go beyond the aforementioned perspective of reading and writing as

skills or single literacies labeling students as good or struggling literacy users. As consequence, the

process of learning is dulled and limited to what children are capable of doing. Accordingly,

Street,1995 (as cited in Harste, 2014) considers that “instead of one literacy there are multiple

literacies” which channels students‟ inner force that propels them to express themselves and

promotes their strong need to communicate and share meaning, by means of not solely oral and

written language, but through other modes of expressing and transacting (p. 90). Such modes are

drawings, oral interactions and images, which causes learning to take place in socio-cultural

environments. The following paragraphs describe two concepts of literacy that this study relies on.

Literacy as Social-Situated Practice

To begin with, literacy as social practice is understood as various ways of knowing and social acts

that embrace attitudes, personal experiences and knowledge providing engagement and

understanding to learners during the interaction with socio-cultural aspects of their close context.

Since this study includes the participation of children, literacy adopts a social role that allows

students to interact with one another, while their cognition and social identity are developed.

Therefore, literacy practices exist among students, teachers and the school community daily

interactions, that open paths to construct meaning in diverse modes.

At this point, it is relevant to consider Freire‟s approach to literacy as a dialogical

relationship between human beings and their worlds through the language, as a transformative

agency. Literacy as a social situated practice implies the responsibility of people to understand and


30

transform their own experiences through not only reading and writing, but also establishing

relationships with their immediate social context. I envisioned this research study, so that literacy is

part of “concrete human activities” (Baynham, 1995, p. 1) since the linguistic dimensions are

intertwined to a socio-cultural approach to the study of literacy with reference to social purposes for

creating and exchanging meaning.

In tune with the previous assertions, Freire and Macedo (1987) argue that reading does not

consist merely on decoding the written world of language; rather it is preceded by an interlaced with

knowledge of the world, thus language and reality are dynamically interconnected” (p. 1). His ideas,

lead me to re-evaluate the perspective of reading, writing and other multiple modes that students

employ to make meaning namely print texts, images, movements, sound and learners‟ oral

interactions to discover the connections between the text and the context of the text; and how to

connect the text to the personal, social and cultural context of the reader.

In a similar way, Barton, Hamilton and Ivanic (2000) contend that literacy practices are

what “people do with literacy with regard to their lives […] since they also involve values, attitudes,

feelings and social relationships” (p. 7) as internal processes of the individuals. Such processes

include people awareness and sense making for the construction of social knowledge. Additionally,

teaching and learning are central activities affiliated to the previous assertion, since the situated

perspective of such practices embraces what children do with reading and writing in particular acts,

which are interlaced to broader social and cultural elements of their school surroundings.

Essentially, effective literacy learning involves viewing learning through social lenses that

engage learners in creating a variety of texts through their language knowledge, experiences, social


31

and cultural knowledge. Likewise, elements of students‟ local context serve as a bridge to

communicate and express understandings in multiple ways, either independently and with others

with respect to broader and socio-cultural contexts. In this sense, students‟ experiences with the

language and culture might open spaces for dialogic practices that promote holistic language and

literacy learning processes.

Multimodal Literacy

Another relevant feature this research draws on nurturing the social situated perspective of literacy

that is referred to the abilities of conveying meaning in different cultural and social contexts by

means of using “not only alphabetical but also multimodal representations” (Cope and Kalantzis,

2000), since within the EFL classroom had increased the use of visual means to convey meaning.

Such meaning making processes have to incorporate the use of multimodal messages as more

meaningful ways to communicate and shape ideological stances.

In tune with the previous assertion, the social worlds of learners are permeated with the

integrated use of modalities such as “written-linguistic, oral, visual, audio and spatial patterns”

(Kress, 2000a, 2000b) that they draw on to make meaning, since the globalization and local diversity

brings cultural forms, semiotic systems and new technologies that constantly increase in our context.

Thereby, students‟ literacies involve framing images, expressing ideas and making meaning through

a variety of sign systems and modalities that bring up new outlooks to language, recognizing its

many venues through which “messages are conveyed, meaning making is made and representations

are presented” (Kress, 1997).


32

As part of the EFL literacy development of learners, whose linguistic code is still growing, as

this particular case, they use multimodal modes namely oral interactions, drawings and images,

which contain more information than conventional writing to clarify their intended meanings to

others. Furthermore, students come to school with the ability to make meaning using their available

resources and new literacies as “raw images” (Rosenblatt, 2005, p. 65). In this regard, Med and

Whitmore (2000) contend that when English language learners is composed by drawings and

selecting sound effects before writing any language, they “express their previous knowledge,

construct new knowledge and communicate regardless of their facility with English” (p. 49).

On the other hand, students‟ cognitive disposition is inherently connected to semiotic

elements of their social worlds to frame images and express their ideas to make meaning, instead of

the verbocentric lessons typically given at traditional school. In this regard, the construction of

meaning takes place given that language is the foremost process for sense making and that it can

take several forms for the construction of meaning. As consequence, multimodal acts of meaning

making offer several modes to afford children expressing themselves, their knowledge and their

learning. Similarly, students draw on and combine their writing abilities and available modes of

meaning making, as they so naturally do in their daily lives for creating multilingual and multimodal

texts.

In the same line of thought, Leland and Harste (1994) adopt the term “ways of knowing”

to refer to those sign systems such as art, music, language and drama as “potentials by which all

humans might mean” (p. 339). In this sense, learners find themselves as active literacy users and

knowledge holders, when they are capable of orchestrating a variety of sign systems to create

meaning in relation to their socio-cultural milieu. These abilities take place when learners interact


33

with their peers and teachers, framing a broad concept of literacy that is grounded in social practices

and considering that “Literacy is not simply about knowing how to read and write a particular script,

but applying this knowledge for specific purposes in specific contexts of use” (Barton, 1994, p. 24).

Regarding the way learners might find multiple modes and sign systems for meaning

making, they also discover these modes as opportunities to engage in authentic literacy events1 that

bring out the complex nature of constructing meaning in regards to social and cultural factors. Such

literacy events imply the collaboration among peers, when they endeavor to inquire about topics that

matter to them. As consequence, literacy development is enhanced through the zone of proximal

development “as the characteristic not solely of the child or of the teaching, but of the child engaged

in collaborative activity within specific social environments” (Moll, 1990, p. 11). In addition, when

children share their understandings to broader members of their close communities, their potentials

for meaning making are enhanced by means of “collective zones of proximal development” (Moll &

Whitmore, 1993), where their composition are the result of interpreting the local information present

in socio cultural factors of their immediate context.

When literacy as social practice is coupled with the notion of multimodal literacy, it could be

conceived as a particular set of social practices available for children to construct meaning through

which they demonstrate abilities for reading and writing re-create their socio-cultural previous

knowledge. In this regard, the socio cultural approach frames the ways in which learners interact

with their direct realities, using language to convey meaning and make that multimodal and socially

situated literacy practices go “in connection with the complex social relationships and cultural

practices of human beings within classrooms or community settings” (Moll, 1994, p. 179). As result

1 Literacy events are activities where literacy has a role. The notion of events stresses the situated nature of literacy, that it always exists in social

context


34

of such connection, students might found paths for using their collective background knowledge to

negotiate and remix their experiences, and foster authoring practices as opportunities to let students

being self-regulated and autonomous learners.

On top of the previous assertions, the socio cultural perspective of foreign language

education within this study brings a broader panorama of literacy as social and multimodal practices,

which entails viewing learners as knowledge holders, who are able to do more with reading and

writing, than the mandated curriculum. With this in mind, giving students time to spin their ideas

through a wide range of meaningful modes and consider that socio cultural sources of their social

context are valuable paths to let them be agents and owners of their own learning process, new

pedagogical stances based on genuine students‟ thoughts and interests are paramount for bringing to

the EFL classroom. As consequence, literacy practices will go in hand with students‟ personal,

social and historical connections to lead unexpected avenues for their inquiries, and preclude the

tendency of viewing children‟s emerging literacy practices as „basic skills‟, and be amazed by

students‟ work and intellectual capabilities.

Inquiry

Inquiry has always been part of education. Inquiry traces its origin since the Socratic dialogues

as the earliest documented instances of learning through questioning. Later on, John Dewey

(1938) considered inquiry as one of the constructivism education approaches during the last

century. He emphasized the importance of asking questions relevant to students‟ concerns as a

reason to learn. Dewey (1938) acknowledges the curiosity of children as a natural impulse to

learn and brings ideas about integrating learners‟ expectations, experiences, beliefs, concerns and


35

context into the school environment to shape new and enduring views of the world. In this regard,

inquiry takes several meanings for teaching and learning within the EFL pedagogy, as is the case

of this study. For instance, inquiry teaching involves “allowing children to learn from direct

experience and cultivate their natural curiosity” Dewey (1938) to bring holistic educational

environments that enable teachers and students to integrate knowledge across the disciplines, and

unfold learning in a way that value the intellectual growth and age-specific concerns of the child.

In a similar way, Short (2001) states that “as educators examine their beliefs and actions,

they take control of their learning and work with their students to create more democratic

learning environments”. Within these environments, students become both problem-posers and

problem-solvers (Freire, 1985), since they are provided with the time they need to immerse into a

topic and find the questions that are significant to their lives, rather than completing research on

an assigned topic, enabling that “inquiry goes beyond building curriculum from students to

negotiating curriculum with students” (p. 21).

With the previous assertions in mind, inquiry within this research is a practice that

promotes learning in all areas of the curriculum, specifically within EFL education and involves

the acts of wondering, exploring and investigating upon socio-cultural sources of students‟ close

surroundings. As Wells (1995) asserts, “an inquiry typically consists of three major components;

research, interpretation, and presentation each of which involves the three phases of planning,

acting, and reviewing”, such components allow students to engage in interesting and authentic

learning environments, where they can build in prior knowledge and understandings to make

sense of their social worlds. In this sense, inquiry orients learners to assume an active position

that encourage them to think and decide by themselves.


36

On the other hand, inquiry enriches literacy practices and develops students as

communicators, who use language as means to learn and construct knowledge through a

motivating force for learning, which provides more relevant and powerful literacy learning

opportunities. Similarly, inquiry favors learners‟ natural curiosity to boost the act of questioning

and experiencing meaningful learning environments to convey and co-construct meaning.

Additionally, Harste (2003) contends that inquiry brings to the curriculum “lots of

opportunities for students to explore their own inquiry using reading, writing and other sign

systems as tools and toys for learning” (p. 11). In this regard, students‟ voices are heard to make

them capable of communicating meaning with others through active learning and positioning

themselves as owners of their learning process. In consideration to the previous idea, inquiry is “a

way to view education holistically” (Short and Burke 1996, p. 51) and depicts learners as curious

and active by nature. In this sense, students are provided with spaces to ask questions that are

significant in their lives and related to their concerns. As consequence, the mutual participation of

learners and teachers bridges the gap between the school community and students‟ socio cultural

knowledge to acknowledge, “one of the benefits of working in a community is that it is a

collaborative source” (Within and Within, 1997, p. 7).

On the other hand, inquiry allows students to go beyond the search of facts and memorize

linguistic structures to use language for exploring issues through different perspectives that lead

the understanding of students‟ learning. Likewise, inquiry allows teachers to go beyond the

mandated curriculum using the local knowledge present in student‟s communities to make

educational experiences more meaningful and ignite the spark of children‟s learning. In this

respect, Comber, Thomson and Wells (2001) contend that the “unexplored knowledge of


37

students‟ direct context do not respond to social and cultural realities of students” (p. 453), since

there is no authenticity in learning to foster the social and intellectual development of children.

Inquiry is a practice that plays essential roles along different stages of our life, like

childhood, adolescence and adulthood. That is why it should be part of teachers‟ daily practices

and learners‟ mindset. Learning from inquiry is a way of understanding how children learn from

reality, while they enhance their language and literacy skills, as the particular case of this study.

Moreover, such practice involves relevant components that provide learners with a wide range of

opportunities to make meaning and expand their knowledge of the language. Taking into account

the role of inquiry within this study, it is necessary to decenter the teacher as the more

knowledgeable member of the literacy community and offer opportunities for students to take

their questions beyond the EFL classroom, while trusting in their genuine interest and planning

literacy events around what matters to students.

Collaborative Inquiry

A view of language learning as a social construction, where knowledge is negotiated and

acquired through social interaction rather than being delivered by the teacher, is central in this

research. The previous perspective acknowledges the importance of interaction, peer mediation

and scaffolding (Vygotsky, 1978). In this sense, language learning and teaching practices within

this panorama are considered initiatives of collaborative inquiry, whenever knowledge is

“dialogically constructed” (Wells, 2002, p. 5) by teachers and students.

Collaborative inquiry becomes part of this framework, as a dialogic practice that allows

students to consider many ways of thinking and sharing with others, as well a mode to pursue


38

meaningful questions within the classroom. Similarly, collaborative inquiry practices have to do

with decision and meaning making processes of students and teachers, where teachers are in

charge of making the inquiry experience purposeful, highly thoughtful and effective, guiding

students in their learning. As consequence, inquiry becomes into a collaborative practice where

all the EFL classroom members have an active role in the construction of knowledge.

Additionally, collaborative inquiry takes various forms since participants in this study are

young EFL learners and are curious by nature. Thus, it becomes in a form of learning where

students are provided with insights for „knowledge building‟ through guidance of their constant

inquiries. I present the spiral of knowing (Wells, 2002, p. 8) to explain how knowledge building

is developed in an inquiry-based learning approach as the one presented in this research. The next

figure displays the spiral of knowing.

Figure 3. The spiral of knowing. (Wells, 2002, p. 8)

In the spiral, each cycle starts with the understanding of individual past experiences that

students use to make sense of what is new. Then, the knowledge building cycle starts with the

new encountered information, either from action into students‟ school context, from using


39

multiple modes (reading, writing, listening, talking, drawing, using images and so forth) or

interacting, collaborating and reflecting with others. Thereafter, the new information students

have access to, lead to enhancement of understanding as the following cycle, which must be

articulated and transformed through dialogic and meaning making processes. Finally, the

experience cycle is the result of students‟ learning and understandings they obtain by means of

their inquiry collaborative experiences.

Collaborative inquiry provides learners with common challenges from their real world

while cultivating “a context for cooperation and community building” (Independent Together,

2003, p. 63), that give them insights to go beyond the classroom walls and create an academic

network. In this sense, “knowledge is co-constructed, rather than unilaterally delivered” (Wells,

2002, p.6) because children‟s learning is enriched when they consider other perspectives of using

literacy practices, that helps them to broaden their understandings. On top of that, collaboration

involves educators in sustained dialogue with learners to create a decision-making environment

and guide students thinking, as well as gaining new understandings of themselves and their

learning process. As part of this assertion, collaborative inquiry switches the role of educators as

owners of knowledge towards a more democratic perspective of teaching within the EFL

classroom, taking into account students‟ concerns, experiences, beliefs and their social context.

Collaborative inquiry within this research recalls the notion of Vygotsky (1987) of the

zone of proximal development, which suggests that all learning is in some way collaborative.

Particularly when it takes place in inquiry processes and involves the enterprise of authentic

questions and learning, involving the construction of meaning that comes from exploration. Such

practices, implies “mentoring provided by more knowledgeable persons, usually elders, who engage


40

in activity with less experienced in a process known scaffolding” Bruner, 1975 (as cited in Lee and

Smagorinsky, 2000 p. 2). In this regard, the more knowledgeable person are not only the teachers,

but the students and other members of the community, who are considered knowledge holders that

can unfold their understandings when collaborative and dialogic inquiry takes places.

The notion of collaborative inquiry arouses the concept of zone of proximal development

within this research through collaboration as a trait of peer bounding processes. This occurs when

learners adapt easily to the classroom, as the result of their interaction with classmates whose

previous knowledge of language and literacy is wider. As consequence, learners who need support

of their classmates can lessen initial feelings of isolation and loss by interacting within their zones of

proximal development with knowledgeable peers, as a step in creating a comfortable and friendly

classroom environment, emotional sides of learning and work identity.

On the other hand, collaborative inquiry can only begin with what learners already know

and perceive. In so doing, Spanish and English are valuable sources that position learners, as

„knowledge holders‟ who can communicate meaning with others instead of portraying English

language as an object of study within the curriculum. The previous assertion leads me to shape

two components that collaborative inquiry brings to the language classroom: ownership and

agency.

In this regard, inquiry results in students being able to take ownership, understood as the

natural sense of learners‟ responsibility about their work, turning language and literacy learning

into a more enduring process. As consequence, students find inspiration and learning

opportunities in unique places as their close communities that make them able to pursue their


41

curiosities without complete dependency on an educator. Such abilities empower and encourage

them as a way to be resilient when they do not find the results they expected. Subsequently,

students as owners of their learning will realize that there is more than one way to approach a

question, reach their goals, and value the process they start within their inquiries.

Furthermore, Wells (2002) contends that orienting learning and teaching towards inquiry

promotes ownership when students have responsibilities to select the topics to be search, the

methods and the resources they need for such a purpose. As consequence, the resulting sense of

ownership “enable [learners] to sustain their engagement and to develop strategies of responsible

collaboration that lead to successful completion” (p. 6) of their inquiries. The aforementioned

assertions entail some conditions that teachers need to bring to the classroom namely, comfort to

students to ponder questions, communicate their thinking, and have a lot of leeway to develop their

inquiries and really take ownership of their learning.

The other element that collaborative inquiry promotes within this research is agency. The

promotion of learners‟ agency involves them in having “the power to act” which ignites their

initiatives to learn beyond the inputs that are transmitted by the teacher or the curriculum. Young

children‟s agency has been identified as a foundational for learning in any realm of knowledge and

social development, since it is broadly acknowledged that students learn and develop through active

interaction with others and participation in their social environments.

Agency takes place in the inquiry classroom when students feel in charge of their own

learning, pose questions, and foment an environment for knowledge building. With reference to my

previous statement, Wolk (2008) contends that “nurturing agency in children, involves honoring

their unique constructions of knowledge, integrating choices and ownership in the curriculum” (p.


42

121) as the way to engage children in learning and in decision-making processes. As children make

meaningful decisions about things that affect them, they start to see themselves as rich, competent,

capable learners and valuable members within their school community and social context. In

essence, developing a sense of agency in the students means providing opportunities for children to

make autonomous choices, making their voices worth in their day-to-day environment.

To sum up, collaborative inquiry brings new ways to foreign language education that

broaden opportunities for learners‟ social interaction and self-expression to enrich their L2 learning

experience. In this regard, by including the recognition of students‟ school community as a relevant

source to be explored; they develop a sense of belonging as well as inquiry and academic skills. In

concordance to Dewey (1990), we as teachers must include the outside social context and its

significance “through which the school itself shall be made a genuine form of active community life,

instead of a place set apart in which to learn lessons” (p. 14).

State of the Art

Since this study intends mainly to describe the emerging literacies of young EFL learners by means

of inquiry practices, taking into consideration the local knowledge of students‟ contexts, I have

explored several studies that show different perspectives concerning inquiry-based approaches and

literacy, understood as a socially situated practice. The following lines describe some studies that

relate closely to the theoretical tenets of my investigation:

Mendieta (2009) reported an action research based on a pedagogical experience in a female

private school in Bogotá, Colombia. She had to implement Problem Based Learning approach (PBL)

as part of the mandated school curricula, where seventh graders needed to develop the skills and


43

knowledge necessary to solve puzzling phenomenon. Since Mendieta (2009) was not informed

enough on how to implement such approach, she founded on Inquiry-based Learning (IBL) a

response to connect the curriculum to a problematic situation for EFL learning. During the

beginning of the pedagogical implementation, Mendieta (2009) used gender discrimination as the

main topic of the literature book that seventh graders were reading, to generate curiosity and know

their previous knowledge about this topic. In so doing it, students were involved in a project where

they have to gather, select and share information about human rights. They visited web pages, read

the newspaper articles and the literature book to be informed about this social issue. Then students

expressed their personal opinions about the role and position of woman around the world. As

seventh graders were involved in women discrimination, Mendieta (2009) asked them to explore in

depth this topic through group work by searching and identifying how women have been

discriminated in different parts of the world.

In this regard, opportunities to work collaboratively were given within and inquiry

environment for the co-construction of students‟ knowledge. Seventh graders inquired

collaboratively by using primary sources such as laws, decrees, real cases, important women‟s

biographies, among others in both languages (Spanish and English), to do oral reports and brochures

in front of their teacher and classmates and received feedback to improve their language usage.

Then, students decided to present the outcomes of their investigations and gained knowledge to the

whole school community through a wide variety of sign systems, namely power point presentations,

brochures, sketches, handicrafts and costumes. At the end of the project, students were asked about

what they learned throughout the inquiry project, and what they got from the class. Their responses


44

evidenced students‟ critical stances that showed how well they were prepared not only for the

development of the foreign language, but also for life.

The findings of this investigation showed students‟ beliefs and knowledge referring o issues

like justice, violence, religion, human rights and women‟s discrimination in different parts of the

world. In the same way, students reflected upon the information they found in order to come up with

their own interpretation to what would be meaningful to share with their community, where they co-

constructed knowledge not only related to foreign language, but of real social and cultural issues that

are worth to study within the EFL classroom. In addition, Mendieta (2009) found that students‟

voice is a key aspect that allows teachers to engage learners in meaningful language environment.

