Teachers’ perception of extramural English as lesson content

(1)

Degree Project in English Studies in Education

15 Credits, Second Cycle

Teachers’ perception of extramural

English as lesson content

Lärares uppfattning om extramural

engelska som lektionsinnehåll

Alexander Hansson

Kristina Broqvist

Degree in primary education, 240 Credits

Major English Studies in Education

Date for the Opposition Seminar 22 March 2019

Examiner: Björn Sundmark Supervisor: Shannon Sauro

DEPARTMENT OF CULTURE, LANGUAGES AND MEDIA

(2)

Abstract

The following study investigates teachers’ perception of extramural English (EE) activities as an in-class learning material connected to pupils’ motivation to speak English. We have witnessed during our teacher training program pupils being reluctant towards English speaking activities in school. Consequently, we questioned the use of textbooks as a basis for learning material rather than incorporating pupils’ EE activities they engage in on a voluntary basis into the classroom. Therefore, with this study, we examined two teachers that incorporate EE as a learning material within an English as a foreign language classroom. The results show that an EE teaching practice is likely to endorse pupils’ motivation to speak English, their linguistic confidence, as well as lower speaking anxiety. The results also highlight a teaching concept grounded on familiar contexts to the pupils, but not always involving their EE activities. Therefore, a fusion between EE and areas familiar to the pupils’ resulted in EE as In- Class Activities (EE-ICA)

classifications. From these results, ICA could be divided into four categories: Primary EE-ICA, Secondary EE-EE-ICA, Tertiary and non-EE. However, the result imply that lesson tasks based

entirely on EE activities may be difficult to achieve and not beneficial for all pupils.

Nonetheless, lesson content that involves EE activities the pupils can relate to could be a well-functioning base for increasing pupils’ motivation to speak.

Keywords: Extramural English, (EE) Extramural English-In class activities, motivation (EE-ICA), teaching implications, Global English, English as a foreign language (EFL), Elevnära

(3)

Preface

The following paper is conducted based upon the goals and guidelines of the course Advanced

Level Degree Project in the Major Subject at Malmö University. We hereby state that all of the

work has been equally written throughout this study. This includes:

• Deciding the research questions,

• Conducting and analyzing the data collected,

• Structuring and writing the paper and all of its components, • Active engagement throughout the length of the study.

We hereby confirm that the above statements are accurate, and no work has been done independently.

(4)

1. Introduction

The following study focuses on teachers’ perceptions of extramural English (EE) activities as an in class learning material, specifically connected to pupils’ motivation to produce English. EE refers to English activities learners engage in outside a language learning classroom and was defined by Sundqvist (2009). EE involves a language learning environment where the common language is naturally English which according to Lightbown and Spada (2013) is desirable while learning English as a foreign language (EFL). In addition, the Swedish School Inspectorate (Skolinspektionen, 2011) stresses that it is crucial to bridge the in-school and out-of-school English and thus incorporate pupils’ digital usage outside of school and include it as a didactical tool.

An ongoing trend that we have experienced from our teacher training program (VFU) is pupils being reluctant towards English class, especially to engage in English speaking activities. Moreover, lessons seemed seldom organized with consideration for the pupils’ interests.

Accordingly, the lessons were often textbook based, and pupils expressed de-motivation towards in-school learning. Despite this, we witnessed during our VFU pupils frequently used and

incorporated English in their daily life. For example, they listened to music, referred to something seen on YouTube, or played online digital games. We also observed pupils that we perceived as the most proficient and willing to produce English in class, were also the ones that engaged in online digital games in their spare time.

Reflecting on these VFU experiences, we believe that pupils are interested and engaged in activities that require the use of English outside of school, yet lesson content seems to lack this relation. This is in contrast to the Swedish syllabus that expresses how teaching English for year 4-6, should include “subject areas that are familiar to the pupils” (Skolverket, 2011, p. 33). With the aim “to deal with spoken language and texts, pupils should be given the opportunity to develop their skills in relating content to their own experiences, living conditions and interests” (Skolverket, 2011, p. 32). According to Lundahl (2014), the syllabus is designed with a focus on openness and does not express how English lessons should specifically be taught. However, previous research with a classroom perspective show a positive correlation for pupils' grading outcome. Correspondingly, EE activities have been proven to increase motivation to

communicate in English (Forsell 2017; Sundqvist & Olin-Scheller 2013; Olsson 2012; Levin & Zakharia, 2012). Therefore, EE’s connection to the motivational aspect could be a major factor

(7)

to consider for teachers who wish to incorporate EE in lesson content (Sundqvist & Wikström, 2015; Olsson 2012).