Similarly, this study evidences how the role of teachers switched from being owners of knowledge

to be facilitators, who guided and supported the students in inquiry practices. In this respect, students

became knowledge holders who were able to use their previous knowledge to represent the

information they inquired collaboratively through a variety of modes.

This study enlightens my research concern, since the adoption of an inquiry-based learning

approach promotes EFL literacy development from a social dimension because students inquire

about issues from inside and outside their social context, which subsequently, allow them to adopt

critical stances as knowledge holders. In a similar way, this study provides me with insights on how

the language offers a variety of modes through which students can share and represent what they

learn from their investigations. In this sense, students‟ voice can be a source to make the language

curriculum more meaningful, where learners‟ needs and interests take part on the selection of topics

and activities for EFL learning. Additionally, this study portrays the local knowledge embedded in

students‟ communities, as a valuable source that brings meaningful opportunities to ignite student‟s


45

sense of curiosity, while using their previous knowledge of both languages (English and Spanish).

Another relevant aspect this work contributes to mine has to do with the way the teacher and the

students can exchange their roles, where they share information to co-construct knowledge.

On the other hand, Rincón (2014) carried out descriptive qualitative research that outlined

the ways in which community inquiries created opportunities for tenth graders to explore social

and cultural issues of their neighborhoods, using multimodality in a public school located in the

south of Bogota, Colombia. The pedagogical innovation included an emphasis on Community

Based Pedagogies (CBP), as those outside school practices, symbols and people that become into

a source of inspiring material for teacher researchers. In this regard, Rincón (2014) used the

community assets of students‟ neighborhoods, as a bridge to develop critical literacy practices

and make a transition from the mono-modal language teaching approach to a more participatory

educational experience.

Since this study was conducted to know the ways students use multimodality to inquire

upon socio-cultural issues of their neighborhoods, Rincón (2015) guided and supported her

students to map their neighborhoods and find a social issue of their interest to be investigated.

Then, tenth graders posed questions and selected possible instruments to collect data. Finally,

they presented the data gathered through blogs and written interaction on Facebook and discussed

main points of their findings in class debates. The findings of this study showed how students

developed inquiry skills through observation and identification of assets, finding an issue,

documenting the issue and presenting findings through multimodal modes.


46

In a similar way, students did oral and written comments in Spanish and English to

convey meaning through a process named translanguaging (Garcia, 2009), which bridged the gap

between language learning and self-expression. Such experiences gave students the opportunity

to foster their literacy development and EFL learning. Likewise, students‟ abilities in EFL

writing namely, literal, descriptive, argumentative and interpretative were unfolded in reporting

socio-cultural issues in social media and blogs by means of song creations, video clips, stories,

photo galleries and reflections. Finally, this study depicted the community students inhabit as a

valuable space to develop inquiry skills, language practices and personal reflections that can be

displayed in multimodal ways.

The previous research traces relevant elements that helped me to understand how the

language offers multiple facets, through which learners can draw on to construct meaning and

enhance language learning either using images, pictures, videos, songs, written and oral

interactions. Another relevant insight that this study gives me is linked to the way students

combine English and Spanish language to maximize their communicative potential and express

their opinions. In this sense, translanguaging becomes into a meaningful linguistic resource

within my research concern, because I can contextualize my students and support them to express

their needs and opinions with more confidence, since they are emergent EFL learners. Another

valuable insight that illuminates my research ideas has to do with the way close surroundings of

students become into a remarkable opportunity to create meaningful language and inquiry

practices, that progressively might shift the fragmented language learning environment my

students and I are immersed in.


47

In a similar attempt to develop literacy from a social perspective, Hernandez (2016) used

inquiry-based learning and Community Based Pedagogy (CBP) approaches to conduct an action

research with a group of third graders of a private school in Bogotá, Colombia. Such work drew on

the socio cultural perspective of literacy with the purposes of portraying the development of EFL

writers as inquirers, determining how do third graders develop a sense of community when inquiring

into their surroundings and identifying the developments in the formal aspects of text that are

evidenced in writing as meaning construction on community issues.

In order to reach such purposes, this qualitative study used the authoring cycle (Short and

Burke, 1999) as the curricular framework to link the institutional requirements for EFL learning

and the literacy practices. The authoring cycle brought possibilities for third graders to be

knowledge and text creators. In this regard, they felt empowered through investigations of their

families, neighborhoods, school and city. Additionally, students used multimodal representations

such as videos, pictures, drawings, oral presentations and posters to make meaning and co-

construct local knowledge of their communities.

The results of this study showed how third graders constructed their own meanings by

adopting a role of community-researchers, as they used a variety of modes to inquire, register and

share data. Subsequently, students became aware of the varied sources of information different

from the teacher and the textbooks that are meaningful and valuable to promote EFL and literacy

learning. On the other hand, students‟ inquiries upon their communities strengthened their

linkages to family and school community members, friends and neighborhoods. As consequence,

students realized that community people are possessors of knowledge that they cannot find in the


48

library or on the Internet, while they developed a sense of belonging that strongly links to their

own lives.

Furthermore, students conceived their communities from a critical stance, since they

identified community issues and their possible solutions. Such criticality and awareness enable

students to read their worlds while cultivating their social sensitivity and commitment towards

their communities. Finally, students improved their literacy performance as writers, since inquiry

was an experience that naturally leaded third graders to investigate on socio-cultural aspects of

their communities and share meanings to others by following conventional rules of written

English language. In this respect, the role of the teacher switched from controlling learners‟

writing to be a facilitator and scaffold the development of students‟ own inquiries and texts.

This study provides me relevant understandings on how the authoring cycle is a useful

tool to develop agency and ownership when literacy is part of EFL learning, because it allows

me to create a more democratic and holistic environment where learners support each other and

their previous knowledge counts as valuable sources to construct new meanings. Likewise, this

work strengthens the way I can shift the role of my students from being passive learners to be

life-long learners and inquirers. That is to say, that third graders position themselves as authors of

their own education and feel confident to convey and communicate new knowledge. Another

important aspect to bear in mind of this work has to do with the multimodal modes that language

and literacy offer to children, particularly, when they are immersed in an inquiry-based

environment that require them to convey and represent meaning through oral, written, visual,

among other modes, that turn their learning experiences into more fruitful and meaningful ones.


49

On a similar case, Pineda (2007) carried out a case study using the authoring cycle, as an

inquiry-based technique to explore and describe the way a group of 22 eleventh graders develop

inquiry practices in the EFL classroom from a semi-private school of Bogotá, Colombia. In order to

have a clear starting point for the inquiry project, Pineda (2007) followed the authoring cycle stages

to carry out the pedagogical innovation. In so doing it, she explored students‟ interests and noticed

that eleventh graders were concern about plans as professionals. In this regard, she encouraged her

students to pose questions keeping in mind their interests. Subsequently, students agreed on

exploring the educational context of universities through inquiries based on interviews, searches in

the web, visits to some university campus, and reports before choosing a major. As part of their

inquiries, students made interviews, designed brochures, made poster zones, oral presentations and

class discussions to fulfill their interests and augment their range of knowledge about Colombian

university system. Afterwards, students discussed and challenged their perspectives through

interactions and reflections with others to shape their understandings finally, students presented their

findings to other eleventh graders and shared the information they found.

The results of this research reflected students‟ learning experiences with regard to learning

about language and learning through language, since students expressed their development of

reading, writing, speaking and listening skills, as well as they learned about many other significant

topics related to their life projects. With this in mind, eleventh graders recognized through their

journals that English in not a matter of learning grammar structures, but it is an opportunity to write

several compositions according to their personal interests and beliefs. Similarly, they commented the

advantages of being the main actors in the development of their inquiry projects, as they learned

how to get on during an interview to be admitted in a Colombian university, and know more about


50

the academic programs that public and private universities offer to them. Another result of this study

deals with the way inquiry-based learning allowed students to bring their feelings and perceptions

regarding the advantages of developing EFL classes by including their interests.

The previous research leads me to acknowledge the relevance of involving students in

collaborative work and inquiry practices to promote the use of literacy as a social act. Given that,

children within my study are depicted as gifted individuals, whose knowledge background is too

broad, that they are able to co-construct new understandings from what they already know, and the

information their close surroundings offer to them. Furthermore, this research contributes to my

research concern due to the way the authoring cycle was carried out. Such implementation entailed

the acknowledgement of students‟ voice, needs and wants as essential aspects to create democratic

practices within the EFL curriculum. Therefore, I envision my study as an opportunity for students

to express their feelings in relation to their own learning and reflect about the way they learn more

and better.

Furthermore, Gomez (2016) conducted an action research with a group of 35 fifth graders of

a public school of Bogotá, Colombia. This study aimed to characterize the different reflections about

school coexistence that students experienced when doing collaborative inquiry in the EFL classroom

and to analyze the possible influence of collaborative inquiry on students‟ relationships. Gomez

(2016) implemented the authoring cycle as an inquiry-based model and the CBP approach to lead

students into reflections about the way they relate each other. During the initial phase of the project,

students were asked to make groups by setting the rules to work together and achieve different goals

during the inquiry project. Afterwards, students explored their school context and wondered about


51

matters that concern them. At the end of the exploration, they decided to inquire about the school

snack.

As part of the authoring cycle stages, each group posed questions in Spanish and English

concerning different aspects they wanted to know about the school snack. Then they collaboratively

chose some instruments and sources of information to gather data. After collecting information from

books, the internet and some interviews to the school staff in both languages, fifth graders

demonstrated the relevance of language as mean for knowledge construction. Finally, each inquiry

group finished its project and decided to organize and illustrate their findings in books that they

wrote in English. As part of the last stage of the Authoring cycle, students launched their books in

the school library and shared their experiences through oral presentations to students and teachers. In

the same way, students had the opportunity to reflect about their collaborative inquiry practices to

accomplish common goals, while strengthening their citizenship skills.

The findings of this action research implied students‟ reflections regarding task development

and group work, as well as expressing different types of learning. Such reflections evidenced how

collaborative inquiry promoted peaceful attitudes among students, that allowed them to

acknowledge the importance of all members within the group to achieve common goals. In this

regard, the development of tasks and group work were meaningful because students became self-

regulated learners, while strengthened their literacy and language learning. Similarly, students

expressed different learning outcomes such as working in teams, be informed of the whole process

to get their snacks at the school, coexist with their classmates, use Spanish and English to research

and use local sources of information to feed their inquiries.


52

The previous study is quite meaningful for my research interest because the authoring cycle

as a methodological tool brings many opportunities to switch the traditional literacy practices that

have to be developed in my school context, and turn them into more meaningful and dynamic

practices, where my students can be agents of change of their learning. On the other hand, the

inquiry-based approach adopted in the previous study, enlightens my methodological practices, since

inquiry is a useful tool to position my students as knowledge holders of Spanish and English, and

make them confident during the development of their assignments. In the same way, the role of

teacher switches to become a teacher-researcher who guides, orients and supports students in

learning what they want and need. In this respect, the inquiry-based approach, allows me to envision

the curriculum as a dynamic entity that is permeated by socio-cultural elements, which are essential

to work inside the EFL classroom and foster learners‟ spirit of questioning to promote their language

and literacy learning from a social dimension.

In a similar attempt where the inquiry-based approach was the core aspect to understand a

phenomenon, Becerra (2006) carried out a qualitative study in a public school of Bogotá, Colombia.

The participants of her study were forty children, whose environment and socio-economic situation

were inappropriate for them to grow up. This study was conducted to enhance conflict resolution

and cooperative learning, since learners showed struggles while working together during the

development of language learning tasks. The pedagogical intervention of this study followed and

inquiry-based learning environment, where the authoring cycle was implemented to guide learners in

inquiring collaboratively some questions that they posed.


53

Since inquiry starts with a question and demands changes in learning and teaching practices,

Becerra (2006) used twin texts2 (Camp, 2000, p. 400) to build the inquiry process upon students‟

experiences by following the stages of the authoring cycle. In so doing it, she read fiction and non-

fiction stories to ignite students‟ curiosity on butterflies. During the development of their inquiries,

children used a variety of tools to fulfill their queries, namely books and photocopies in English and

Spanish that their teacher brought to the classroom, since they did not have money to afford them.

As long as students inquired collaboratively, they reflected about the process of working

collaboratively to accomplish common goals, while the co-existence issues diminished in the EFL

class. After completing their projects, they decided to share their knowledge and understandings of

butterflies through multiple modes as posters and oral presentations.

The results of the study showed how students became owners of their own language

learning, while co-existence issues decreased through collaborative inquiry practices of a topic that

ignited children‟ curiosity. Similarly, this study allowed learners to use language not solely to read,

write, inquire and solve co-existence issues, but also to learn through language, since learners

searched information about butterflies. On the other hand, this study elucidates the importance of

innovating current language teaching practices and contributes to the development of the EFL

curriculum from a social dimension that acknowledges the natural learning course of language and

literacy of children. Finally, the previous study depicts teachers as researchers and agents of change

that are capable of readapting and reshape elements of theory to guide more holistic language

teaching practices.

2 Twin texts are two books, one fiction and one non-fiction (informational) on the same topic.


54

The aforementioned results nurtures my research interest, since the inquiry-based learning is

a key approach for immersing students in collaborative tasks, that lead them to share, co-construct

and re-create knowledge through the wide range of modes that English and Spanish language have.

Similarly, an inquiry-oriented cycle, as the one implemented in the previous study brings

possibilities to learn through language and learn about the language, particularly when students

make connections between both languages (English and Spanish) to easily understand, convey and

co-construct meaning.

With respect to other research studies that adopted inquiry and literacy from a socio-cultural

perspective as stances, Ghiso (2011), Guccione (2011), Sluys and Laman (2006) and McGianni

2000) and Ghiso (2011) are examples of how such tenets illuminates teaching and learning as

endeavors to create communities of inquirers and thinkers to share knowledge. To begin with, Ghiso

(2011) conducted a yearlong ethnographic study in a public school of United States. The participants

were 20 first graders of African American, European American, Algerian, and Native American

descendent, whose literacy practices were being developed from a linguistic-based approach as basic

skills. This study “examined what it means to be writer in the first grade class, specifically how the

teacher orchestrated writing invitations, how students interacted in such invitations, and how the

teacher and students talked about writing” (p. 347).

As part of such endeavor, the teacher invited students to write about topics that matter to

them and provoked children‟s active participation by constantly questioning them about vandalism,

poverty, smoking, homelessness and littering with the purpose of mingling individual and collective

engagements. The writing curriculum was then permeated of personal narratives and collective

inquiries that mattered to students, since they started to be aware of the social issues of their


55

communities. During the pedagogical intervention, children‟ knowledge background of civic issues,

created opportunities for the class‟ heterogeneity to become into sources of information. For instance,

students and teacher conversations allowed personal, social and historical connections to share, ask

information and provide alternative viewpoints, as they wrote about events that made explicit various

social and economic issues.

As result, students adopted individual and collective critical stances where collaboration and

engagement took place. Similarly, this study demonstrated that structuring writing time around what

matters to students and providing time to spin out their ideas, students are able to set their own

agendas and decide what to share and to whom. On the other hand, teacher was decentered as the

most knowledgeable member of the writing community and opportunities to students were given to

be authors of their own learning, as they follow unpredicted paths in their inquiries.

In reference to the contributions of this pedagogical experience to my research, a similar

perspective aims to preclude a skill-based approach that shies away language and literacy knowledge

of my students to trust on their thoughts and write around what matters to them. Similarly, I consider

paramount to understand students‟ literacy as a practice that allow them to explore social and

cultural sources of their communities, as well as generating environments that switch their roles as

users of linguistic forms to be generators of knowledge by means of inquiry. In this respect, the

previous research helped me to understand how to orchestrate literacy as a tool for inquiry and

promote authorship practices without limitations.

In tune with the previous research work, Guccione (2011) explored the connection between

literacy and inquiry from a socio cultural perspective, but focused on multiliteracies through a

yearlong ethnographic study in a public school of Colorado, United States. Taking into account that


56

Native English Speakers and English Language Learners (ELLs) were part of the class, the

participants within this study were three first graders who were non-English proficient according to

the standardized test of Colorado English Language Assessment. Her investigation was meant to

unveil first graders‟ literacy practices and foster their content knowledge skills through inquiry-

based instruction.

While first graders inquired about animals and other topics of their interest by means of

expository texts, they were engaged through a multiplicity of language arts of reading, speaking,

listening, writing, drawing, viewing and representing, which allowed them to construct meaning

during one year across the 90-minute language arts class. The data gathered in this qualitative study

was organized in a main category named Literacy Practices (LP), and eleventh subcategories:

viewing, I learned, interactive components, schema, connections, questions, art strategies,

decoding, text features, code switching and sources.

The findings of this study evidenced how the engagement of learners within an inquiry

environment promotes not solely the use of multiple literacy practices, but students‟ learning

enjoyment, which allowed them to be self-regulated learners and authors of their own education.

Additionally, the integration of inquiry and literacy practices brought the development of

essential skills to search information that matters to students and enrich their content knowledge.

In reference to the contribution of the aforementioned study to my research concern, a

similar student-centered approach to teaching and learning based on inquiry-based instruction is

aimed to be the basis to foster literacy, in which the close surroundings of students are to be used

as sources of information. In this regard, the participants of my study can benefit from meaning-


57

rich activities that embrace their social and cultural resources and bring opportunities to use

literacy from a social dimension in meaningful ways. Additionally, the work of Ghiso (2011)

discloses the appropriateness of instilling an inquiry mindset on my EFL class and helped me to

discover many ways of integrating students‟ knowledge background to new information they

might get through their collaborative inquiries.

In this way, literacy and language learning within my study will be an opportunity to

support learners‟ comprehension of their social worlds instead of demonstrating the acquisition of

a new skill. Thus, EFL learning might turn into a fruitful experience to tap students‟ inner

language abilities through several modes, which ultimately help them to become self-regulated

learners, owners and agents, and authors of their own education.

Following this same line of linking literacy to socio cultural elements of students‟ context,

Sluys and Laman (2006) conducted a yearlong ethnographic study in a public elementary school of

Illinois, United States, as a response to bring authentic language and literacy practices, where a

scripted curriculum portrayed language as an object of study through defined rules. Although the

participants were part of two different classrooms with respect to the grade levels and their literacy

experience, they shared many beliefs and practices. The purpose of this research was to “examine

the ways in which multiage and multilingual students used written conversations to inquire into

language and their […] social worlds [and] how students took responsibility on for learning about

language as they engage in written conversations (p. 223) as a strategy in which participants engage

in face-to-face chats on paper” (p. 225). Another goal of this research was to know how students use

language for social purposes as they conversed in paper with peers. In order to accomplish such


58

goals, the teacher guided students on class meetings, inquiry projects and written conversations “, to

pursuit their questions.

The findings of this study showed how students used language conventions, the features of

language and cultural resources to write their conversations, as drawings, shortcuts, symbols, sound-

symbol relationships and different fonts to engage in friendly and meaningful chats. As

consequence, learners constructed meaning and depicted themselves in regards of what they were or

wanted to be within their peer group or social worlds. Such outcomes become part of the process of

learning about language, learning from and about others‟ experiences through meaningful

interactions.

Additionally, written conversations invited students to show what they know regarding

grammar rules, proper spelling, and phonemic awareness to inquire about what they do not know

and write more than what they would have produced on their own. In the same way, written

conversations afforded collaborative learning that supported students‟ growth as writers, since one

member of a writing partnership might bring knowledge of form and another of literary language.

As consequence of the previous knowledge students had, the teacher could examine the way they

build their literate identities through which students saw themselves as communicators, readers,

revisers and accomplished writers, while others saw themselves as actresses, friends, comedians,

inquirers, animal lovers, computer users, immigrants, mathematicians, boys, girls, among other

roles.

The previous study gives me insights to understand the relevance of creating authentic

language learning contexts in order to engage students on literacy and inquiry practices, where they


59

feel empowered to take the responsibility of being autonomous learners. Additionally, Sluys &

Laman (2006) work, offers me different perspectives on how helping my students to portray

themselves as competent users of language and share meaning to others through collaborative work.

Building on this trend of research, I adhere to the social perspective of language as a communicative

tool that engages students in inquiry practices and learning from others to promotes authorship

practices and meaningful literacy learning experiences.

Finally, McGinnis (2007) conducted an ethnographic study with Khmer (Cambodian ethnic),

Vietnamese and Somali children of migrant farm workers who were in sixth, seventh and eighth

grade in a public school of Pennsylvania, United States. The main concern was directly related to the

way school literacy practices did not address the diversity and complexities of students‟ language

practices, neglecting the varied ways youth use reading, writing and language. Thereby, a broader

perspective of literacy was unfolded following the multimodal and multilingual nature of students‟

literacy and language practices. In this sense, this study intended mainly to build a curriculum

through inquiry-based projects around students‟ interests, knowledge and social worlds in order to

create spaces to listen their voices, especially of those whose first language was not English.

Additionally, McGinnis wanted to give her students semiotic systems to construct their intended

meanings through inquiry-based projects and depict learners as agents of their meaning-making

processes instead of focusing on the acquisition of English Literacy to comprehend meanings that

are based in the dominant culture.

During the pedagogical innovation, students began choosing their topics of inquiry, which

ranged from investigating rap music in the United States to writing about fruit from their home

country as a way to easing their feelings of loss, since they had to live their rural life to be part of the


60

urban life of a new country. Likewise, students chose to inquire about such topics as an opportunity

to make sense of their new urban identities. In so doing it, students drew on and combined their

different languages, writing systems and modes of meaning making available, as they so naturally

do in their daily lives. As result of their work, students created multilingual and multimodal texts to

express themselves and their previous knowledge regarding topics of their interest as rap music,

Asia‟s fruits and Dragon Ball Z. In spite of the limited resources students had, they used magazines,

traditional school texts, movies, even students‟ own knowledge and elder woman in the community

as valuable resources during their investigations. On top of that, the majority of resources were in

English, the students discussed their content using their native languages. In this way, students

explored collaboratively through dialogic inquiry practices, while learning from their peers,

enhancing their language and literacy abilities.

After gathering data of their inquiries, students presented their investigations by combining

different linguistic, oral, visual and physical modes to express the intended meaning through a tri-

fold poster for displaying their multimodal and multilingual texts. The results of this study were

stunning since youngsters learnt from their peers and acquired knowledge about language.

Furthermore, language and literacy learning emerged as the students participated in different ways.

Another relevant trait of this research findings deals with the way students‟ voices and feelings

became essential elements for developing multilingual and multimodal literacy practices. Similarly,

students were seen as capable learners with abilities and talents to co-construct meaning, and new

understandings of their social worlds.

According to my research purposes, this study gives me several insights as teacher researcher

to understand the role of students as knowledge holders, since they are capable of using their


61

language and literacy knowledge to work collaboratively, when they are in charge of investigating

topics that matter to them within their social context. On top of that, as teacher researcher I consider

paramount to value multimodal nature of students‟ literacy as an opportunity to position them as

owners of their knowledge, agents of change, responsible and successful learners within our fast-

changing global world. Similarly, the inquiry-based project developed in the work of McGinnis

(2007) gives me insights on how to create environments to maximize learning opportunities, peer

bounding and literacy practices from a social dimension that might help to overcome the curricular

boundaries of the EFL mandated curricula.

After having examined several research works based on English Language Learning and

Literacy instruction within an inquiry mindset, I found relevant connections between my research

and the aforementioned investigations, since there is an inclusion of a socio-cultural perspective of

literacy practices and language learning. Even though, these studies refer to the relevance of

combining inquiry and literacy from a socio-cultural perspective to promote students‟ language

learning, empowerment, authoring practices, collaboration, self-regulation of learning and the co-

construction of curriculum, they do not describe the emerging EFL literacy practices that students

might use when they inquire upon their close surroundings, particularly, their school community.

Although some studies took into account local knowledge of students‟ communities to develop

writing practices from a socio-cultural perspective, none of them specifically explore the modes that

elementary students draw on to bring out their literacy practices to the EFL classroom, within an

inquiry-based learning environment. This is why my work is relevant and appropriate to be

conducted, since it potentially contributes to the TEFL field.


62

Chapter 3

Research Design

This chapter presents the research framework with the purpose of answering the following

research question: What literacy practices emerge when third graders inquire collaboratively into

their academic surroundings at a private school in Bogotá? The chapter introduces the research

methodology of the study, the setting and participants, as well as the instruments for data

collection, role of the researcher and ethical issues.

Type of study

Since this study accounts for a social phenomenon related to literacy development of EFL

learners within a particular socio cultural context, it is necessary to observe the reality of

participants experiences from different angles. In this sense, this work is a qualitative research

which contemplates that “meaning is socially constructed by individuals in interaction with their

world” (Merriam, 2002, p. 3), due to the fact that participants inquire about their school

surroundings and construct new understandings, and meanings while developing literacy

practices from a socio cultural dimension.

Similarly, a qualitative research locates the researcher as observer to identify, act and

implement changes that he or she considers relevant to tackle the problems within their natural

setting attempting “to make sense of meanings people bring to them through a series of

representations including field notes, interviews, conversations, photographs, recordings and

memos” (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005, p. 3).


63

While this study is a qualitative research due to the objectives that it pursues and the

characteristics of my role as teacher-researcher within the context I currently work, I adopted the

action research methodology in order to articulate educational and research practices to work on

the issues this study address. Action research is conceived by Burns (2001) as “a form if inquiry

in which practitioners reflect systematically about their practice in order to obtain results, that

contribute to improve and build knowledge” (p. 33).

Similarly, Mills (2003) claims that “action research is any systematic inquiry conducted

by teachers researchers to gather information about the ways that their particular school operates,

how they teach, and how well their students learn” (p.4). Furthermore, Creswell (2002) considers

that action research aims to “improve the practice of education by inquiring on local issues, to

reflect upon them, to collect and analyze data and to implement changes based on findings” (p.

580). According to my perspective, the previous ideas frame a central part of this research since

the data gathered provide explanations and evidences of the way students develop meaningful

literacy practices during a collaborative inquiry process they take part.

In this respect, action research is a methodology that allows me to generate personal

theories by studying my own teaching practice to develop insights into my students‟ learning and

identify potential problems that might imply the modification of my teaching practices and

different ways of generating knowledge. Accordingly, action research is the most convenient and

powerful methodological design to develop my teaching and research practices, since this study

implies a shift on the way language and literacy practices are conceived from a structuralist

perspective to be viewed as social constructs that might enhance language learning. In this

regard, the implementation of this methodology might bring opportunities for my students to


64

convey and make meaning in concordance to the local knowledge present in their school

community and provide them with occasions to experience meaningfully their EFL learning

process.

Action research methodology implies different models, such as Burns (2009), McNiff

(2002), Kemmis and McTaggart (1992), and Cohen Manion and Morrison (2000). Burns (2009)

describes action research as a cycle of interrelated activities to explore an issue in teaching or

learning. Such cycles have to do with identifying areas of concern; observing how those areas

play out in the setting of the study; discussing how the issue might be addressed; collect data to

determine the action to be taken (e.g., student questionnaires, observation reports, journal entries)

and planning strategic actions based on the data to address the issue.

In addition, McNiff (2002) action research model has to do with a “form of research

which can be undertaken by people in any context […] it involves thinking carefully about what

[it is] doing, so it can also be called a kind of self-reflective practice” (p. 15). In this sense, action

research implies learning through action and reflection across a variety of contexts as an abstract

discipline, and a set of procedures that can be applied within the real-life experience of real

people. The most widely known model is that of Kemmis and Mctaggart (1992) which focuses on

implementing an action plan, where the researcher has “to plan, act, observe and reflect more

carefully, more systematically and more rigorously than one usually do in everyday life” (p. 10)

Since the characteristics of my educational context allowed me to take a constant

participation within this research as observer and homeroom English teacher, action research

methodology “empower teachers to take control of their own professional development (Nunan,


65

2006, p. 1). In this regard, teachers become in teacher-researchers and move between theory and

practice, as a process that leads changes and improvements in what happens in the classroom.

Regarding the model of action research that best addresses to the purpose of this study is

that of Cohen et al. (2000), since this methodology can be used in almost any setting where a

“problem involving people, task and procedures cries out for solution or where some change or

feature results in a more desirable outcome” (p. 226). For instance, the current educational setting

of this study, allude that communicative language teaching is the favorable approach for the

development of reading, writing, listening and speaking skills. Such situation turns the EFL

practices into language-cantered ones where students have to develop lineal and fragmented task

to command language. In this sense, action research guides how learner-centered practices lead to

obtain desirable outcomes in the EFL classroom, by implementing an integrated approach for

learning and teaching including values and attitudes, as part of the constant reflection, which

action research methodology suggests.

Cohen et al. (2000) also define action research as “a small-scale intervention in the

functioning of the real world and chose examination of the effects of such intervention” (p. 227).

In this sense, the situation that puzzles me concerning literacy learning was intervened in order to

analyze rich data cases that informed me about the effects of such pedagogical innovation. Action

research involves a spiral of cycles of planning, acting, observing and reflecting, and then re-

planning, further implementation, observing and reflecting (Cohen et al. 2000, p. 229).

I will describe each stage according to the moments this methodology is developed. The

planning phase has to do with exploring and identifying literacy processes in the school curricula

as well as finding information to give account of such processes. Subsequent, was essential to


66

design an action plan meant to shift the current EFL literacy instruction of the EFL classroom.

The action phase has to do with the implementation of the previous action plan to collect data to

be analyzed. Then, observation phase involves perceiving the effect of the action plan by means

of the analysis and examination of the data to inform what is happening, and go towards the

reflecting stage, where the outcomes of the intervention allow to establish new teaching strategies

and plan further data collection to articulate and report final findings.

Figure 4. Research cycles based on Cohen et al. (2000)

Research Setting

This research is conducted at Liceo de Cervantes School, a private school founded in 1934 and

located in the North of Bogotá, Colombia. The school has a population of 1.258 students who

attend classes from 07:00 a.m. to 2:40 p.m. This institution started to enroll girls in 2015. Now,


67

classes consisted on both male and female students in preschool, first grade and second grade.

The number of girls in the school is 48.

Liceo de Cervantes School has an intensive English program of ten hours per week based

on the communicative approach aimed to make students reach high levels of proficiency in the

English language communicative competence. Similarly, students are instructed to learn

Phonics, Science and Math during one hour per week correspondingly, due to the fact one of the

school purposes is to incorporate a bilingual education system in a near future.

Ninety-six teachers are part of the school community; 18 of them belong to the English

area divided into preschool, elementary and high school sections. English language teachers meet

two hours per week to talk about class planning, assessment processes, institutional activities and

standardized exams preparation for students in all academic levels. Teachers teach English,

Phonics, Math and Science mostly in the classroom, although twice a month teachers and

students can use ICT in the English Laboratory for students from 3rd

to 11th

grade, likewise the

English Play Room is available for students from preschool to 2nd

grade.

The mission of the school is focused on orienting students with catholic identity by means

of learning how to be, do and share to be leaders of tomorrow and look forward society

improvement. The vision aims to strengthen the catholic identity to keep leading the orientation

of competent citizens who are able to humanize the globalized world in the culture, technology

and the fields of science.


68

Participants

The participants of the study are 20 third graders who are aged from 8 to 9 years old. The

students belong to social strata 3 and 4, and biological parents and siblings compose their

families. Since this qualitative research is an opportunity to foster literacy practices, it is

important to select a purposeful sample from which the most can be enhanced. With respect to

the criterion employed to select the participants, a non-probabilistic sample was selected to target

a particular group of students.

Similarly, purposeful and convenience sampling strategy was the qualitative research

strategy used to select a particular group of participants, as Patton (1990) claims the relevance to

select “information rich cases for study in depth to illuminate the questions under study”, as those

participants from whose is possible to observe characteristics of paramount importance for the

purpose of this research (p.169).

Data collection and Techniques

Due to the nature of this qualitative research and its purpose is to describe the literacy practices

that students might use when inquiring about school surroundings, it is necessary to define the

instruments for data collection to gather information that respond to the previous need. For the

purpose of this study, I have decided to use three instruments for gathering the data: Field notes,

Students‟ Journals and Students Artifacts.


69

Instruments

Field note. Is an observational technique that includes “descriptions and accounts of

observed events, including, non-verbal information, physical settings, groups‟ structures [and]

interaction among participants” (Burns, 1999, p. 87). As this instrument is useful to report direct

observations, it allows data gathering of students‟ interactions in order to identify the emerging

literacy practices that are enhanced when students become part of the inquiry-based learning. The

field note layout utilized for data collection of this research is divided into two rows for jotting

important observations “ in the heat of the moment, for making methodological, theoretical,

analytical annotations and personal comments, written during reflective moments” (Lankashear

and Knobel 2004, p. 230). It is worth to mention that audio and video recordings were used to

feed the field notes since gathering data, teaching and classroom management were difficult tasks

to do at the same time. In order to know if field notes serve for the purpose of data collection, a

piloting was done to validate the way observations should be jotted and understand the way this

type of data should be collected. (See Appendix C for field note layout).

Artifacts. Are evidences of learning and understanding accompanied by authors‟

reflection and “represent another form of primary evidence” (Yin, 2011, p. 148). For this study,

artifacts are mostly written tasks in which children complete various activities that are collected

at the end of the class to be one of the main sources for analyzing and describing inquiry

processes and social situated literacy practices. Hubbard and Miller (1993) affirm that students‟

artifacts are one of the best sources of data for teacher-researchers as “it is tangible evidence of

what kids [students] respond to different learning tasks” (p. 102). Artifacts will be hand-in-hand

with multimodal representations to provide students with tools for meaning-making and ways to


70

represent knowledge through the use of language and drawings for expressing their ideas.

Similarly, artifacts were piloted and the experience was quite rewarding due to the fact that

students involvement and performance were the expected. They did the activities and wrote some

reflections upon the work they did in pairs. (See Appendix D for student artifact)

Journals. Are a “set of personal notes. A log of events rich in personal sentiments and

confessions” (Burns, 1999, p. 89). Respectively, journals allow recording students‟ reflections,

opinions and reactions, while they use a variety of modes to carry out proposed activities within

the pedagogical intervention, in terms of collaborative inquiry. The journal format includes the

topic of the activity and a set of guided questions that vary according to the number of activities

students do and their type of interactions. Students used Spanish to write their journals taking into

account that their English proficiency is still emerging. Similarly, Spanish as students‟ mother

tongue allows them to make better sense of their feelings, thoughts and reflections. (See

Appendix E for student journal).

Role of the researcher

With regard to my role as homeroom English teacher, I simultaneously adopt active roles as

researcher, observer and participant in the sense of becoming a planner, designer, listener,

synthesizer and reporter during the whole process of this research. In this sense, the adoption of

these roles, particularly the teacher-researcher role allows me to “identify more suitable practices

[in the] classroom[s], in order to try new possibilities that can benefit teaching and learning

practices” (Lankshear and Knobel, 2004).


71

In other words, I am an active part of the whole research, since I am responsible for the

design and implementation of pedagogical activities that integrate meaningful literacy practices

and collaborative inquiry and for the process of collecting and analyzing data. The previous

pursuits, imply “building toward theory from observations and intuitive understanding gleaned

from being in the field” (Merriam, 2002, p. 5)

I collected data systematically from May to October 2016. My attention focused on

students‟ use of literacy practice by means of different modes beyond reading and writing,

generated during the inquiry process they were immersed in. Triangulation of data took place

using the aforementioned data collection instruments to validate and verify the information.

Ethical Issues

Cohen et al. (2000) state the importance of “attend moral issues implicit in the work of social

researchers and of their need to meet their obligations with respect to those involved in, or

affected by, their investigations” (p.49). According to Diener and Crandall (as cited in Cohen et

al. 2007, p. 52) an informed consent has to do with “the procedures in which individuals choose

whether to participate in an investigation after being informed of facts that would be likely to

influence their decisions”. Bearing in mind the relevance of informing the nature of this research

study, the school principal and parents received a consent form with the explanation of the

project and the management data will have (See Appendix F and G). Similarly, an ethics

statement is signed by the researcher to show awareness and take responsibility of all the

implications this study addresses. At the end of the project, the outcomes of this piece of work

will be shared to the Principal and English Area staff of the school.


72

The gathered data through the instruments I previously mentioned, allowed me to answer

the questions stated in my study. The pedagogical intervention that I designed to foster literacy

practices by means of collaborative inquiry is described in the next chapter.


73

Chapter 4

Instructional Design

The present chapter explains the pedagogical component of the study. It presents from an

instructional point of view, the development of EFL social situated literacy practices as students

inquire into their close surroundings. First, the educational context where the pedagogical

intervention takes place is described. Then, the curricular platform with the visions of curriculum,

language, learning and classroom that frame the inquiry-based approach assumed within these

instructional units are presented. Finally, an account of the instructional activities, goals, stages,

and learning experiences are explained.

As mentioned in chapter one, this study is meant to describe the emergent literacy

practices when third graders inquire collaboratively upon their surroundings. As result of my

constant reflection as an English language teacher, researcher and material designer, I decided to

adjust curricular activities based on students‟ interests, to make a transition between language-

centered practices into more learner-centered experiences to promote lifelong learning. Now the

main pedagogical constructs are explained.

Curricular Platform

The pedagogical intervention of this study is designed as a response to the objectives of the

school curricula, where learners have to be authors of their own learning. Thus, it is relevant to

contextualize literacy practices instruction and promote inquiry skills on learners, based on the

“problem-posing” pedagogy (Freire, 2011, p. 79) that invites students to think, propose and


74

research on the topics they are curious about, as a way to interact and construct knowledge within

their academic surroundings as the school community.

The role of the students embraces a deep and active immersion in the school community

exploration where they inquire collaboratively using Spanish for authentic communication and

scaffolding, as well as using English to shape and represent their inquiries through literacy

practices that embrace their close academic surroundings. Similarly, both languages will be the

tools to use local sources of information, data collection instruments and create multimodal and

expository texts, interviews, taking pictures, making posters, drawings and other type of

representations to shape students‟ findings along the inquiry units they worked on.

Concerning the inquiry-based approach used in this study, the authoring cycle (Short and

Burke, 2001) is the curricular framework that underlies the pedagogical intervention, since it

follows a process that guides and encourages the participants to think and decide by themselves

throughout this project. Within this cycle, six phases were developed where the point of departure

was the connection to students‟ life experiences with respect to school community assets, that

guided them to use a wide range of social situated literacy practices to research, create, represent,

share and plan new inquiries.

In order to explain the scope of the instructional implementation, I present the visions of

curriculum, language, learning and classroom that show how inquiry activities promote the use of

social situated literacy practices of EFL learners in meaningful ways.


75

Vision of Curriculum

The curriculum in which this pedagogical intervention relies is Curriculum as Collaborative

Inquiry (Short & Burke, 1991). Curriculum as collaborative inquiry is the process of

collaborative construction of knowledge, where students continually “seek understandings of

personal and social significance from new perspectives, new sign systems perspectives, new

knowledge system perspectives, new social perspectives for purposes of creating a more just, a

more equitable a more thoughtful world” (p. 60).

Following the previous statement, curriculum as collaborative inquiry is based on what

learners want to understand and explore in their immediate social context, taking into account

their life experiences and previous knowledge of the world as source of knowledge. This type of

curriculum fits to the purpose of this research, since learners are at the center of learning practices

as active agents, who construct knowledge based on their school community assets. Similarly,

curriculum as inquiry, allows educators “to examine their beliefs and actions in order to create

more democratic and learning environments” (Short, 2001, p. 21)

This inquiry-based curriculum is nourished with Nunan (1988) assertions about learner-

centered curriculum as a “collaborative effort between teacher and learners, since learners are

closely involved in the decision-making process” (p. 2), for instance having the opportunity of

selecting what they want to learn and how to learn through active involvement within the learning

process. Thus, curriculum as inquiry allows students to trace their own goals and learn better

through their particular wonders and personal experiences.

Curriculum as inquiry also provides opportunities to connect the learner with more

understandings and fosters their development of autonomy through the interaction with three


76

different knowledge sources (Harste, 1993). These knowledge sources are 1) Personal and social

knowing; the knowledge that learners bring from their personal experiences of living in the

world; 2) knowledge systems that humans use to structure knowledge e.g., History, Biology and

Economics and 3) Sign systems as the alternative ways of creating and communicating meaning

with others such as language, art, music and so forth.

Concerning this pedagogical intervention, the development of new understanding and

knowledge rely on active learners‟ explorations of the physical, historical, intellectual and social

environments that their school community offers in order to create new meanings and pursuits

through their inquiries.

Vision of Learning

The vision of learning within this pedagogical intervention is based on the interaction with peers

and the teacher as a dialogic practice, where collaboration and meaning making take place to

shape students inquiries by means of multiple modes of language. Similarly, the experiential

learning ideas of Tudor (2001, p. 79) and its principles feed this vision of learning. In this sense,

learning is a meaningful act, where students “learn by doing” while they inquire into their close

surroundings; “use authentic materials” as local sources of information present in the school

community; use “collaborative models” of learning when children work together while sharing

common goals within their inquiries. Then, comes “holistic practice” where both languages

English and Spanish involves a natural communication to convey messages and ideas putting

aside the linguistic elements of language that in certain moment might be shaped.


77

In regards to the vision of curriculum, experiential learning place the students at the center

of the educational practices where they discover themselves as active agents of their own learning

and “ their immediate personal experiences are taken as point of departure for deciding how to

organize the learning process” (Nunan, 1999, p. 5). Similarly, experiential learning intertwines

personal knowledge of individuals with new understandings through a process of transformation

where immediate experience places an essential role for the construction of new meanings.