Furthermore, motivational factors connected to pupils’ own interests focus on individual differences (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2011). Therefore, motivation towards learning English may lay with the specific function it serves for the individual learner. Classroom motivation, according to Lightbown and Spada (2013), is connected to the teachers’ competence to create interesting and relevant content for the pupils to associate to their interests outside of school. Therefore, with this backdrop, we see a need to investigate the field of EE used as in-class learning material to motivate pupils to speak English.

(8)

2. Purpose and Research Questions

The purpose of this research study is twofold. First, this study strives to shed light on how

teachers use pupils’ EE as in-class activities. Second, we aim to investigate teachers’ perceptions regarding using this teaching method, and what effects it has on pupils’ motivation to produce English in class. Using EE as a platform to practice English speaking skills may develop the quality of language production. However, due to the limited research focusing on using EE as a basis for in-class activities for motivating pupils to speak English, we aim to fill this gap with this research. The results could be of interest to teachers, teacher-to-be of English or anyone interested in the effects of EE within an EFL classroom. Therefore, we have formulated two research questions:

1. How do teachers use EE as an in-class activity to motivate pupils’ English production? 2. What are teachers’ perceptions of using pupils’ EE in class to motivate pupils to speak

(9)

3. Theoretical background

The following chapter will first define and explain the term extramural English and present several teaching implications. Secondly, motivation will be presented and defined with its relevance to a global society and what teaching implications it may have.

3.1 Extramural English

The term extramural English (EE) was introduced by Sundqvist in 2009 and defined as English-related activities that pupils engage and interact in outside the EFL classroom (Sundqvist, 2009). These types of activities include various media and Internet sources such as English-speaking films and TV productions, music, digital games, social media, browsing the Internet, and watching YouTube (Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2014). This type of informal English that pupils are exposed to outside the formal educational language classroom occurs when the students choose what they want to do, when and how. This type of English learning leads often to implicit learning (Lundahl, 2014).

Previous research has proven a correlation between EFL learning and EE where a higher amount of time spent on EE have resulted in higher grades (Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2016).

Sundqvist and Sylvén (2016) have summarized their individual and pair research regarding how much time pupils spend on EE activities per week. Results show pupils range from 7,2 h/week to 18,4 h/week on EE activities.

3.1.1 EE teaching implications

Sundqvist and Sylvén (2016) suggest that gaining insights in pupils EE activities is essential to adapt teaching when including pupils’ EE activities. To gain these insights, the authors suggest three effective tools: the language diary, questionnaires, and interviews. The language diary consists of predetermined EE activities where pupils write the number of hours spent on each EE activity for one week as well as the normality of those EE activities. The questionnaires contain more open-ended questions or yes/no questions compared to the language diary. Pupils can therefore answer more freely. Interviews are defined as when the teacher asks the pupils about their EE activities. The authors claim, interviews can be very time consuming and require careful planning.

(10)

Sundqvist and Sylvén (2016) continue by suggesting EE activities in the classroom and present three different bases for activities: reading, films, and digital gaming. Reading activities include everything with text, for example comic strips, blogs, books, and song lyrics. In-class tasks could be comparing texts of another genre, investigating sentence structures or learning new words based on the EE activities’ content. Sundqvist and Sylvén (2016) emphasize however that the possibilities are endless. Examples of films can, obviously, be regular films but also YouTube clips or other motion picture. Sundqvist and Sylvén (2016) suggest the teachers should

encourage pupils to propose different films seen at home as content for class and create pre- and post-task about the film. When using digital gaming, Sundqvist and Sylvén (2016) suggest teachers can have pupils introducing other pupils to the game since it has been proven that digital gaming has the most positive effects on English learning of all EE activities. It can also be a source for discussing what types of language are used in the games, for example, the use of foul language.