Vision of Language

Bearing in mind that language is not just a mere linguistic entity, but also a way to represent

personal experiences of living in the world, this pedagogical intervention lies on Tudor (2001)

assertions, who considers that language is a “mean for learning” (p. 79), experience the world

and the social context students are immersed in. Similarly, Gutierrez (2001) contends that

language is “a powerful intermediary tool in learning activity (p. 564). That is to say that,

language (Spanish and English) is the vehicle to empower students, while they make meaning

and create new understandings, not only by as a single mode, but through an infinite set of

meaningful modes namely, oral, written, audio, drawings, images and so forth, that are present in

students‟ context. Thus, language allows learners to have lifelong learning experiences in and out

of the classroom, by valuing their previous experiences and knowledge for the co-construction of

local knowledge with peers and broader members of the school community.


78

Vision of Classroom

Since this innovation implies an active learners‟ role as inquirer-researcher, the classroom is the

precise place where learning experiences take place to make meaning upon the local knowledge

that the school community possess, while literacy practices are developed from a social situated

perspective. In tune with the aforementioned vision of curriculum, which promotes the

development of learners‟ autonomy, the classroom within this pedagogical intervention relies on

the concepts of learner autonomy, self-direction and empowerment. In this sense, the classroom

is the place where language learners bring with them a “variety of knowledge, experience and

insights which can allow them to play an active role in their language learning, be active agents

and co-authors” (Pennycook, 1997 as cited in Tudor 2001, p. 117).

The concept of classroom that this innovation fosters goes beyond the four walls and

provides two key components of the learner-centered classroom. First, students have more

responsibility in their hands to manage their learning; second, teachers take roles as facilitators of

knowledge to help students in their learning process, rather than being the source of knowledge.

In other words, the classroom becomes the perfect place to construct knowledge and promote

collaboration for learning and thinking where “children can create a new reality – a reality that

will make a significant difference” (Short, Harste and Burke. 1996, p. 48).

Pedagogical Intervention

The upcoming section of this chapter presents the goals, methodology, stages, learning

experiences and outcomes of the pedagogical intervention. The addressed goals states as follows:

Pedagogical Intervention Goal


79

By the end of these pedagogical units, students will inquire cooperatively about their

school community by means of a variety social situated and multimodal literacy practices

Pedagogical Objectives

To empower students as inquirers-researchers by providing them with a relevant local

context for the construction of new understandings and meaning making.

To promote students‟ sense of agency and ownership through an inquiry-based learning

environment and the use of multimodal representations.

Taking into account the main goals and objectives within the EFL syllabus, I designed a

pedagogical innovation based on the authoring cycle (Short et al., 1996) as the curricular frame.

The authoring cycle puts inquiry at the center of what education is all about and promotes the

“integration of personal and social knowing, knowledge systems and sign systems within a social

context based in education for democracy” (Short et al., 1996, p. 261).

Accordingly, for the purpose of this pedagogical innovation, the authoring cycle is a

powerful curricular framework that fosters the autonomy of learners and the development of

collaborative inquiry skills. In the same way, the authoring cycle allows the use of multiple

literacies where various ways of knowing are encouraged and enhanced. The next lines, mention

the stages through the authoring cycle was implemented: a) Life experiences, building from the

known; b) Taking the time to find questions for inquiry; c) Gaining new perspectives; d)

Attending to difference; e) sharing what was learned; and f) Planning new inquiries (Short et al.,

1996, p.53). The authoring cycle is illustrated through the following visual display based on the

stages (Short et al., 1996, p. 52) propose:


80

Figure 5. Authoring cycle adaptation from Short et al. (1996).

The pedagogical intervention was carried out from May to November, 2016 by

implementing two curricular units where students were invited to inquire into their academic

surroundings and developed multiple social situated literacy practices as well as accomplished

the creation of particular text types in regards to the meaning making processes they experience

on socio-cultural knowledge, as the following table shows:

Table 2. Curricular units and text types accomplished

Date Curricular Unit Accomplished Text Type

May, 12 to

August 26

The History of my school Community: An inquiry

project about historical events of the school. Expository Text (Timeline)

September 5 to

November 14

People of my School Community: An inquiry project

about personal and professional life of teachers. Biography

The first curricular unit, The History of my School Community (See appendix I) had as

point of departure the introduction of inquiry to students, since EFL instruction is mainly about


81

learning about grammar and they had not experienced the act of inquiring in the EFL class. The

first stage of the unit was named “Life Experiences” where students‟ first engagements were

guided through interviews to their classmates and explorations of the school places such as their

own classroom, kindergarten, elementary and high school sections in order to shape students

wonders into a major topic to be investigated. The image below shows a collage of how children

used an interview to know more about other classmates and the way they jotted observations and

wonders during their explorations of the school.

Figure 6. Life experiences stage. Students‟ exploration of their school community.

Exploration of the

classroom

Interview by pairs

(Frontside)


82

The second stage was “Building from the known” in which students brainstormed ideas

about their school community through a set of guided questions. The answers they provided in

English and Spanish were used to make a spider web, where students made meaning through the

connection of their previous knowledge to new understandings. The next image shows the spider

web students made through their brainstorming with my guidance.

Figure 7.Building from the known stage. Spider web as the result of brainstorming upon the school community.

After having explored and described the school community in the spider web, the students

moved to the third stage “Taking the Time to Find Questions for Inquiry”. During this stage,

students were told to write the “what I know” and the “what I want to learn” sections of the KWL

chart taking into account their life experiences, as point of departure for posing questions in

relation to their school community. Students‟ questions were written in Spanish so that they


83

could easily express themselves, as well as may of the questions geared to reflect upon the

inquiry process they were taking part in. Most of the answers were aimed to know the same topic:

The history of the school community. Students‟ answers were assorted in seven groups,

conformed by three or two students, who worked collaboratively to solve their queries. The

following image shows the KWL chart (See Appendix H) of a student with the “What I know”

and the “What I want to Know” of the School community.

Figure 8. Taking the Time to find questions for Inquiry” stage. KWL Chart. Students‟ questions upon the History of

the School Community.

The subsequent stage was “Gaining new Perspectives”; this stage consisted of gathering

information needed to answer the inquiry questions through different sources of knowledge. This

was the longest stage because students took several sessions to nourish their wonders and

organize the information they obtained. During this stage, students were grouped according to

their inquiry interests and brainstormed sources of information to collect data. For instance, they

thought about making interviews to community helpers that have been working for many years in

the school, looking for books in the library that tell the history of the school and search for

information in the school web site as local sources of knowledge.

The first local source of knowledge students used was the interview to the academic

coordinator. Students used Spanish and English to carry out the interview, while they developed


84

inquiry skills and sense of agency. The next image depicts the moment in which students did the

interview to start gaining new perspectives.

Figure 9. Gaining new Perspectives stage. Students doing an interview.

After doing the interview, students and teacher talked about the preliminary results of

their inquirers and decided to make a museum of history about the school with the initial

information gathered. Each group made a mini-poster where they wrote short sentences In

English complemented with images and drawings that represented the historical facts of the

school told during the interview. Then, each group used English to present orally the information

they queried. The next image shows the moment where students presented the school history

museum they did by inquiring and working collaboratively using the first source of local

knowledge.

Figure 10. Gaining new perspectives stage. Oral presentation of the School History Museum.


85

Subsequently, students talked in Spanish with the teacher to reflect upon the experience of

working together during the interview, elaborated the school history museum and shared the

initial findings orally to the whole class with the purpose of enhancing their collaboration and

inquiry skills. Then, as part of the same stage “Gaining new perspectives”, students decided to

inquire more about the history of the school community due to some facts provoked their

curiosity during the interview with the guest speaker. They used the two sources of local

knowledge they previously had proposed such as viewing the year book of 1979 available in the

school library and surfing in the school web site to see what information was worth to feed their

inquiries. The following image shows a collage of the central moments third graders experienced

during this stage.

Figure 11. Gaining new perspectives stage. Third graders experiencing collaborative inquiry process.

Students working

collaboratively

Inquiries through

multimodal modes.

School web site as a local

source of knowledge.

Yearbook of 1979 as a local

source of knowledge

Oral interactions as dialogic

inquiry processes.


86

The following stage was “Attending to difference”. During this moment, students revised

if the information collected was good enough to answer their questions, and if it was necessary to

explore other sources to collect more data. This stage also allowed students to reflect upon the

difficulties they might have had during the beginning of their inquiries and how to improve future

inquiry experiences. Similarly, they acknowledged the learning experience and the way the used

both languages to know more about their school community.

In order to present the findings, students took decisions about what, how and when these

findings were going to be shared and presented to broader members of the school. This process

implied organization of the data and a discussion about what type of text should they make to

show their outcomes. As I was their guide during their investigations, I showed them several type

of expository texts to present their findings, such as a poster wall, timeline and bulletin boards.

Since students were familiarized with timelines in the previous grade they had coursed, they

decided to make a single timeline that included all the information they gathered. Some students

turned back to local sources of knowledge to copy some of the pictures that depicted the

historical facts of the school and enrich each year of the timeline. Since some students were in

charge of inquiring about relevant facts during 2014, 2015 and 2016 did not find images on

internet nor in the yearbooks, they took pictures to some members of the school to represent such

events. Finally, the timeline was done and it was entitled “Liceo Cervantes Timeline”. It was

displayed outside the classroom.

The forthcoming stage was “Sharing what was learned”. Students as authors wanted to

present the timeline in a more formal way, so they invited teachers and students to listen and

observe in detail the beginning of their school community started. They also published the


87

timeline in the first issue of the institutional magazine of the school named “Quijotadas”. They

felt happy, famous and proud of themselves because they presented the timeline in English

through an oral presentation and published their piece of work to the whole community (parents

and external members of the school). The next collage showed the different moments that

students experienced during the oral presentation of the timeline and their learning outcomes

within the publication of their expository text.

Figure 12. Sharing what was learned Stage. Publication and Oral presentation of the Liceo Cervantes Timeline in the

institutional magazine.

Additionally, students wrote the “What I learned” in their KWL charts as part of the

inquiry process they started, where they describe multiple learning outcomes. Some of the

learning outcomes were related mainly to the historical background of the school, since it was the

Oral presentation

of the timeline

Publication of

the timeline


88

main purpose of the inquiry project, but they also learnt how to make a timeline in English, use

both languages to do an interview and write past events in English.

Figure 13. Sharing what was learned stage. Students‟ learning outcomes.

The last stage was “Planning New Inquiries”. During this phase, students were

encouraged to think how well they had achieved their goal throughout the inquiry process as well

as difficulties they faced. Then, they were asked to think about new ideas and interests they

would like to pursue.

Regarding the meaning third graders constructed as authors in the first curricular unit

“The History of our School Community” the authoring cycle was initiated again from its first

stage “Life experiences”. At his point, I took advantages of the elements of our school

community and showed them a power point presentation that contained pictures of human,

ecological and linguistic assets of the school in order to make connections and bring a new topic

to be investigated. Then, they wrote the second KWL with information they already knew and


89

their learning expectations as part of the second stage “Building from the known”. This chart

allowed me to know which the central topic was for the second curricular unit that was headed

towards knowing about “Community helpers of the School”. The image below presents the

second KWL chart with students‟ wonders as the base for new inquiries.

Figure 14. Building from the known stage. Students new inquiries based on human assets of their school community.

Since students already had begun to think on a topic for inquiring, they had time for

talking and thinking about what community helper, they would like to know more about, as part

of the third stage “Taking the Time to Find Questions for Inquiry”. After each student chose a

community helper, I read their KWL charts and I found commonalities on their interest, as an

opportunity to group students again and keep promoting collaborative practices while they

inquire.

The following stage “Gaining new perspectives” started when third graders as

experienced inquirers decided to know more about a community helper by pairs. This inquiry

topic came from the natural curiosity of children since they felt some affection towards


90

community helpers and they were curious about their personal and professional life. They

considered that interviews would be the appropriate tool for collecting data, in so doing, students

started to shape their questions using Spanish and asked teachers for their consent to be their

interviewees. The image below shows a sample of an interview done by two students, who

inquired about one of their teachers.

Figure 15. Gaining new perspectives stage. Students interviewing to their Physical Education teacher

The subsequent stage “Attending to difference” was aimed to revise if the information

collected was enough to answer the questions students posed in the KWL chart and to reflect

about the aspects they found important during the inquiry process they lived. Secondly, students

were asked to think how to represent and share their investigation to other members of the

school. I explained some expository text such as posters, biographies or murals. They considered


91

that the biography was a suitable type of text to present the obtained information, so they started

to write the biographies in English. As part of the writing process, students wrote their

biographies using the dictionaries and asking for help to their classmates or the teacher to

translate some words from Spanish to English. The following image shows the writing and

edition process of the biography.

Figure 16. Attending to difference stage. Students write and edit their biographies.

The following stage was “Sharing what was learned”. During this final phase, students

first presented their biographies to their classmates and then, they launched their pieces of work

to the whole community in the Writing Exhibition that the school always does at the end of the

semester in the halls of the elementary section. In addition, they wrote what they learnt in their

KWL chart to acknowledge the learning outcomes of their final inquiry project. Students were

happy of doing such a great work and very proud of being community inquirers and authors. The

images below show two of the biographies students wrote, the writing exhibition where students

shared their pieces of writing and the KWL chart, as evidences of students learning outcomes and

development of multimodal and social situated literacy practices.


92

Figure 17. Sharing what was learned stage. Students read their biographies and presented them to the whole school

community.

Reading aloud

the biographies

Biographies

Writing Exhibition


93

Figure 18. Sharing what was learned stage. Students write their learning outcomes in the KWL Chart.

These pedagogical units allowed students to move from being passive learners of L2

linguistic and grammar patterns, to be at the center of language learning. Additionally, third

graders conveyed and made meaning of their investigations through multimodal and expository

texts, sharing what they learn as authors and inquirers. Similarly, students used past

tenses to express and present in written form their multimodal texts, in so doing it, third

graders surpassed the goals proposed in the English area project, since the curricular grid

prompts that students have to command simple present tense in third grade. Finally, students

developed a sense of agency, ownership and collaboration while they worked together to achieve

common goals within their inquiry projects. They also were immersed in reflection processes as

an occasion to make things better and recognize the importance of others, while working in a

group. Such elements are explained in the following section.

After having described in detail the two curricular units, the forthcoming chapter presents

the main findings of the study concerning the research question and objectives posed.


94

CHAPTER 5

Data Analysis and Findings

This chapter aims to present the research methodology and explain the data analysis process that

attempted to answer the research question: What literacy practices emerge when third graders

inquire collaboratively into their academic surroundings at a private school in Bogotá? The

chapter depicts the procedures used to analyze the data collected from a group of third graders in

a private school by means of students‟ journals, field notes and artifacts. I also explain the

categories that emerged, supported by theory and evidences from the data.

Data Management

The data for this qualitative study was collected throughout the implementation of two curricular

units between May and November 2015. The pedagogical intervention involved students‟

collaborative inquiries and explorations in their school community through a wide variety or

local sources as the base for their investigations such as interviews to school community

members, group reflections and school yearbooks from the library, among others.

Students‟ oral interactions and productions are tangible evidence of the inquiry process;

therefore, artifacts are the primary source of information by which the emergent literacy practices

were fostered through collaborative inquiry. All the sessions where video recorded as means to

describe in detail, the literacy practices students used to inquire. The aforementioned video

recordings were used to complement field notes, as “after the facto notes” (Hubbard and Miller,

1999) to analyze data. In addition, students‟ artifacts and journals are the other instruments that

helped me to obtain data to be analyzed.


95

Data analysis Framework

In order to carry out the data analysis process, I used grounded theory as the framework of

analysis, since it “offers a practical and reflective approach to interpret complex social

phenomena” (Charmaz, 2010). Thus, this theory allows me to take a reflective position to stay

engaged, while interacting with the data and explain the process of the emerging literacy

practices of elementary students. Moreover, grounded approach emphasizes on the utilization of

data sources that are grounded in this particular context of my research. In this regard, the

instruments to gather data will be students‟ artifacts, journals and field notes. To start such a

process, I transcribed it, broke it down in small set of themes; labeled, examined, compared,

conceptualized and categorized it to build theory (Strauss and Corbin, 1990).

During the initial data analysis process, grounded approach allowed me to maintain a

constant dialogue with the data, as a “pivotal link between collecting data and developing an

emergent theory to do this process” (Charmaz, 2010). Then, data was coded according to their

relevance for my research question. Additionally, it was linked, grouped and created connections

among the emergent categories and subcategories.

Data analysis Procedure

The data analysis procedure I conducted through grounded theory embraced three types of

coding; open, axial and selective. These techniques helped me identify patterns, groups and

categories that were useful to develop theory from the gathered data and respond to the research

question.


96

After transcribing the data of students‟ artifacts, field notes, students‟ journals, memos

that came from the curricular units entitled “The History of My School Community” and “People

from My School Community”, I decided to use create a hermeneutic unit using Atlas.ti software

version 7.5.7 in order to start with the open coding stage. In this stage, “the data are broken into

discrete parts, closely examined, compared for similarities and differences, and questions are

asked about the phenomena as reflected in the data” (Strauss and Corbin, 1990 p. 62). Then, I

named data by creating codes with different colors of the instances that could potentially feed my

research interest. During this first step of naming data, I created groups of codes and tried to find

actions in each line of the data. Then, I took into account what Charmaz (2010) suggests

concerning the way “Initial coding should stick closely to the data. Try to see actions in each

segment of data rather than applying preexisting categories to the data and attempt to code with

words that reflect action” (p. 47). Field notes that were transcribed as post-facto notes after the

classes, the written journals students did before and after inquiry activities and literacy events and

the students‟ artifacts students made were coded as the below figure shows:

Information gathered from field notes. August 23rd, 2016

Information gathered from Journal. November 15th, 2016

Field note

Journal


97

Information gathered from Student‟s Artifact. September 2nd, 2016

Figure 19. Open coding stage. November 20th, 2016

Then, the codes were grouped in an attempt to do axial coding as a “strategy for bringing

data back together again in a coherent whole” (Strauss & Corbin as cited by Charmaz, 2010, p.

60). During this stage, Atlas.ti allowed me to create families of codes by looking at key words

and find points of intersection among them. At this moment, many codes were associated in

conceptual categories through semantic webs of different colors in order to identify

commonalities among them. The following figure is a sample of the axial coding phase of field

notes, students‟ journal and students‟ artifacts.

Field Notes

Student Artifact


98

Students‟ Journal

Students‟ Artifacts

Figure 20. Axial coding stage. Semantic webs. November 27th, 2017

The selective coding stage took place, when I read several times the semantic networks,

compared and contrasted them for making abstract groups in order to obtain the preliminary

categories and subcategories, which responded to the research question. The semantic webs

below show the selective coding phase that gave me the insights to respond the research question.


99

Field Notes

Journals

Students‟ Artifacts

Figure 21. Selective coding stage. Semantic webs. December 2nd

, 2017.


100

Findings

Having several semantic networks, I started to make connections between the theoretical

framework, the codes and the previous networks. Two categories emerged by re grouping the

codes within new semantic networks with respect to the research question: What literacy

practices emerge when third graders inquire collaboratively into their academic surroundings at a

private school in Bogota? The figure below shows the research question, the two emergent

categories with the correspondent subcategories.

Figure 22. This figure illustrates the research question, the two emergent categories and subcategories.

Social Situated Multimodal Literacy Practices. The first category has to do with the

different multimodal modes students drew on in order to convey, construct and represent learning

outcomes through the creation of multimodal texts. Such modes included, oral interactions,

viewing, drawings, use of images from the school web site, Google images, and the yearbooks of


101

1979 and 2015, as well as taking pictures to community members of the school. Similarly,

English and Spanish were fundamental sources of knowledge for students‟ authentic

communication as a bridge between their language learning and self-expression. Both languages

were sources to collect data and develop student‟s inquiries. Likewise, English and Spanish

helped third graders to re-create local information, according to their varied experience on using

other modes apart from reading and writing to represent their intended meanings. This category is

central within these findings, since it portrays the social situated dimension of language and

literacy, where students were immersed in to use their previous knowledge, and make

connections within the local and socio-cultural sources of information of their school community.

The data analyzed, gave me insights to determine two subcategories that feed the

aforementioned category. The first subcategory is Using multimodality to convey meaning of

socio cultural knowledge, which emerged during a reflective interaction with the most relevant

themes of the semantic webs from the selective coding stage. Such themes led me to identify the

varied and meaningful ways that third graders used to re-create and bring new understandings of

the local knowledge present in the school community, including oral presentations, posters that

weaved pictures and words to represent their meanings, viewing images from printed books and

the Internet, among others to re-shape and co-construct their previous knowledge.

The second subcategory, Students as agents and owners of their language and literacy

learning, emerged since the selective coding stage helped me to organize meaningful themes for

them, making sense of students‟ interactions, students‟ reflections and their artifacts. As result, I

discovered how they adopted a role of responsibility and felt empowered to portray themselves as


102

competent multimodal literacy users and inquirers, while they acknowledged they learnt through

their investigations.

The inquiry process students went through began with an interview by pairs, where they

drew on the use of both languages. Children wrote the answers in English, and made drawings as

a way to represent the physical appearance of their peers. The aforementioned modes of

interaction allowed children to bring their previous foreign language knowledge, while developed

multimodal literacies from a social dimension, as they engaged with some traditional and

multiple modes for the construction of meaning. In this sense, the subcategory Using

multimodality to convey meaning of socio cultural knowledge is unfolded in some literacy events

that students took part throughout the pedagogical units, to nurture the emerging category

previously described. The figure below shows the interview done by Jerónimo and Juan

(students names are pseudonyms to protect their identities) during the “life experiences” phase of

the authoring cycle. Based on their personal preferences and physical appearance students drew

each other and talked to me to explain the meaning of their drawings in Spanish.

As it is evidenced in the interview, meaning making within students‟ social worlds had

become multimodal, since drawings and oral descriptions of their drawings are combined to

provide meaning, as students encounter with their social world. In this sense, “literacy is in its

nature multimodal” (Cope and Kalantzis, 2000, p. 234) due to the fact that the combination of

different modes of representation and communication extends the learners potential for the

construction of meaning. When students were allowed to choose their peers, take their time to

observe, draw, use the language to interview each other and have freedom in their language

learning, students unfolded their previous multimodal knowledge and were involved in a social


103

situated process of meaning making of their personal realities. The next image shows the front

side of the interview with its corresponding meaning description.

Figure 23. Data source 1. Student artifact. Interview in pairs frontside., May 12th, 2016.

-T: Bueno, ¿Por qué se dibujaron así?

-Juan: Porque Jerónimo es chiquito, tiene poquito pelo…

- Jerónimo: Es que me acabaron de peluquear, pero tengo mucho.

-T: Y ¿Por qué lo dibujaste con ropa normal, o sea sin uniforme?

-Juan: porque es mejor estar sin uniforme y Jerónimo se ve más „cool‟.

-T: bueno, Juan porque dibujaste así a Jerónimo.

-Juan: me parecía que tenía el pelo crespo,

- Jerónimo: What?

-T: ok, y la ropa que tiene ¿es del uniforme o la ropa que él normalmente se pone?

-Juan: la ropa que se pone fuera del colegio porque se ve mejor sin uniforme.

-T: y tú, ¿Por qué te dibujaste así?

-Jerónimo: ja ja, se ve chistoso…ahora dibujo más y mejor.

-T: no te preocupes por la forma que dibujas, solo quiero saber por qué, por ejemplo ¿Por

qué te dibujaste así lo ojitos?

- Jerónimo: porque pensé que eran grandes

-T: si, tú tienes ojos grandes y bonitos

-T: y tu Felipe, ¿Por qué te dibujaste así?

-Juan: porque así soy, aunque ahora dibujo mejor que eso.

- Jerónimo: Ja ja los ojos parecen de miedo

-Juan: Ja ja…ahora dibujo mejor que eso.


104

In a similar way, the backside of students‟ interview shows the way students used English

and Spanish to write and invent words, as means to respond to an authentic purpose in their

community. As consequence of such practice, students used other modes as oral interactions and

their conventional writing to generate their “best guesses, their theories or hypothesis, based on

their perceptions and current understandings of the world, and how it works” (Ferreiro, 1990) to

learn and think for themselves, and to communicate their intended meanings. Additionally,

children language inventions disclose the experiences, knowledge and beliefs that they have

about literacy and language within their world as a mean to “make sense with intentionality and

purposefulness” Harste, Burke and Woodward, 1984 (as cited in Whitmore et al., 2005, p. 299).

In this respect, students took risks to figure out how language works and how it relates to them in

order to increase learning through authentic and powerful meanings.

The following image shows the backside of the interview, where students answered some

questions in respect to their personal preferences and the way they invented words, and used

Spanish.

Figure 24 . Data source 2. Student artifact. Interview in pairs backside. May 12, 2016.


105

As part of the inquiry-based learning promoted in this research, individual reflections

emerged to describe the experience of using multimodal modes within the interview. One of the

students acknowledged how interesting was to do an interview in the English class, sharing with

his friends and learning the language, while inquiring. His reflection leads me to assert that

language learning either, learning to write, read or to speak, never occurs in a vacuum. On the

contrary, when learners are immersed in rich and authentic functional language within different

literacy events, as is in this particular case, the interview, children draw on their cultural and

social context, and the multiple modes available for using both languages, where their “literate

identities reflect the influence of cultural and social practices” (Gee, 1990). In this respect, the act

of engaging in literacy events allow children to portray and position themselves in relation to

their world and their learning experiences, nurturing not solely the multiple ways they can use

language to learn and interact with others, but also shaping their identities as language and

literacy learners. The next image shows a piece of data from an individual reflection done in one

of the students‟ journals.

Figure 25. Data source 3. Students‟ Journal: Describing inquiry experience. May 13th

, 2016.

Taking into account the wide range of modes students were capable of use throughout the

inquiry projects, it is noteworthy to explain that they also drew on images from the school web


106

site and the yearbook of 1979 and 2015. They also took pictures of people from the school

community and shared orally what they found, with regard to the topic they chose to inquire: The

history of my school community. In this sense, students‟ literacy practices involved “framing

images and making meaning through a variety of sign or semiotic systems and modalities”

(Kress, 1997) that unfolded the many avenues that language possess through which messages,

meaning making and representations are brought to the EFL classroom. The upcoming collage

shows the multimodal modes students used to show their learning outcomes with their classmates

by means of oral presentations and readings aloud.

Figure 26. Data source 4. Students sharing inquiry and learning outcomes through multimodal representations. May

20th

and November 15th

, 2016

Another important aspect of multimodal representations and inquiry endeavors of students

has to do with the variety of multimodal and expository texts they created collaboratively. At the

end of each project, I showed them some options they might use to represent their outcomes and

create a type of text. Students chose to create posters to make a museum that tells the history of

the school, a timeline and biographies, since they already had used such type of texts in second

grade. As result of students‟ collaborative inquiry, the multimodal texts they created become in

“meaningful acts […] that combined various modes and forms that afford [children] to more

varied ways to express themselves, their knowledge and their learning” (Flood, Heat & Lapp,


107

1997). Moreover, the inquiry-based learning environment they experienced allowed them to draw

and combine Spanish and English, and modes of meaning making available, as they naturally

address them in their daily lives.

For instance, the elaboration of the “Liceo Cervantes Time Line” as a multimodal and

expository text implied the “use of modes as means for making meaning and allow [students] to

get away of making language too general” (Kress, 2012). In this sense, the timeline included

written information and pictures to make meaning as the result of students‟ constant inquiry,

where images of the yearbooks of 1979 and 2015, and information from web sites were used to

represent the past events of the school. In addition, students had to take pictures to other

community members that were not in the previous sources, in order to shape the whole history of

the community by adding current aspects of the school community.

The way students used the local knowledge of their school community to feed their

inquiries, turned the school context into a valuable source, since it provided third graders with

rich content of socio-cultural knowledge that was mobilized for academic learning through

inquiry-based activities. In this regard, students created multimodal and expository texts namely

posters, biographies and a timeline, in order to describe and expand the information about

historical events of the school and community helpers. Such texts were the result of the way

students drew on multiple modes of literacy to make and co-construct meaning, which turned

their roles from passive learners to be agents, owners and authors of their language and literacy

learning. The way students accomplished such type of texts arose from the environment they

were immersed in, which fostered in-depth engagement with topics that mattered to them and

valued their previous knowledge and experiences with their worlds.


108

The next images display the multimodal and expository texts that students created as the

result of their construction of socio cultural knowledge within their school community.

Figure 27. Data Source 5. Students‟ Artifacts. Multimodal texts created by the students.

Posters

Tineline

Biographies


109

In addition to the modes students used to create their multimodal texts, a reflection

concerning other modes students drew on, during the oral presentations of the timeline to broader

members of their classroom was transcribed in one of my field notes. In such reflection I noticed

how collaboration, shaped the construction of meaning among students to make a multimodal

text as the one from the precious image. This moment was relevant for the development of

learners social situated multimodal literacies because they employed “gestural, oral, visual, audio

and spatial patterns” (Kress, 2000b) to express the historical facts of the school community

regardless their facility with English pronunciation, and showed their inner need to share the

investigations they did. That is to say, that students‟ literacy development is promoted through

social activity, talking and other multimodal modes, as sources that propel learners need to

communicate and share meaning. Such assertion is reiterated by Street (1990), who considers

multiple literacies as the variety of forms and semiotic systems that people draw on to make

sense of their worlds, instead of mono-modal sources as print texts that reject the meaningful and

varied modes that language has. The subsequent lines describe the transcription of my field note,

where students used social situated multimodal literacies to represent and share local knowledge

of their school.

The session of today was rewarding with regard to the attitude of my students; they were

so willing to work together and supported all members of their group to accomplish a

common goal. They enhanced their abilities of working cooperatively, while designing

the timeline and made meaning through multimodal literacy.

Students combined different modes of meaning such as L2, L1, and images. L2

highlighted central aspects of the image and provided it a context, and the image was

powerful enough to show what happened in each year according to written descriptions.

The timeline students made is a multimodal text, where students mixed multiple semiotic

resources to make meaning of their school community history and create new

understandings of their realities.


110

Students were so receptive to my support. They wanted to use English in a coherent mode. The

presentation of the timeline to broader members of the school community involved the use of

multimodal literacy through semiotic resources such as language, gestures at the moment of

speaking, images, oral and visual that helped students to construct socio-cultural knowledge of

their school.

Field notes (Timeline presentation) - August 16th

, 2016

The following subcategory Students as owners and agents of their language and literacy

learning is a byproduct of the social situated multimodal literacies students used for carrying out

their inquiry projects and construct knowledge. Since collaborative inquiry within this research

allowed students to bring their social worlds that tapped their literacy and language abilities as

they so naturally do in their daily lives, they become agents and owners of their own learning,

which shift language and literacy experiences into long-life learning process. When students had

to talk and make decisions with respect to the topic they wanted to research, and the resources

they use to collect the data, they engaged in decision-making processes and discussions to fulfill

their need of looking for information to understand the historical facts of their school community.

As consequence of such interactions, third graders “nurture[d] agency […] and honor[ed]

their unique construction of knowledge, integrating choices and ownership in the curriculum

(Wolk, 2008, p. 121) to reach common goals of their project. In this regard, this result showed me

how paramount is to understand the way students‟ agency and ownership enlighten a more

democratic construction of curriculum, if learners‟ expectations and needs are recognized and

understood. On the other hand, students assumed collaborative roles to search tools that

evidenced the knowledge they had in relation to the use of web sites like Facebook and YouTube;

the local information that school community helpers might have and the print texts that the

library offers to them. The previous knowledge students have is precisely what Short & Burke

(1991) acknowledge when “students have understandings about life [that] come from their social


111

and cultural communities in which they live and learn both inside and outside the school” (p.35).

Some of the interactions between students and me were transcribed in my field notes as follows:

T: Bueno. Ahora vamos a hablar sobre las herramientas o instrumentos que ustedes

podrían usar para dar respuesta a las siete preguntas que ustedes han formulado. Van a

pensar y vamos a compartir nuestras ideas con todo el grupo.

S1: Podemos preguntarle a alguien, como a los profesores por ejemplo.

T: Que buena idea.

S2: Si, yo creo que, como preguntarle a profesores que lleven mucho tiempo en el colegio,

podemos ir a la sala y hablar con ellos.

T: ¿Alguna otra idea?

S3: profe, también le podemos preguntar al padre.

T: aja, buena idea, él también es parte de nuestra comunidad escolar. ¿Alguien más tiene

ideas sobre que herramientas utilizar para dar respuesta a nuestras preguntas?

S4: Pues aparte de preguntarles a los profesores, podemos buscar en internet sobre el

colegio.

S5: Podemos ver videos en YouTube o entrar a Facebook a buscar cosas del colegio.

T: buena idea, me parece un buen recurso también. Bueno, sigo escuchando más ideas…

S6: Podemos ir a la biblioteca y buscar un libro que diga, por ejemplo: “Historia del

Colegio” o algo así.

T: ok, que buenas ideas chicos…

Field notes. May 19th, 2016.

After students interviewed to the academic supervisor and the librarian about historical

facts of the school, students‟ sense of agency was fostered within an inquiry mindset, where they

used English and Spanish as multi modal modes for authentic communication. In this regard,

Pineda (2001) contends that “content, inquiry and language processes interact and benefit one

another” (p. 16) during the moment in which learners become inquirers. Additionally, students

nurtured their agency abilities by acquiring real tasks and responsibilities, which provided them

with challenges and questions that added significance to their wonders. Moreover, these

experiences allowed them to be agents of experiences, rather than simply “undergoers of

experiences” (Bandura, 2001, p. 4) to fit in a learning community that share common goals.


112

In the same way, when children were doing the interview, they experienced an authentic

collaborative inquiry environment that addressed socio-cultural elements of their school, while

they were in charge of accomplishing common goals through collaborative work. During some

moments of the interview, some of the answers provided by the academic supervisor astonished

most of the students, which ignited their natural curiosity and triggered learning agency, as they

started to ask more questions regarding their interest. In this respect, students had the freedom to

express opinions, considering matters that were part of their realities. For instance, the next

transcription of one of my field notes, shows the surprised students had when they knew that the

King and Queen of Spain came to inaugurate their school, as consequence they did comments

and asked more questions about such event. In this respect, when students become active agents

within the exploration of their worlds, many tensions and questions arose about topics that

puzzled them to “investigate those questions or tensions and create new understandings, new

questions and issues that they want to explore further (Short et al. 1996, p. 257).

Another moment were students became agents of their own language and literacy learning

occurred when they agreed on using English and Spanish to address the questions of the

interview, and the manner they interacted orally with the academic supervisor. They seemed very

confident, since the questions they created were all connected within an inquiry environment

were all they wanted to be part of. The next picture shows the moment when students did the

interview with its corresponding transcript below.


113

Figure 28. Data source 6. Students interviewing to the academic supervisor as one of the local sources of knowledge.

May 19th

, 2016

T: Ok, question No. 2. Martin, Felipe, Jose Cadena and Miguel. Who is going to ask the

question?

S1: ¡Yo! , When was our school community created?

Guest Speaker: Pues el colegio en este momento tiene 82 años.

Students: ¡Oh!

Guest Speaker: O sea que se creó en 1934 con el nombre de Liceo de la Infancia. El

dueño era José Joaquín Casas. Luego se le cambia el nombre a Liceo de Cervantes porque

él era muy admirador de la obra de Miguel de Cervantes y luego, ya lo compra la

comunidad y se mantiene con ese mismo nombre.

S2: Es que hay un Liceo de Cervantes llamado Retiro y este, que es el Norte.

Guest Speaker: Si claro, pero primero nació este colegio, pero dentro de la misma

comunidad se crearon 3 colegios que se llaman Liceo de Cervantes, El Retiro, que queda

en el barrio el Retiro y hay otro Liceo de Cervantes en Barranquilla, pero es lo mismo, de

la misma comunidad.

S3: ¿Y el que lo fundó, todavía sigue vivo?

Guest Speaker: no, el falleció hace muchos años.

T: the group of S7, S8 and S9 does the next question. Who is going to read the question?

S4: When was the school built?

Guest Speaker: Este colegio se empezó a construir en 1976 y se termina de construir en el

año de 1979 cuando se inaugura oficialmente con la visita de los reyes de España al

colegio, Don Juan Carlos y Doña Sofía.

S5: ¿Qué?, ¿Qué?, ¿Qué?

S1: ¿Vinieron acá?

Guest Speaker: Si, allá en ese sitio, en la mitad de la cancha aterrizó un helicóptero y lo

reyes vinieron a visitar el Liceo de Cervantes

S6: ¿Los reyes de España?, ¡En serio! (algunos los niños se paran con cara de sorpresa a

ver la cancha desde la ventana donde aterrizó el helicóptero en aquella época)

T: ¡Que información tan interesante! Ok, boys, what is the next question?

S6: ¿Y los reyes de España todavía siguen vivos?

Field note (Interview to the Academic Supervisor) – May 19

th, 2016.

Since socio cultural sources of knowledge were essential to fulfill students‟ wonders

during the interview, they reflected upon their experiences and positioned themselves as


114

responsible agents of the inquiries to accomplish common goals. Similarly, student‟s agency

allowed students to take action and promoted collaborative work, when they were asked to

present the information gathered by using the modes of their preference. As part of these literacy

events, collaboration and multimodal literacy were key aspects for students to accomplish the

goals proposed in this stage of their inquiries. In so doing it, they distributed their tasks and each

one was in charge of writing, drawing, helping each other or looking for images to nurture their

multimodal and expository text.

Students did such a great job. They talked, advised each other with respect to the use

written English and the colors they should use for their drawings. They used their dictionaries to

check the spelling of words and asked for my help when they needed it. As result of their

collaborative work, they understood that all members of the group were important to accomplish

the project. Moreover, some students helped other groups, who had not finished at time due they

could not agree to carry out the task properly. The next image shows the moment when students

worked collaboratively to create their first multimodal text and presented it to the class;

accompanied with the transcription of a group reflection about their performance in collaborative

work, and some agency traits of their language and literacy learning.

Figure 29. Data source 7. Students‟ Artifacts. Collaborative work and agency traits in students‟ language learning

and literacy events. August 22nd, 2016.


115

T: Bueno, ahora vamos a reflexionar sobre lo que hicimos durante la primera parte de

nuestro proyecto de indagación. ¿Qué cosas creen que hicimos muy bien?

S1: Los posters del museo de historia del liceo nos quedaron bonitos

S2: La forma en que expresamos lo que tuvimos que decir en Inglés contar la historia del

colegio.

T: Bueno, ¿Qué otra opinión, tienen respecto a las cosas que hicimos bien en nuestro

proyecto?

S3: nos fue bien, porque pudimos aprender más palabras en inglés y la historia del

colegio.

T: Buenos ahora vamos a pensar en los problemas que ustedes tuvieron cuando estuvieron

haciendo la indagación.

S4: Cuando yo me hice con Alberto estábamos un poquito distraídos y Julián nos ayudó

escribir nuestro mini-poster.

T: ¿Alguna otra opinión?

S5: Mi grupo de trabajo estuvo muy desorganizado, Nicolás estaba muy distraído y

jugando, ellos no me ayudaron mucho

S6: ¡distraído yo!:

S7: Yo me puse nervioso en la presentación del museo de historia del colegio.

T: ¿Algo más

S8: Que Juan José y Michael son los mejores ayudantes del mundo

T. ¿Por qué?

S8: Porque trabajamos muy bien y ellos me ayudaron a dibujar.

S9: Nosotros peleamos mucho porque nos sabíamos quién iba a escribir y a leer. Si Juan

David, Felipe o yo…Al final, fue por tu ayuda que nos pudimos organizar.

T: ok, bueno…Ahora, ¿Qué cosas fueron positivas o buenas durante todo el proyecto de

indagación?

S10: Qué aprendimos a hacer posters en inglés.

S11: Cuando nos pusimos de acuerdo en todo, nos pusimos un propósito, que es trabajar

en lo nuestro, que si alguien necesita algo, le ayudamos, y así terminamos todo como un

equipo que se ayuda entre sí.

Students‟ Journal-Transcription of group reflection, August 23rd, 2016.

The other element that the present subcategory elucidates is related to the way

students became owners of their language and literacy learning, when students inquired

through other multimodal modes such as viewing, making personal connections to convey

meaning upon the information they found in another local source of information. In this

case, students read the yearbook of 1979 in black and white images, and compared past

events, people and places to the way the school is nowadays. This literacy event allowed

them to make three different kinds of connections: text-to-self, text-to-text and text-to-

world (Keene & Zimmerman, 1997).


116

The text-to-text has to do when readers remember other things they have read in

others book, as in this case students looked at the hairstyle and clothes of the first enrolled

students from the yearbook of 1979 and remembered them to the way „the Beatles‟ band

members looked like. The text-to-self connection is a highly personal moment that a

reader makes between a piece of reading material and the readers‟ own experience of life.

Such connection took place when one of the students considered that would be good, if

they were allowed to use normal clothes instead of using uniforms and employed the

English word „cool‟ to give more meaning to his opinion. The text-to-world connections

are larger connections that a reader brings to a reading situation and go far beyond

personal experiences, as in the particular case, when my students are surprise because

their first grade teacher had worked in the school before 1979, and expressed their desire

of having her as one of their current teachers.

The previous connections awoke prior knowledge and experiences of learners by

means of their experiences, opinions, and emotions, as a good point of departure for

developing ownership in their language and literacy learning. The next field note shows

the way the aforementioned connections took place within the literacy event and the

students‟ sense of ownership.

T: ¿En qué forma es este anuario diferente de otros que ustedes hayan visto?

S3: profe, en este anuario, los estudiantes se parecen a los Beatles. Ahora no…

S5: si profe, ahora los estudiantes deben usar uniformes y no pueden tener el pelo así

como ellos.

S8: ¡sí!, ¡miren el pelo!, parecen los Beatles.