However, Henry (2013) highlights that incorporating EE activities into the classroom can be problematic. Pupils can feel a need for separating their in-school identities from their out-of-school identities. This means pupils can object to using EE activities as an in-class activity because it can intrude on their privacy. However, Henry (2013) argues for teachers to recognize pupils’ different cultures, identities, and experiences from EE activities and incorporate that into the teaching. It is not a matter of just incorporating EE activities into the classroom for the sake of motivating the pupil, but to show the pupil that their experiences outside of school matter. Henry (2013) continues this argument by saying that the English pupils meet outside of the school, as mentioned above is substantial in time by Sundqvist and Sylvén (2016), is important and need to be recognized by the teacher.

Henry (2013) claim therefore, that teachers should not only be well informed of what EE activities the pupils engage in but also understand what they actually mean. By not relying on second-hand information or guesswork of the activity but to get a first-hand understanding of the EE activities, teachers can be better equipped to bridge EE activities with in-school activities. This understanding of pupils’ EE activities and the language used within them will also signal inclusiveness to other types of English then the formal English, a type of English pupils rarely meet outside of the school. Henry (2013) summarizes this with a question: “indeed, if as teachers we expect students to be able to navigate between different types of English that are appropriate in different domains, should not we also be able to do so?” (p. 148).

(11)

An argument Henry (2013) makes, is that teachers should strive to bring in EE activities in the classroom on a more general form rather, for example, asking pupils to log on to their private social media accounts, playing online games in the classroom with their characters, or asking them to show fanfiction they read. Instead, teachers can use the cultures pupils engage in EE activities for example connecting new vocabulary to digital games with its characters and stories. Another example lifted by Henry (2013) can be to look at different text genres by using

examples from digital games or other EE activities. Ushioda (2013) summarizes all the teaching implications elegantly:

/.../ valuable steps in this regard would seem to include giving students voice in

expressing their interests and identities, facilitating their autonomy in negotiating ideas and preferences, and encouraging them to build their own personally relevant connections between what they do in class, their lives outside class, and their aspirations and desired identities for the future. (p. 235)

3.2 Motivation and ESL learning

The word motivation means ‘to move’ and refers to what moves, or makes, someone to make certain actions (Dörnyei and Ushioda, 2011). However, as Dörnyei and Ushioda (2011) explains, what motivation really is and how it is constructed has been debated by scientist and theorists over decades. The authors claim, one reason for not having consensus could be that researchers are having difficulties to capture the full range of motivation spectra and only being able to capture selective parts of the concept. Therefore, there is no unanimous scientific definition of motivation to date. However, Dörnyei and Ushioda (2011) argues there are some factors of motivation that most scientist agree on. Scientist believe motivation, overall, consider why people choose to do something, how long they can withstand the chosen act and how much effort they are willing to devote to pursue something.

The following quote by Dörnyei and Ottó (1998, cited by Dörnyei and Ushioda, 2011) can act as a general, but substantial explanation of what motivation can mean.

In a general sense, motivation can be defined as the dynamically changing cumulative arousal in a person that initiates, directs, coordinates, amplifies, terminates and evaluates

(12)

the cognitive and motor processes whereby initial wishes and desires are selected, prioritised, operationalised and (successfully or unsuccessfully) acted out (p. 6).

3.2.1 The L2 Motivational Self System

Motivation is also connected to pupils being dynamic persons and not only a “language learner”. This means different personalities and identities affects motivation (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2011). When Dörnyei (2009) presented the L2 motivational self-system, he argued for, based on

empirical evidence, that three components are important when learning the second language (L2) (in this context, L2 is used identical to EFL): the ought-to L2 self, the L2 learning experience,

and the ideal L2 self. The ought-to self refers to specific L2 skills one believes s/he ought to

acquire to avoid future unpleasant situations or to meet certain expectations. For example, perceived responsibilities of friends, parents, and teachers. The L2 learning experience refers to motivation based on the immediate learning experiences and situations, for example current curriculum, peers, the impact of the teacher and L2 experience of success. The ideal L2 self refers to the motivational factor of imagine oneself being a L2 speaker, in this case an English speaker, for a future purpose. One example can be a pupil wanting to work as an international gamer. From these three factors, Dörnyei (2009) focuses on the ideal L2 self and presents six concrete points for the ideal L2 it to be realized. (1) The L2 learner has a vision of his/her future self (2) that is clear, powerful, (3) and plausible as long as it does not interfere with expectations of the immediate social environment. (4) The vision is also constantly triggered in the learners working self-concept. (5) These are further connected to specific strategies for reaching the goal and (6) with clear consequences.