S4: Ojala nosotros pudiéramos vestir sin uniforme, como lo hacen en los colegios de

estados Unidos. Sera más „cool‟ venir con otra ropa, es que con el uniforme nos vemos

todos iguales… ¡Qué aburrido!

T: Aquí está la profesora Pepita, la que nombró nuestro coordinador ¿Se acuerdan?

S6: ¡Sí!, ¡yo la dibuje en el museo de la historia del colegio que hicimos!

T: Miren como era. Bueno, acá esta la profesora Rosalba.

S10: ¿Rosalba Mendoza?


117

T: Si, Rosalba Mendoza.

S11: ¿Ella lleva todo ese tiempo en el colegio?

T: Si, ella está desde el año 1979.

Students: ¡Que!

T: Si, bueno, ¿Qué piensan de la siguiente pregunta?: ¿Qué elementos de este anuario son

similares a los de ahora?

S8: Que Rosalba sigue siendo una profesora de nuestro colegio. Ella fue nuestra tutora en

primero B.

S11: ¡Nuestra profesora es una leyenda!

S8: ¡Eso es genial! ¡Rosalba es una leyenda!

S6: ojalá, ella fuera nuestra profe otra vez…

Field Note- July 19

th, 2016

In a similar attempt to be owners of their learning, students took the initiative of

presenting their results in English to teachers and students from other grades. Children used their

abilities to think and communicate through the “sign systems as ways of making and sharing

meaning in their lives, including music, art, movement, drama and oral and written language”

(Short et al. 1996, p. 43). As part of this situation, students used written and oral communication

to present the timeline as a whole group, which enhanced their sense of ownership in their

language learning. Such literacy event encouraged them to use integrated ad meaningful literacy

practices to construct meaning as they learn language and literacy. In a similar way, the sign

systems students drew on to make sense of their investigations allowed them to experience an

authentic context in which they could excel using language and literacy, while learning with and

from each other through dialogic inquiry. Moreover, third graders became into self-regulated

learners since they engaged and took active participation in their inquiry projects by unfolding

their multimodal literacy practices as modes to support and develop their language learning,

instead of demonstrating the acquisition of new skills.


118

The image below showed the moment students as authors displayed their inquiry

outcomes and collaboratively presented the socio cultural knowledge they were able to re-create

through the „Liceo Cervantes Timeline‟.

Figure 30. Data Source 8. Oral presentation of the Liceo Cervantes timeline.

Another moment where students shared the responsibility for selecting the topics to

investigate and the tools to accomplish such task was in the second work unit. Third graders drew

on their KWL chart to address their learning with respect to the previous inquiry project, and

linked them to new wonders they liked to pursue, taking into account the umbrella term of

„school community‟. In this sense, students made decisions and decided to inquire about some

teachers of the school, so they talked in pairs to choose a teacher they wanted to interview. Such

moment evidenced a “dialogic process” Wells (2002), where they considered others peers

perspectives “to support each other learning and inquiry” Short and Burke (1991, p. 68), as part

of the development of collaboration skills. The following image shows the KWL chart of one of

the students who agreed to their classmate to know more about the personal life of the co-

existence supervisor from elementary section. This chart has three columns, but for showing


119

learners‟ sense of ownership, just two of them are displayed. The first one shows learning

outcomes of their previous inquiry project and the second, the new topic they wanted to learn.

Figure 31. Data Source 9. Students Artifacts. KWL Chart. September 28th

, 2016

Subsequently, students made a set of questions to interview the community helpers they

chose. Third graders used Spanish to create and write the questions through a constant interaction

with me to shape their inquirers. Such interaction guided them to work within their zone of

proximal development (Vygotsky, 1978) as a scaffolding process where knowledge is not simply

handed down from one to the other, but as a reciprocal practice where “meaning is […]

constructed through joint activity rather than being transmitted from teacher to learner” (Lee and

Smagorinsky, 2000, p. 2).

Additionally, they asked for the permission of community helpers to respond to their

questions and carried out the interview in Spanish. Before the interview, students talk about the

way they had to make the interview and took turns to ask questions to their interviewee.

Similarly, students were very engaged during the interview, since they had close connection to

their interviewees. As result, third graders were able to carry out the interview with enthusiasm


120

and a friendly attitude. Such features, allowed them to complete their work and know more about

their teachers. In this respect, Wells (2002) asserts that the sense of ownership students developed

through collaborative inquiry, “enable [students] to sustain their engagement and to develop

strategies of responsible collaboration that lead to successful completion [of their investigations]”

(p. 6). The next images shows the manner in which children worked by pairs and interviewed the

community helper they chose to inquire about his personal and professional life.

Figure 32. Data source 10. Students as owners of their inquiries. October 3rd

, 2016.

T: Bueno chicos. ¿Ustedes a quién van a entrevistar?

S1: A Orlando, nuestro profe de Educación física.

T: Y, ¿Cuántas preguntas llevan?

S2: Pues vamos en la primera. Le vamos a preguntar en que año nació.

T: ¡Muy bien! buena pregunta. ¿Y que más les gustaría preguntarle a él?

S1: Pues, pues, queremos preguntarle Por qué empezó la carrera como

Profesor de Educación Física y cuántos años lleva trabajando en el colegio.

T: Excelente…esas preguntas están muy interesantes.

S2: También queremos preguntarle a que universidad fue y si tiene hijos.

T: Si claro, o también puedes preguntarle en que universidad hizo su carrera.

T: En ese momento un estudiante de otro grupo interviene para ayudar diciendo:

S3: Yo les puedo ayudar con esa respuesta, Orlando tiene un hijo.

Data Source 11. Field note - September 29th, 2017

The previous transcript also evidenced the scaffolding process that students were part of,

when one of them helped a group to complete one its questions. This means that learners are

capable of assisting peers with first-hand information when doing inquiry-based activities, which


121

awakens developmental processes in children that can operate, as argued by Miller (1993), only

when “they interact with others in their environment and cooperation with other children”.

In this regard, learners turned their roles from receptors of information to be knowledge

holders of their social and cultural community and contributors of other classmates‟ inquiries. In

this sense, Newman, Griffin and Cole (1989) contend that “we cannot lose sight of the

continually role of the child” (p.58) as agents, owners and possessors of knowledge that enrich

and transform their individual and collaborative inquiry experiences, while develop a variety of

literacy practices embedded in social and cultural assets of their context.

In a similar way, the interaction I had with my students in the above data source, provides

insights about my role of teacher as a “Community teacher” different from the “banking concept”

of education (Freire, 2011). In this regard, I could construct and environment that encouraged

peer collaboration, articulate the local knowledge of the school community via inquiry-based

practices and oriented my students to be owners of their own learning process. Similarly, the

community teacher addresses the idea that “learners are active in the creation of their knowledge,

proactive in the use of knowledge and interactive in social contexts that give that knowledge

meaning and value” (Murrell, 2001, p. 3)

To sum up this category, the emerging multimodal literacy practices were essential in

students‟ meaning making of their school community, while inquiring collaboratively through the

pursuit of questions that are significant in their lives. Similarly, language was linked to social and

cultural constructions, as the result of what students already know and the new information they

obtained from their local context for “knowledge building” (Wells, 2002, p. 8), through

collaborative interactions among children and their teacher. In this sense, students as active


122

multimodal literacy users were able to collect images of people and historical facts, by either

taking photographs or coping images from internet or conventional texts to support the co-

construction of multimodal texts, which enriched and recreated the local knowledge, positioning

them as agents and owners of their own language learning.

Expressing feelings and learning of collaborative inquiry experiences. This second

category emerged as the result of students‟ collaborative inquiry practices and the use multimodal

modes to build new knowledge regarding the local information they found. Such experiences,

strengthened their confidence during their language and literacy learning, bringing up the

expression of their feelings in relation to the way they performed as community inquirers.

Similarly, students‟ reactions and feelings allowed them to strengthen their confidence as authors

and language users, since they felt part of a collective endeavor that made worth their efforts and

previous knowledge of the inquiry topic they research.

This category presents a variety of students‟ feelings, perceptions and reactions

concerning the inquiry projects they carried out and the meaningful learning experiences they

experienced, since the literacy events they were immersed included the social dimension of

learners. In this regard, a social situated perspective of literacy allowed third graders to naturally

show the “values, attitudes, feelings and social relationships” (Street, 1993, p. 12) that any social

activity entails. Likewise, the reflections and interactions within the classes led third graders to

see themselves as active learners of language, users of literacy, inquirers and decision – makers.

The present category is underpinned by two subcategories named: Valuing collaborative work

and Acknowledging language and literacy learning.


123

Valuing collaborative work through students‟ reactions, feelings and perceptions took

place before, during and after students‟ shared their multimodal texts. They talked about how to

present their inquiries and decided through a common agreement doing oral presentations to

teachers and students from other grades, as well as displaying their texts in the writing exhibition

of the school. They also, published their timeline in the institutional magazine of the school. The

next transcription of my field notes reflects the manner students give value to the importance of

collaborative work, my students and I talked about the development of their inquiries and took

decisions about the project, and the next conversation was transcribed:

T: Bueno, como ustedes han encontrado información sobre la historia del colegio, yo

quiero saber si ustedes quieren indagar más sobre este tema ¿Qué piensan?

S1: si, teacher, yo quiero que sigamos buscando información porque me parece chévere

saber sobre el pasado del colegio. Además en mi grupo no ha ido muy bien.

S2: si, si vieron los dibujos que yo hice, me quedaron bonitos porque Richard me ayudo.

El colorea muy bonito.

S3: En mi grupo también, nosotros nos pusimos de acuerdo y terminamos rápido, y

cuando yo termine, me sentí muy bien porque pude ayudar a Juan, porque sus compañeros

estaban jugando y no le ayudaron mucho.

T: Bueno, ¿Qué más piensan los demás?

S3: Si teacher, yo creo que debemos seguir averiguando más cosas porque este no es el

único colegio de los padres agustinos y falta incluir las cosas que han pasado hace poco en

el colegio, por ejemplo que ahora el colegio tiene niñas, eso es importante…

S4: ¡Uy! ¡Sí! mi hermanita Carolina, entro a kínder el año pasado.

Students: ¡Sí!, sigamos buscando más información, se acuerdan que Cecilia nos dijo que

había un anuario con información del colegio…ahí podemos encontrar más cosas.

T: ok, ¡súper!, entonces organicemos lo que vamos a hacer…

Data Source 12. Field note – September 5

th, 2016

As it is evidenced in the previous piece of data, students valued their collaborative efforts

and felt encouraged to be active and informed community agents to learn best since language

learning connects strongly with their school community context. In this respect, Wells (2002)

believes that when students are “affectively and intellectually engaged [the ] problems have no

single answer and there is not an all knowing authority”, which implies the importance of


124

following the inquiry needs of students beyond the classroom walls to let their literacies and

learning take the paths according what matter to them.

In a similar way, students decided to make a timeline as part of their previous experiences

in second grade to represent the historical information they gathered from their inquiries. They

worked in groups and completed their multimodal text. Afterwards, I talked to them and heard

their ideas about sharing their pieces of work to other members of the community. The next

conversation was transcribed:

T: Bueno y ahora, ¿De qué manera van a empezar a compartir su línea del tiempo sobre la

historia del colegio?

S1: Podemos presentarla en una izada de bandera, cada niño presenta el año que le

correspondió hacer.

S2: si y cada uno va pasando al frente hasta que la línea queda completa.

T: Esa es una muy buena idea. Aunque tenemos que averiguar cuando es la próxima izada

de bandera, creo que ya no tenemos más izadas de bandera.

S4: Profe, tengo una idea, podemos invitar a los profes y a otros estudiantes de la clase

para que vengan a vernos y escucharnos.

S5: Teacher, o también podemos poner la línea del tiempo en la revista quijotadas que nos

dan al final del año escolar y así los estudiantes de bachillerato y otros profesores la

podrían ver.

S6: ¡Sí!, y nuestros papas también la pueden ver.

S7: ¡Uy sí!, que bien, todo nuestro trabajo lo podrán ver todos en el colegio.

S8: Si, además nosotros trabajamos juntos para hacer la línea del tiempo, nos quedó

bonita.

S9: aja, todos buscamos información, recortamos, escribimos y pegamos la línea del

tiempo afuera del salón.

T: Claro chicos, es un esfuerzo de todos, además ustedes trabajaron juntos y se pusieron

de acuerdo en muchas cosas.

Data Source 13. Field note-September 14th, 2016

The previous piece of data shows how students joined their ideas to keep working

collaboratively, where some of them adapted easily to the classroom, when their thoughts

mattered. As result, learners can lessen initial feeling of isolation by interacting in their zones of

proximal development, where peers‟ ideas awake others thoughts to contribute and shape a


125

common endeavor. This situation, allows the creation of comfortable and friendly classroom

environments, as well as emotional sides of learning and identity.

Similarly, the following piece of data, presents the way on of the students perceived his

performance while he inquired collaboratively during the development of both inquiry projects.

The student highlighted the fact of knowing what topic to search about and how well he worked

to his classmate to accomplish his inquiry projects. This means that when students are exposed to

collaborative practices and have the choice to learn what they want, they are able to use language

to be agents and decision makers in order to fulfill their learning needs.

Figure 33. Data source 14. Students‟ artifact: Describing inquiry experience .November 10th

, 2016

Another important feature of students valuing their collaborative work entails the

relevance of working collaboratively to overcome difficulties that they faced during the inquiry

project. For instance, in the next piece of data, one of the students acknowledged his classmates‟

support to accomplish the assigned work, since he struggled to make it. In this regard, students

exchanged experiences and knowledge through their zones of proximal development, since

learning is in some way collaborative Vygotsky (1987), particularly when it takes place in

inquiry processes and involves the enterprise of authentic questions and learning as the

exploration of socio-cultural knowledge of the students‟ school community.


126

Figure 34. Data source 15. Student Journal. Describing inquiry experience. November 10th

, 2016

After students shared their timeline through oral presentations and published it the

institutional magazine, each student received a copy of the magazine. They immediately showed

their happiness, awesomeness and proudness of being part of the 2nd

issue of Quijotadas

Magazine as authors, inquirers and English language users. Then, students wrote their journals in

Spanish for authentic expression of their thinking to reflect about the publication of the timeline.

Students‟ feelings and reactions emerged showing how relevant was for students to be part of the

inquiry project. The following pieces of data show the publication of the timeline in the

institutional magazine and students‟ reflections where they acknowledged their experience as

authors, owners and agents of their collaborative inquiry experiences.

Figure 35. Data Source 16. Students‟ artifact: Timeline. October 15, 2016


127

Figure 36. Data Source 17. Students‟ Journal: Expressing feelings. October 16, 2016

The previous students‟ reflection evidenced how they value their collective efforts all in

order to show their investigation of the history of the school, through different sources of socio-

cultural knowledge they possessed, namely English language, literacy and inquiry skills.

Similarly, students felt acknowledged, famous and proud of their work, since they adopted

common challenges from their real world to “cultivate a context of cooperation and community

building” (Independent Together, 2003, p. 63) as an opportunity to involve them in the

construction of the language and literacy curriculum taking into account their needs, wants and

learning expectations.

Additionally, students‟ expression of feelings attains relevant aspects of language

learning, as in this particular case, literacy as a social situated perspective. According to Guthrie

(1996), literacy learning “links the personal/motivational needs to the social milieu in which

these needs might be fulfilled and to the potential of literacy, as an avenue for gaining

knowledge” (p. 435). Additionally, the way students felt within the development of challenging

literacy and inquiry activities give them insights to be aware of their own progress when they


128

have specific goals and maintain a positive motivation in school. In the same way, when children

participate in various activities where they read, talk, discover and construct meaning, and then

share that meaning with others, they can experience literacy by themselves to convey their ideas

and express their feelings. As consequences, learners will be successful in classrooms activities,

where language is channel for constructing meaning in multiple ways.

The following excerpt from field notes is a sample of other type of feeling the students

experienced when worked in groups to search information about the history of the school in

English and Spanish within their EFL class. Students acknowledged how fun was to discover the

school history through different sources of information and how lucky were them of learning

English in this way, while other students were learning English according to the normal class

plans.

…Similarly, students valued their efforts and showed pride about the publication they did

of their time line as result of the inquiry project. They felt content about others work and

appraised each other as a way to recognize the importance of working collaboratively.

They also valued the fact that while other students were having the normal classes, they

were so lucky of being inquiring about the history of the school and how fun had been to

explore the school through walking, looking information in the internet, interviewing

people and checking the first yearbook of the school.

Data source 18. Field Notes - October 17th

, 2016

By the previous observations of my classroom, I understood that students conceived this

inquiry project as a way to put in practice the socio-cultural knowledge of the school that they

own, the use of English and the multiple modes that literacy offer them to make meaning and to

co-construct new understandings of their realities. Thus, literacy embraces the social, cultural and

personal knowledge of students when opportunities to work together and share their experiences

are brought to the EFL classroom.


129

Another relevant moment where students drew on to express their feelings while doing

collaborative work, was that of choosing a member of the school community to be interviewed

and know more about him/her, since the second inquiry project implied looking for information

of human assets of the school. Students chose teachers to inquire about their personal and

professional life, since they appreciate them or liked the subject they taught. Regarding the

previous fact, third graders extended the social knowledge of people they admired or liked within

the school, since they had the chance to ask them questions written up by their own and nurture

their development of English and Spanish languages.

Additionally, the literacy event students were part of, as this particular case, the interview,

created dynamic tensions between their language learning and personal constructions of literacy,

since they were able to orchestrate communication and social skills, attitudes and time

management to successful accomplish their inquiries. In this regard, language and literacy were

not isolated practices anymore and became sources for meaning construction that implied “the

interrelation between the knower and what is to be known” (Rosenblatt, 1976, p. 27), where third

graders connected their knowledge background to what they wanted to know within their social

realities.

Figure 37. Data source 19. Students‟ Journal: Explaining inquiry choices. November 10th

, 2016


130

The second subcategory Acknowledging language and literacy learning relates directly to

the way students used the language for different purposes, since they were able to interact,

inquire communicate and convey meanings in English and Spanish by means of multimodal

literacy, including writings compositions, drawings, oral presentations and multimodal texts. The

previous experiences developed in the EFL classroom allowed me to observe two types of

learning that my students experienced within their inquiry projects: learning about language and

learning through language (Halliday, 1994). Such learning is the consequence of students‟

publication in the school magazine, sharing their understandings and supporting each other to use

language in a coherent mode. Consequently, the school context where students experienced such

learning does not devoid of the socio-cultural value, which grants the semiotic constructions to

provide meaning and understandings of third graders inquiry projects.

Learning about language, took place when students wrote the third column of their KWL

to describe what they have learnt during the first inquiry project. For instance, Diego

acknowledged that he learnt to speak English when he presented the timeline to other members of

the school and write a biography in English about the community member he chose with his

partner. As part of this experience, I provided the context in which students could interact and

construct their own concepts and ideas through the language use to maximize their potential of

meanings.

Apart from learning about language, students also shaped their confidence when they

experienced literacy events as the interview they made and shared the outcomes of their

investigations in English. Therefore, such experiences that only can begin when inquiry is part if

the EFL classroom as the particular case of this study, are essential to build up learners‟

confidence to success in their academic life. Moreover, the resulting learning outcomes of


131

students showed how working together was part of the good results they acknowledged, as Short

et al (1996) contends that “students [work] collaboratively in supporting each other‟s learning

and inquiry” (p.68) and recognize other as important part of the group. The following image

presents the learning about language that third graders experienced when presenting information

in English and writing his biography.

Figure 38. Data source 20. Student artifact: KWL Chart. November 15th, 2016

Another trait of students learning about language and literacy took place when the

students were writing their biographies in English to display them in the writing exhibition of the

school. Since I recorded most of the observations during the projects, for then, writing my field

notes, the next oral interaction among my students took place, where they evidenced how much

they know about English use when writing their biographies.

While I was supervising the work of the whole class, one student came to me and asked

for help.

S1: Teacher!

T: Yes, what do you need?

S1: How do you write “estuvo” en Inglés? es que quiero escribir que Aida estuvo

estudiando en la universidad por 5 años.

at that moment one students came to student 1 and told him.

S2: se escribe “was”, te acuerdas que para he y she, se usa was…cuando es pasado.

S1: Thanks Eduardo….

T: Wow! Eduardo, me encanta que ayudes a tus compañeros…


132

Data Source 21. Field note-November 2nd, 2016

The second type of learning students describe was learning through language. Such

learning experiences are described in detail in the below image, which is part of the publication

of students‟ timeline. Learning through language entails the way students learned much more

than the English language. How they went beyond the language use to discover many

sociocultural events that framed interesting historical facts of their school, which strengthened

their sense of belonging to their school community and expanded their knowledge about inquiry

practices as collecting data through interviews, search on the Internet and the first yearbook of

the school.

This type of learning, demonstrates how inquiry-based learning situated the literacy

practices of students within a social cultural perspective that nurture the EFL field of meaningful

learning experiences, through which they can uncover what they really want to learn and make

sense of what they learn within their social context being the main actors of the development of

their education.

Figure 39. Data source 22. Students‟ artifact: Publication of the Timeline October 15th

, 2016


133

Another feature of students‟ learning through language is presented in the third column of

the following KWL Chart, where students described what they learned after culminating the two

inquiry projects. In this piece of data, one of the students recognized how important was to co-

exist with the teachers, as a feeling that came from the interview did to the Art teacher, since he

felt affection toward her and enjoyed being in her class. Likewise, the student acknowledged that

he learnt to make an interview and felt more confident to present the information orally to a

specific audience.

Figure 40. Data source 23. Student artifact: KWL Chart. November 15th, 2016

This chapter has widely presented the way in which data gathered throughout the

pedagogical platform gave account of the research question that emerged from a concern that

embraced language and literacy learning in Liceo Cervantes School. The previous analysis

provided and overview of how the social situated multimodal literacy practices and the

expression of feelings and learning of collaborative inquiry, were the emerging literacy practices

third graders drew on, when they inquired collaboratively upon their academic surroundings.

Such categories, became the entry points for sense making processes, inquiry practices, EFL


134

learning and literacy development that spread confidence, autonomy, ownership, agency,

authentic communication processes and strengthened students‟‟ collective zones of proximal

development. The findings explained throughout this chapter adhere to the conclusions,

pedagogical implications and further research presented in the following chapter.


135

Chapter 6

Conclusions

This research was meant to describe the emerging literacy practices that students used when they

inquired collaboratively into their academic surroundings, having as theoretical reference Inquiry

and Literacy. Such a goal was addressed based on one research question: What literacy practices

emerge when third graders inquire collaboratively into their academic surroundings at a private

school in Bogota? As part of this research purpose, three specific objectives were proposed to

have more insights and respond to the research question. These were: 1) To determine the types

of literacy processes students develop when working with collaborative and inquiry-based

methodology; 2) To explore the modes that students use when they develop literacy practices

with respect to socio-cultural elements of their school surroundings; and 3) To determine how

meaning making takes place when children use literacy by means of collaborative inquiry. This

chapter presents the conclusions regarding the data analysis process and findings, the

implications, limitations and further research.

As point of departure, it is worth mentioning how students‟ school community provided

alternatives for students to unfold their language and literacy abilities through meaningful

learning environments in the EFL classroom, which also allowed me, as teacher-researcher to

make a transition from fragmented and decontextualized language practices into more enjoyable

and flexible ways to communicate what mattered to students. In this respect, the first category

that emerged to describe the way students disclosed their literacies and respond to the research

question was Social situated multimodal literacy practices.


136

The previous category implied that third graders adopted a role of community researchers

who used a variety of modes namely drawings, writings, reading and viewing printed literacy,

searching information on the web, representing and drawing to convey and co-construct meaning

of socio-cultural knowledge present in their academic surroundings. Such role, implied the use of

language and literacy from a social dimension of learning that acknowledges children‟

interactions with their peers to develop their inquiries, flexible thinking and collaboration.

Likewise, this category also displayed students‟ authorship, agency and ownership

practices within several literacy events, namely interviews to community members, oral

presentations and the creation of multimodal and expository texts to convey and co-construct

meaning of their investigations, while they nurtured their thoughts, as entry points to use literacy

from a social dimension.

Another relevant trait of the aforementioned category entails the manner students became

authors, owners and agents of their own education within and inquiry mindset. This means, that

while students planned, organized and developed their inquiry projects, they took control of their

learning experiences and switched their roles, from receptors of knowledge to be active literacy

and language users. Similarly, the role of the teacher as the only knowledge holder within the

EFL classroom was faded and opportunities were given for students to bring authentic pieces of

personal and local knowledge, as part of their learning interests. Consequently, this category

depicts language as a “powerful mediational tool for learning activity” (Gutierrez, 2001, p. 564),

since students‟ EFL learning implied the use of English and Spanish, as paths to read their

worlds, convey and co-construct new meanings collaboratively, while they interacted within their


137

collective zones of proximal development through scaffolding practices among them and their

teacher (Vygotsky, 1987).

Additionally, I can conclude that the methodological practices implemented to discover

the previous category, have a wide impact within local and national EFL field, since inquiry

based-learning approach entailed democratic processes that involved all the participants in

negotiations around the phases of the inquiry projects. Thus, the inquiry based-practices that took

place within this study, increased students‟ motivation, active participation and promoted their

senses of agency and ownership to be life-long learners.

In tune with the previous conclusions, I am inclined to believe that my research work

adheres to the “emancipatory literacy” that Freire and Macedo (1987) contend, in which students

and educators become active agents of change to transform our communities of teaching and

learning and enlighten a more democratic construction of curriculum. That is to say, that third

graders were able to make meaning of their social worlds through multimodal literacy knowledge

they already possessed, while fostering their EFL learning within a social situated processes that

embraced their realities. Such experiences were displayed in the subcategory “Using

multimodality to convey meaning of socio cultural knowledge” where students were authors of

multimodal texts that allowed them to weave previous and new understandings of literacy and

language use. Additionally, it is paramount to highlight how the “emancipatory literacy” took

place in the present research, since third graders developed authentic processes of communication

to express their intended meanings using English and Spanish, and drawing to represent what

they know, learnt and felt which shaped and strengthened their literate identities within cultural

and social practices within their school community.


138

Another important trait of this first category is related to the way students took active

participation into their inquiries and literacy events, as it was presented in the subcategory

“Students as agents and owners of their language and literacy learning”. In this respect, children

worked collaboratively to be agents of their literacy and learning experiences, and shared

common goals that awake that hidden knowledge, that only emerged through collaborative

inquiry and social situated literacy practices. Similarly, students developed ownership processes

in their language and literacy learning, where they felt responsible of the collaborative endeavor

they were experiencing. As result, they made different types of connections to share their

experiences and knowledge to others through oral and visual presentations of their expository

texts, namely the timeline and the biographies that evidenced their abilities to create and re-create

the socio-cultural knowledge of their school community through multiple modes.

The second category that emerged to answer my research questions was Expressing

feelings and learning of collaborative inquiry experiences. In this respect, students were

immersed in inquiry based learning experiences they never have lived before in the EFL class and

had the opportunity to explore historical facts of their school community and interact to members

of their school to know more about their personal and professional, since they felt appreciation

towards them. Such experiences, allowed them to co-construct their own meanings, strengthen

their confidence as literacy and language learners. Consequently, students were intellectually and

emotionally engaged to achieve better learning, since their personal knowledge and socio-cultural

information became into valuable sources to accomplish their inquiries and learn what really

mattered to them.


139

Moreover, the expression of feelings and learning of collaborative inquiry experiences

within this category, implied students‟ reflections, where they valued their collaborative efforts

within their inquiries and showed their happiness and proudness of outcomes. Such situations

leaded me to conclude that literacy within this research involved the “values, attitudes, feelings

and social relationships” (Street 1993, p. 12) of learners which depict it as a social practice since

it includes the social dimension of children. Similarly, this category is devoted to conceive

literacy as a “community resource realized in social relationships, rather than a property of

individuals” (Barton & et al. 2000, p. 13), since students expressed their feelings and learning

after working collaboratively throughout the literacy events and inquiry projects as it was

evidenced in the subcategory “Valuing collaborative work”. In this regard, collaboration allowed

third graders to decrease their initial feelings of isolation and promoted the interaction within

their zones of proximal development, to help each other, strengthen friendship ties and

accomplish common goals. This situation brought to the EFL classroom more comfortable and

friendly learning environments, as well as emotional sides of learning and identity.

Another aspect to bear in mind to conclude this research has to do with the subcategory

“Acknowledging language and literacy learning”, as students‟ development of social situated

multimodal literacy practices entailed the use of both languages to exchange meaning and new

understandings that portrayed themselves as authors, owners and agents of their learning. As

consequence, students learnt about language and learnt through language, since they created their

own multimodal texts, worked together, supported each other to use English grammar and

vocabulary in a coherent mode, always with the support of their teacher or other peers. Classes

were dynamic and fruitful, as students worked collaboratively and were aware of their language


140

abilities to present their inquiries through multiple facets of language either, visually, orally or in

written form.

The previous conclusions evidence the completion of the research and specific objectives,

since students developed social multimodal literacy practices when collaborative and inquiry-

based methodology took place in the EFL class and felt confident to express their feelings and

learning, turning EFL learning into a more enduring and life-long experience. In addition, third

graders used a variety of modes within their literacy events to co-construct knowledge based on

the socio-cultural elements of their academic surroundings and fulfill their inquiries. In this

respect, Spanish and English, connections, drawings, oral interactions, search on the internet,

viewing, oral presentations and publications, became on those modes that students drew on to

develop their literacy practices from a social dimension. That is to say, that literacy practices

were launched as tools to convey and make meaning, rather than decontextualized skills to be

acquired and assessed. Similarly, meaning making took place when children inquired

collaboratively and gradually used different multimodal literacies, which naturally emerged when

they engaged, explored, worked together, drew, talked to their teacher and peers, and supported

each other within the literacy events they need to be part of to complete their inquiry projects.

Finally, I consider that the role of teacher-researcher I assumed during this academic year

was different from the role I used to have, because the inquiry-based methodology allowed me to

provide students with opportunities to pose questions and find answers, taking in consideration

the local sources of knowledge to fulfill their learning needs. Similarly, I also became into an

active inquirer, and students‟ guidance to unfold their literacy and language knowledge to follow

the collaborative inquiry process within the pedagogical innovation. Similarly, students‟ modes


141

of using language and literacy are valuable outcomes that depict them as knowledge holders,

owners, agents and authors of their own education.

The present research made students and teachers being cognizant of the relevant

information their academic surroundings offer them to carry out more meaningful and enduring

experiences of literacy and language learning, for instance, the local knowledge that community

helpers possess, which is neither in textbooks nor in the internet. In this respect, the way

collaborative inquiry and Literacy as a social situated practice were launched within this research,

acknowledged and turned the academic surroundings of students as remarkable opportunities to

experience meaning-rich activities that embrace socio-cultural resources, enhance written and

oral language development and facilitate opportunities to interact with multimodal modes for the

co-construction of unique knowledge. In the same way, this research highlights effective means

of constructing knowledge through dialogue arising from cooperative inquiry.

In other words, by creating collaborative community […] students learn with and from

each other, as they engage in dialogic inquiry (Wells, 1999). Consequently, the outcomes of this

study might illuminate new understandings to overcome the limitations and boundaries that

skills-based approaches bring to the EFL curriculum through scripted literacy programs that

consider reading and writing as the only skills learners need to develop to accomplish the

mandated curriculum standards.

Implications

Collaborative inquiry as a pedagogical innovation implies a shift from mono-modal EFL teaching

and learning practices to more learner-centered and democratic spaces that allow teachers to


142

approach the mandated foreign language curriculum and go beyond its standards. In this respect,

collaborative inquiry helps to find a topic in which language turns into a source for co-

constructing knowledge and foster the development of multiple literacy practices in young EFL

learners, bearing in mind the social dimension of their learning. That is to say, that language and

literacy complement each other to easily adapt inquiry-based methodologies and fulfill students‟

learning interests and wants within the language class.

Consequently, the present research brings new language and literacy perspectives to EFL

teaching programs, pre-service and in-service teachers to understand that language and literacy

teaching should not be isolated entities without context. On the contrary, they should be

integrated within inquiry-based learning environments to provide authentic contexts in which

children can excel and see themselves as valuable members of the learning community, who are

expected, taught and encouraged to use multimodal literacies to construct meaning, as they

develop both language and social abilities. Furthermore, inquiry-based instruction entails many

benefits as the increase of students‟ engagement, responsibility and abilities to search information

related to topics of their concern, which position them as agents, owners and self-regulated

learners who perceive EFL learning as an enjoyable and rewarding activity.

Limitations

The first drawback I had to face during the development of my research was the educational

praxis present in the classroom, where traditional teacher-directed classroom and the

development of grammar-based activities from the textbooks perpetuated students‟ passiveness

and hindered their inner literacy and language abilities. The previous fact brought difficulties


143

when they had to develop collaborative inquiry-based activities that implied autonomy,

collaboration and self-regulation. As students used to work only by pairs or individually, they

struggled when I grouped them in teams to initiate their investigations. Similarly, third graders

struggled while splitting responsibilities and tasks to accomplish common goals within the first

inquiry project. As the innovation thrived, I could evidence changes in students‟ attitudes towards

collaborative work, as they started to consider others‟ perspectives and ideas with respect to the

development of inquiry assignments.

Another constraint was the tight schedule for the English class because I had to split the

time between filling the English grammar textbooks, preparing the English day celebration and

opening possibilities to pursue personal and group learning interests in order to carry out the

pedagogical units of my pedagogical innovation. Similarly, since inquiry-based activities implied

certain time to reflect and discuss, the amount of time per session was not enough and I had to

stop some reflection moments to let students be ready for the upcoming classes.

The last limitation dealt with the permission of the principal to carry out the project

beyond the classroom walls because of the amount of academic duties students had to do at

home. As consequence, I could not to ask students to interact with external community sources,

as their families and their neighborhoods to feed my innovation purposes based on the umbrella

term of community. As consequence, I only used the socio-cultural sources of the school

community to develop the pedagogical innovation.


144

Further Research

Taking into account the result of this study, further research could be based on the following

questions:

In what manners collaborative inquiry fosters English language learning through content

knowledge of other areas of the curriculum?

How might multimodal literacy practices allow EFL learners to adopt a critical perspective when

students inquire about co-existence issues within their school context?


145

References

Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of

Psychology, 52, 1-26.

Barton, D. (1994). Literacy: An introduction to the ecology of written language. Oxford,

England: Blackwells.

Barton, D., Hamilton, M. & Ivanic, R. (2000). Situated literacies: Reading and writing in

context. London and New York: Routledge.

Baynham, M. (1995). Literacy practices: Investigating literacy in social context. New York, NY:

Longman.

Becerra, C. (2006). Twin texts: A possibility to involve children in inquiry-oriented processes.

Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 8(2), 243-250.

Burns, A. (1999). Collaborative action research for English language teachers. Cambridge,

England: Cambridge University Press.

Bruner, J. (1975). From communication to language: A psychological perspective. Cognition, 3,

255-287.

Burns, A. (2001). Collaborative action research for English language teachers. Cambridge,

England: Cambridge University Press.

Burns, A. (2009). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for practitioners.

New York, NY: Routledge.


146

Camp, D. (2000). It takes two: Teaching with twin texts of fact and fiction. The Reading Teacher,

53(5), 400-408.

Charmaz, K. (2010). Constructing grounded theory. A practical guide through qualitative

analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Clavijo, A. (2001). Redefining the role of language in the curriculum: Inquiry-based curriculum

an alternative. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 3(1), 32-48.

Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education. London, England:

Routledge Falmer.

Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. New York, NY:

Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

Comber, B., Thompson, P. & Wells, M. (2001). Critical literacy finds a "place": Writing and

Social Action in a Low-Income Australian Grade 2/3 Classroom. The Elementary School

Journal, 101(4), 451-464.

Cope, B. & Kalantzis, M. (2000). Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning and the Design of Social

Futures. London, England: Routledge.

Creswell, J. W. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative

and qualitative research. Boston, U.S.: Prentice Hall.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative

Research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative

Research (pp.1-32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Collier MacMillan.


147

Dewey, J. (1990). The school and society: The child and the curriculum. Chicago, IL: University

of Chicago Press.

Diener, E. & Crandall, R. (1978). Ethics in social and behavioral research. Chicago, IL:

University of Chicago Press.

Ferreiro, E. (1990). Literacy development: Psychogenesis. In Y. Goodman (Ed.). How children

construct literacy: Piagetian perspectives.. (pp. 12-25). Newark, DE: International

Reading Association

Flood, J., Heath, S. B. & Lapp, D. (1997). Handbook of research in teaching literacy through the

communicative and visual arts. New York, NY: McMillan.

Freire, Paulo. (1985). The politics of education: Culture, power and liberation. Westport, CT:

Bergin & Garvey Publishers.

Freire, P. & Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world. South Hadley, MA:

Bergin & Garvey.

Freire, Paulo. (1998) Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy, and civic courage Lanham, MD:

Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Freire, P. (2011). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.

Gee, P. (1990). Social Linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses, critical perspectives on

literacy and education. London, UK: Routledge.

Ghiso, M. P. (2011). Writing that Matters: Collaborative Inquiry and Authoring Practices in a

First- Grade Class. Language Arts, 88(5), 346-355.


148

Gomez, J. (2016). Collaborative inquiry as a way to promote elementary students´ reflections in

the EFL classroom. (Master Thesis). Retrieved from:

http://repository.udistrital.edu.co/handle/11349/2664

Guccione, L. M. (2011). Integrating literacy and inquiry for English learners. The Reading

Teacher, 64(8), 567.

Guthrie, J. T. (1996). Educational contexts for engagement in literacy. The Reading Teacher,

49(6), 432-445.

Gutierrez, K. (2001). What‟s new in the English language arts: Challenging policies and

practices, ¿y qué? National council of teachers of English, 78 (6), 564-569.

Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). El lenguaje como Semiótica Social. Bogotá, CO: Fondo de Cultura

Económica.

Harste, J. et al. (1984). Language stories and literacy lessons. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Harste, J. (1993). Inquiry-based instruction. Primary Voices, K-6, 1 (1), 2-5.

Harste, J. (2003). What do we mean by literacy now? Voices from the Middle, 10(3), 8-12.

Harste, J. (2014). The art of learning to be critically literate. Language Arts, 92(2), 30-102.

Hernandez, Z. (2016). Third graders as community inquirers. (Master Thesis). Retrieved from:

http://hdl.handle.net/11349/2721.

Hubbard, R. & Miller, P. (1993). The art of classroom inquiry. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Independent Together. (2003). Integrated learning through inquiry: A guided planning model.

Retrieved from:

http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/docs/support/multilevel/ind_together_full.pdf

http://repository.udistrital.edu.co/handle/11349/2664

http://hdl.handle.net/11349/2721

http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/docs/support/multilevel/ind_together_full.pdf


149

Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (1992). The action research planner. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin

University Press.

Kress, G. (1997). Before writing. London, England: Routledge.

Kress, G. (2000a). Design and Transformation: New Theories of Meaning. In B. Cope & M.

Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy Learning and the Design of Social Futures

(pp.153-161). London, UK: Routledge.

Kress, G. (2000b). Multimodality. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy

learning and the design of social futures (pp. 182-202). London, UK: Routledge.

Kress, G. (2012, March 15). “What is Multimodality?” (B, Hendrickson. Interviewer). Retrieved

from: http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/2256/1/2012/02/16/video-resource-key-concepts-in-

multimodality/index.html

Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). TESOL Methods: Changing Tracks, Challenging Trends. TESOL

Quarter, 40(1), 59-81.

Lankshear, C. & Knobel, M. (2004). A handbook for teacher research. Maidenhead, England:

Open University Press.

Lee, C. & Smagorinsky, P. (2000). Vigotskian perspectives on literacy research. Retrieved from:

http://assets.cambridge.org/97805216/30955/sample/9780521630955wsn01.pdf

Leland, H., & Harste, J. (1994). Multiple ways of knowing: Curriculum in a new key. Language

Arts, 71, 337–345.

http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/2256/1/2012/02/16/video-resource-key-concepts-in-multimodality/index.html

http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/2256/1/2012/02/16/video-resource-key-concepts-in-multimodality/index.html

http://assets.cambridge.org/97805216/30955/sample/9780521630955wsn01.pdf


150

McGinnis, T. (2007). Khmer rap boys, X-Men, Asia‟s fruits, and Dragon Ball Z: Creating

multilingual and multimodal classroom contexts. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,

50(7), 570-579.

McNiff, J. (2002). Action Research: Principles and practice. New York, NY: Routledge.

Medd, S., & Whitmore, K. (2000). What‟s in your backpack? Exchanging funds of language

knowledge in an ESL classroom. In P. G. Smith (Ed.), Talking Class- rooms: Shaping

Children’s learning through oral Language Instruction (pp. 42–56). Newark, DE:

International Reading Association.

Mendieta, J. (2009). Inquiry as an opportunity to make things differently in the language

classroom. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 11, 124-135.

Merrian, S. (2002). Introduction to qualitative research. In Josses Bass, A Willey Company (1st

Ed.) Qualitative Research in Practice. (pp.3-17). San Francisco, CA: Josses Bass

Miller, P. (1993). Theories of developmental psychology. New York: W. H. Freeman and

Company.

Mills, G. E. (2003). Action Research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Upper Saddle River,

NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Moll, L. (1990). Vygotsky and education. Cambridge, England: Cambridge

University Press.

Moll, L. & Whitmore, K. (1993). Vygotsky in classroom practice. In E. Forman, N. Minick, &

A. Stone (Eds.), The institutional Implications and Applications of Sociohistorical

psychology (pp.19–42). Oxford, England: Oxford University.


151

Moll, L. (1994). Literacy research in community and classrooms: A socio cultural approach. In

R. Rudell, M Rudell, & H, Singer (Eds.), Theoretical Models of Processes of Reading, 4th

edition (pp.179-207). Newark, NJ: IRA.

Murrell, P. (2001). The community teacher: A new framework for effective urban teaching. New

York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Newman, D. et al. (1989). The construction zone: Working for cognitive change in school.

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Nunan, D. (1988). [Introduction] in Cambridge University Press (Eds.), The Learner-Centered

Curriculum: A Study in Second Language Teaching. Retrieved from:

http://assets.cambridge.org/97805213/58439/excerpt/9780521358439_excerpt.pdf

Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle

Publishers.

Nunan, D. (2006). Action Research and Professional Growth, presented at TESOL Symposium

on English Teacher Development in EFL Contexts, Hong Kong University, China, 2014.

USA: TESOL

Pennycook, A. (2007). Global English and transcultural flows. London & New York: Routledge.

Pineda, N. (2007). An inquiry project: A way to develop a meaningful learning context. Profile

Journal, 8, 59-74.

Pineda, C. (2001). Developing English as a foreign language curriculum: The need for an

articulated framework. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 3(1), 6-20.

http://assets.cambridge.org/97805213/58439/excerpt/9780521358439_excerpt.pdf


152

Rincón J. & Clavijo-Olarte A. (2016). Fostering EFL learners‟ literacies through local inquiry in

a multimodal experience. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 18(2), pp. 67-82.

Rosenblatt, L. (1976). Literature as exploration. New York, NY: Modern Language Association.

Rosenblatt, L. (2005). Making meaning with texts. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Scribner, S. (1984). Literacy in three metaphors. American Journal of Education, 93 (1), 6-21.

Short, K. G., & Burke, C. (1991). Creating curriculum: Teachers and students as a community of

learners. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Short, K. G., Harste, C. & Burke, C. (1996). Creating Classrooms for Authors and Inquirers.

Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Short, K. G. & Burke, C. (2001). Curriculum as inquiry. Retrieved from:

https://www.coe.arizona.edu/sites/default/files/curriculum_as_inquiry.pdf

Short, K. (2001). Curriculum as inquiry: Inquiring into inquiry by examining our beliefs and

practices. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 3(1), 21-31.

Sluys, K. & Laman, T. (2006). Learning about language: Written conversations and elementary

language learners. The Reading Teacher, 60 (3), 222-233.

Strauss, A. L. & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory

procedures and techniques. London, England: Sage Publications.

Street, B. (1993). Cross-cultural approaches to literacy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University

Press.

Street, B. (1995). Social literacies: Critical approaches to literacy in development, ethnography,

and education. London, England: Longman.

https://www.coe.arizona.edu/sites/default/files/curriculum_as_inquiry.pdf


153

Tudor, I. (2001). The dynamics of the language classroom. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge

University Press.

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

Vygotsky, L. (1987). Thinking and speech. Collected Works, 1, 39-85.

Wells, G. (1995). Language and the inquiry oriented curriculum. Toronto, ON: Ontario Institute

for Studies in Education.

Wells, G. (2002). Learning and teaching for understanding: The key role of collaborative

language teaching. Social Constructivist Teaching, 9, 1-41.

Within. D., & Within, P. (1997). Inquiry at the window: Pursuing the Wonders of

Learners. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Wolk, S. (2008). School as inquiry. Phi Delta Kappa International, 90 (2), 115-122.

Yin, R. (2011). Qualitative Research from Start to Finish. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.


154

Appendix A

Semi-structured interview to EFL teachers


155

Appendix B

Structured questionnaire to students


156

Appendix C

Field Note Layout

Field Note # 1 Date:

Title of the Unit:

Learning Objectives:

Context of observation

Observer‟s Reflection


157

Appendix D

Student Artifact


158

Appendix E

Student Journal


159

Appendix F

Parent Consent form


160

Appendix G

School Consent Form


161

Appendix H

KWL Chart Sample


Appendix I

Working Plan Unit 1: The History of my school Community

STAGE Life experiences

SESSION 1-2

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

Describes activities in written form regarding the basic parts of the sentence (subject + verb +

complement).

STANDARDS Menciono lo que me gusta y lo que no me gusta.

Escribo información personal en formatos sencillos.

TOPIC Describing my friend (Simple Present tense)

LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To appropriately use parts of the speech such as nouns, adjectives and verbs for the description of

peers‟ preferences and physical appearance.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To start the process of discovery by exploring preferences and physical appearance of their peers.

To introduce students the act of inquiry.

ACTIVITIES 1. What is an interview?: Teacher launches the term “interview” for students to describe what

they think it means or works for, and listen students‟ opinion.

2. Knowing my peer: Students fill out the interview, taking turns to ask and answer personal

information about each other.

3. Sharing Experiences: Students talk about the experience of doing an interview to their peers.

Then they write a journal to express what they learn and how did they feel.

DATA Students‟ journal and Field note 1


STAGE Life Experiences

SESSION 3

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

Describes activities in written form regarding the basic parts of the sentence in Simple Present Tense (subject + verb +

complement).

STANDARDS Respondo a preguntas sobre personas, objetos y lugares de mi entorno.

TOPIC Exploring my classroom.

LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To appropriately use parts of the speech such as nouns, adjectives and verbs to describe the classroom.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To continue the process of discovery by exploring physical and non-physical settings of the classroom.

To see the classroom as a place to learn and share.

ACTIVITIES

1. Teacher and students watch a video of a non-fiction story named “Go to School” by Stan and Jan Berenstain to

introduce elements of a classroom. Students answer the next questions orally

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHOaaoZ41AI):

a. How is the classroom from the story?

b. Why it is important to have classrooms in the school?

Exploring my classroom

2. Teacher provides students with linguistic input such as adjectives and nouns to describe physical and non-

physical features of their classroom.

3. Students observe their classroom, describe it in a chart where they register what they can see, smell, and touch,

and listen using the adjectives and nouns provided by the teacher.

4. Sharing Experiences: Students talk about their exploration of the classroom and share something they like or

did not like about it.

DATA Field note 2


164


SESSION 4

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

Describes activities in written form regarding the basic parts of the sentence in Simple Present Tense. (subject + verb

+ complement).

STANDARDS Respondo brevemente a las preguntas “Qué, Quién, Cuándo y Dónde” si se refieren a mi familia, mis amigos o mi

colegio.

TOPIC People and places in our school community.

LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To use parts of the speech such as nouns, adjectives and verbs to describe parts of the school.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To continue the process of discovering by exploring ecological, human and linguistics assets of the school community.

To explore the idea of community through observation of close surroundings.

ACTIVITIES 1. Exploring my school community: Students walk around the school and write down words or wonders about

their school community.

2. My school community in pictures: Teacher presents a power point presentation with pictures of the places

students walked by. Students comment about the pictures and ask questions about concerns they might have.

DATA KWL Chart, student artifact and Field note 3


165

STAGE Building from the known

SESSION 5

SCHOOL

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

Describes activities in written form regarding the basic parts of the sentence in simple Present Tense. (subject + verb +

complement).


colegio.

TOPIC People and places in our school community.

LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To use parts of the speech to answer interrogative sentences

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To share the experience of exploring the school community.

To wander and wonder regarding personal interests.

ACTIVITIES

1. Constructing meaning as a team: After having commented on the pictures, students use their previous knowledge

to make a spider web through answering the next questions:

a. Where is our school community located?

b. How big is our school community?

c. Who is part of our school community?

d. What building or places are here?

e. What elements of the nature are present in our school community?

f. What makes our community special or unique?

Teacher registers students‟ answers in a spider web.

2. Writing a KWL Chart: After having explored physical and social surroundings of the school, students individually

brainstorm on what they know and what they want to learn about their school community in a KWL chart.

3. Community inquiry groups: Wonders about students want to know are recorded on the KWL chart. Questions are

assorted in 7 groups for students to inquire collaboratively.

DATA KWL Chart and Field note 4


166

STAGE Taking the time to find questions for inquiry

SESSION 6

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

Describes past events using Simple Past Tense regarding the basic parts of the sentence (subject + verb + complement).


colegio.

TOPIC The History of My school Community

LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To use L1 to jot historical aspects of the school.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To explore the historical background of the school through the human sources of knowledge present at the school.

ACTIVITIES 1. Inquiry groups: Wonders are assorted in 7 groups with a specific questions:

a. Who founded the school?

b. When was our school community created?

c. When was the school built?

d. What subjects did the school teach at its beginning?

e. Who were the first students of the school?

f. Who were the first teachers of our school?

g. Why our school has the name of Miguel de Cervantes?

Students belong to an inquiry group according to their interests.

2. Looking for inquiry tools: Teacher and students talk about the tools needed to answer the questions posed by each

group. Students brainstormed some ideas such as asking people who have been working in the school for many

years, look for books in the library that contains information about the school history and search information on web

sites.

Teacher launches the term “interview” again to check student‟s previous knowledge about this data

collection instrument.

3. Doing the interview: Some community helpers who have worked in the school for many years are the guest

speakers in order to answer inquiry groups‟ questions.

Students work by groups, ask in English and teacher translate the questions for the guest speakers. Students take notes.

DATA Students artifacts and Field notes 5


167

STAGE/CYCLE OF

INQUIRY

Gaining new perspectives

SESSION 7-8-9

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

Describes past events using Simple Past Tense regarding the basic parts of the sentence (subject + verb + complement).


colegio.

TOPIC Exploring the History of My school

LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To create opportunities for describing historical facts based on group inquiries.

To use L2 to present the outcomes of partial inquiries in groups.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To show the historical background of the school based on the information provided by community helpers as social

knowledge holders.

ACTIVITIES 1. Our Museum of the School History: Students will display partial results of their inquiries through a mini-

poster and make a museum with the outcomes of their first collection of data. Each member of the groups write

and draw to show the results of their inquiries.

2. Editing historical facts of the school: Teacher supports students by checking student‟s pieces of writing in

terms of punctuation, capitalization and grammar.

3. Presenting initial findings of group inquiries: After making the seven mini-posters, students paste them on

the classroom wall and make the Museum of the School History; students have to present orally what they

have found. Teacher supports with pronunciation and intonation. Then, each group present the mini-poster.

4. Sharing experiences: Students talk about their experiences of presenting in front of the whole class.

DATA Students‟ artifacts and Field note 6


168

STAGE/CYCLE OF

INQUIRY


SESSION 10

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

Describes past events using Simple Past Tense regarding the basic parts of the sentence (subject + verb +

complement).


colegio.

TOPIC The history of My school

LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To read information in L1 from the web site of the school and graduated students‟ web site to complement

information of the inquiry project.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To explore the historical background of the school by searching information in the web page of the school.

ACTIVITIES 1. Feeding our inquiry project: Students use the second source of information to keep shaping the inquiry

project. Students read information about the school history and complement their perspectives and

inquiries. Students take notes of the relevant information to complement their inquiries in a sequence chart.

http://www.liceodecervantes.freeservers.com/historia.htm

http://www.liceocervantes.edu.co/historia.html

DATA Students‟ sequence chart And Field note 7

STAGE/CYCLE OF

INQUIRY


SESSION 11

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS


complement).


colegio.


LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To read printed and visual information regarding historical facts of our school community.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To explore historical facts of the school community through a yearbook of 1979

http://www.liceodecervantes.freeservers.com/historia.htm

http://www.liceocervantes.edu.co/historia.html


169

ACTIVITIES 1. Our school in 1979: Teacher shows students the first yearbook of the school that contains pictures of

teachers, students and community helpers to broad the understanding of the history of the school

community through images.

DATA Field note 8

STAGE/CYCLE OF

INQUIRY

Attending to difference

SESSION 12

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS


complement).


colegio.


LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To learn about timelines and its uses to display information.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To make students voice worth to take decisions regarding the presentation inquiry outcomes.

ACTIVITIES 1. Taking decisions to present inquiry outcomes: Students and teacher talk about different possibilities to present

the inquiry project. Students and teachers decide to make a time line to portray the history of the school

community.

2. Talking about present events to complement the time line: Students and teacher talk about current events of

the school to give elements of the present to our timeline.

3. Searching another sources for meaning making: Students visited the technology room to search pictures that

complement the facts of each year in the timeline. They used the same web sources from previous exploration

among others. Students also use the library sources and local other local sources of information.

DATA Field note 9

STAGE/CYCLE OF

INQUIRY

Sharing what was learned


170

SESSION 13


ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS


complement).

LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To use multimodal modes to make a timeline about the history of the school community.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To make students voice worth to take decisions regarding the presentation inquiry outcomes.

ACTIVITIES 1. Our School Timeline: Students work together to make a timeline with all the information collected through the

interviews, web sites and yearbooks. Teacher assigned different roles to students in order to work collaboratively

and present their inquiry outcomes.

2. Editing historical facts of the school: Teacher supports students by checking student‟s pieces of writing in

terms of punctuation, capitalization and grammar, as well as support students‟ use of L2 to translate the

information collected.

3. Informal sharing of Liceo Cervantes’ Timeline: Students present orally the outcomes of their investigation to

other members of the school community.

DATA Field note 10 and students‟ artifacts

STAGE/CYCLE OF

INQUIRY

Sharing what was learned

SESSION 14


ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

Describes past events orally using Simple Past Tense regarding the basic parts of the sentence (subject + verb +

complement).

LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To examine difficulties with language functioning, organizing and managing data and collaborative work throughout

the inquiry project.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To reflect on the inquiry process and create possibilities for improvement.

ACTIVITIES 1. Sharing experiences about presenting the timeline: the class as a whole Students talk about their

experiences of sharing their project to other members of the community and reflect about the whole inquiry

project to consider improvement.

DATA Field note 11 and Students‟ journal


171

STAGE/CYCLE OF

INQUIRY

Planning new inquiries. (What new inquiries are we going to pursue?)

SESSION 15

TOPIC People in my school community.

LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To create opportunities for self-expression on issues of personal interest.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To pose students‟ school community as a source for new inquiries

ACTIVITIES 1. KWL Chart: Teacher presents a power point presentation to students with different assets of the school

community for them to make connections and awake new wonders and questions regarding the school community.

Then, they register their wonders on the KWL chart sections what I know and what I want to learn.

2. Planning new inquiries: Having as basis their new gained perspectives upon the history of the School Community

History, students are invited to think of a possibility for redirecting immediate experiences into another broader

field of the school community.

DATA Field note 12

STAGE/CYCLE OF

INQUIRY

Planning new inquiries. (What new inquiries are we going to pursue?)

SESSION 16

TOPIC People in my school community.

LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To create opportunities for self-expression on topics of personal interest.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To address students school community as a source for new inquiries.

ACTIVITIES 1. KWL Chart: The class as a whole goes back to their KWL chart in order to remember the point of departure, which

involved their personal experiences, and the “what I know” section of the chart about prior knowledge of the school.

They move through the “What I want to learn” column and remember the questions on which their inquiries were

based, and end in the “What we learned” section and complete it by writing the meanings they constructed through

the inquiry process.

2. Planning New Inquiries: Having as basis their new gained perspectives upon the history of the School Community

History, students are invited to think of a possibility for redirecting immediate experiences into another broader field

of the school community.

DATA Field note 13


172

Appendix J

Working plan Unit 2: People of my School Community


SESSION 1

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

Asks and gives information about present events by using yes no questions

STANDARDS Describo lo que hacen algunos miembros de mi comunidad

TOPIC Our school in pictures

LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To appropriately use parts of the speech such as nouns, adjectives and verbs to describe orally the assets of the

community.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To appreciate the human, ecological and physical assets of the school community.

ACTIVITIES Observing our school community assets through pictures: Teacher shows a power point presentation with pictures of

ecological, human and linguistics assets of the school in order to provoque students curiosity and wonders and bring a new

topic for inquire.

DATA Field note 1


SESSION 2

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

Asks and gives information about present events by using yes no questions


TOPIC Our school community helpers

LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To appropriately use parts of the speech such as nouns, adjectives and verbs to describe orally people of the school

community.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To observe and appreciate what people do in our school community.

ACTIVITIES Visiting community helpers’ workplaces: After students decided to explore the roles and activities of people in the

community, they visit the offices of some members during the workday to observe and feed their inquiries.

COLLECTED Field note 2


173

DATA

STAGE Building from the known

SESSION 3

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

To identify characters, places and events in a short story.

STANDARDS Asocio un dibujo con su descripción escrita

Describo lo que hacen algunos miembros de mi comunidad

TOPIC Our School Community Helpers

LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To write statements about school community helpers

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To show relevance to human assets of the community.

ACTIVITIES 1. My school community helpers are important: Students watch a story in YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-zd7sqqTlM&list=PL5hFHAEVlO0oNdtSJdgmop_cqJEHrdIzb about

community helpers and identify the role of characters orally. Then, teacher asks students to mention characteristics of

people in the school that they know.

2. Describing my school community members: According to what students know, they are asked to describe one of

community members they use to interact with.

3. KWL chart: Students write the “What I know” column from the KWL chart with regard to their previous knowledge

about the school members.

DATA Students´ artifacts and Field note 3


SESSION 4

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

To describe past and present events in Simple Past and Simple Present Tense using the popper sentence structure

(subject + verb+ complement)



LINGUISTIC To write questions or wonders about a school community helper.


174

OBJECTIVE

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To bring social elements of the community to the classroom through students‟ wonders.

ACTIVITIES 1. Sharing multimodal text to my class: Students share the descriptions of the school community member they

chose to the whole class.

2. KWL Chart: Students are asked to write their wonders in Spanish in the 2nd

column of their KWL charts in order

to shape the topic of their coming inquiry project.

3. Grouping students wonders: Teacher reads students wonders in order to find commonalities among them and

have a clear topic for inquire.

DATA Students‟ artifact

Field note 4


SESSION 5

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS



STANDARDS Escribo sobre temas de mi interés


LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To shape written questions in Spanish as part of the students inquiries.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To bring social elements of the community to the classroom through students‟ wonders.

ACTIVITIES 1. Grouping students wonders: Teacher shows a power point presentation with the most common wonders for

students to establish a topic for research. They noticed that most of the class focused their curiosity on teachers‟

lives.

2. Knowing more about my school community helpers: Students work by pairs and chose a teacher to inquiry

about him/her.

3. Deciding what instruments use to collect data: Students take decision about instruments for collecting data.

They re-design the questions they had made before and add more to their inquiry list.

DATA Student‟s artifacts

Field note 5


175

STAGE Gaining new perspectives

SESSION 6

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

To describe past and present events in Simple Past and Simple Present Tense using the popper sentence structure (subject

+ verb+ complement)



LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To shape written questions in Spanish as part of the students inquiries.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To discover the role of the teachers beyond the classroom

ACTIVITIES 1. Asking for permission to do interviews: Students talk to teacher for time to answer some questions they have for

them. Teacher transcribes the interviews on a word file and gives copies to students in order to start with their

inquiries.

2. My teacher is more than a teacher: Students interview teachers in different moments of the school day. They take

turns to make the interview.

DATA Student‟s artifacts/pictures and Field note 6

STAGE Attending to difference

SESSION 7

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS





LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To decide what type of text or mode students will use to present students‟ inquiry outcomes

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To reflect about the inquiry process so far.

ACTIVITIES 1. Reflecting about our investigation: Students write a journal about the difficulties they had and the experience of

inquiring about a member of the school.

2. Looking for modes to show my inquiries: Students an teacher choose a way to present their inquiry outcomes.

DATA Student‟s journal and Field note 7


176

STAGE Attending to difference

SESSION 8-9

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

To describe past and present events using the popper sentence structure (subject + verb+ complement)


Asocio un dibujo con su descripción escrita


LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To use collected data in Spanish to write a biography in English

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To portray community helpers in a multimodal text.

ACTIVITIES 1. Writing a biography of my teacher: Students write a short biography to show their inquiry outcomes and draw or

take pictures of their teachers to illustrate their writings. Teacher revises and shapes their writing using editing marks

without changing the meaning of students‟ authorship.

2. Shaping my biography: Students edit their biographies and correct the errors they wrote while translating it from

Spanish to English.

DATA Students‟ Artifacts and Field note 8

STAGE Sharing what was learned

SESSION 10

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

To describe past and present events in Simple Past and Simple Present Tense using the popper sentence structure (subject +

verb+ complement)



LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

To read aloud the biographies students did in front of the class.

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To share what students investigated and know more about other teachers.

To make public students‟ inquiries and value their collaborative work.

ACTIVITIES

1. Sharing my biography: Students sat down in a circle and read aloud their biographies.

2. Displaying my biography: Students present their biographies in the “Writing exhibition” that takes place at the end of

the academic term.


177


STAGE Sharing what was learned

SESSION 11

ACADEMIC

ACHIEVEMENTS

To describe past and present events in Simple Past and Simple Present Tense using the popper sentence structure (subject +

verb+ complement)



LINGUISTIC

OBJECTIVE

Students

SOCIAL

OBJECTIVE

To write a reflection taking into account students‟ experiences.

ACTIVITIES Reflecting about the whole inquiry process: Students write a journal to reflect about the whole process where they had to

use the interview to collect data and how to present, as well as their experiences and difficulties.



178

Documents

FOSTERING LITERACY PRACTICES IN EFL LEARNERS …repository.udistrital.edu.co/bitstream/11349/6278/1... · This action research attempts to ... as well as supporting students within