3.2.2 Motivation and Global English

According to Dörnyei and Ushioda (2011), there are indications that pupils are more motivated to learn English because of its role as an international language, also known as global English. Global English refers to the language used to communicate locally and between different nations (McKay, 2000; Nault, 2008; Matsuda, 2011; Lundahl, 2014). Therefore, as Matsuda (2011) argues, English has moved beyond the native-speaking English ideal, for example UK accents, and will naturally be spoken in a variety of ways. This is due to the different linguistic and cultural backgrounds the interlocutors bring to discourses. English is subsequently, according to McKay (2000), de-nationalized and de-culturized. A natural consequence can be that English

(13)

should be viewed according to its function in an international community and has evolved beyond a language owned by the native-speaking English countries. In sum, the ownership of English is global.

Global English can be related to the ideal self and the EE activities pupils engage in. Pupils can be more inclined to pursue goals and careers on an international level since they are involved in activities of an international character, for example pursuing a career as an online digital gamer. Because of English as a global language, pupils can be more motivated to learn English to pursue these future goals because they have participated in EE activities.

According to Dörnyei and Ushioda (2011), motivation is therefore not only an internal process but a dynamic relationship between context, social and internal factors for interaction when learning EFL in a globalized community.

3.2.3 Motivation and the importance of the EFL teacher

As Lightbown and Spada (2013) explain, language production and EFL learning can interfere if the activity contributes to the EFL learner feeling anxiety, as the authors argue is common amongst adolescents. Therefore, it can be important for the teacher to create language production situations with no anxiety.

Furthermore, pupils’ motivation is according to Lightbown and Spada (2013) connected to the teacher’s ability to make the classroom content interesting and relate the content to the pupils’ outside-of-school interests. The syllabus for English states this as “subject areas that are familiar to the pupils” (Skolverket, 2011, p. 35). We believe this would naturally support the inclusion of pupils’ EE activities.

Lundahl (2014) also argues that pupils’ motivation is linked to their in-school success. Depending on, the pupil’s in-school success motivation can increase or decrease. This perception of the pupil’s in-school success is subjective to the pupil and does not have to be the same

perception as the teacher’s assessment of the pupil.

However, Lundahl (2014) highlights that the pupils’ individual varying backgrounds are a factor for their motivation which the teacher must be aware of. Therefore, as emphasized by Dörnyei and Csizér (1998), no motivational strategy can be general and apply to all pupils. Variables, such as the personality of the learner, the teacher, and the learner group, all matter.

(14)

3.2.4 Teaching implications for motivating pupils

Because of the large amount of different motivational factors, it can be hard to define how to teach to increase motivation for EFL speaking (Ushioda, 2013). However, Dörnyei and Csizér (1998) have defined a general list that may increase motivation for the EFL learner. The authors named the list: ten commandments list for motivating language learners, that is presented below:

1. The teacher should set a personal example by being interested in the subject and the amount of effort required to learn the subject.

2. The teacher should also create a pleasant and relaxed atmosphere within the classroom to lower EFL learners’ anxiety which could affect negatively on pupils’ EFL motivation. 3. The teacher should present tasks with clear goals and effective strategies to reach the set

goals.

4. Also, it also benefits the pupils’ motivation if the teachers establish good relationships with the EFL learners.

5. The teacher should also strive to increase the EFL learners’ linguistic self-confidence. This should not be confused with the actual ability to do something but rather the feeling of being able to do something even if it is with a lower linguistic ability.

6. The language lessons should also be interesting for the pupils. This is the pupils subjective experience and could be related to incorporating EE in the classroom.

7. The pupils should be responsible for their own learning. This can enhance the perception that pupils’ learning successes and/or failures are dependent on their own efforts rather than factors they cannot control.

8. The EFL classes should be personally relevant to the pupils.

9. Increase pupils’ goal-orientedness which means the pupils should have own goals they want to achieve and strive for.

10. Pupils should be familiar with the target-language culture by using authentic materials. Dörnyei and Csizér (1998) also argue contact with native-speaking people is important for motivation.

According to Dörnyei and Csizér (1998), some of these commandments can further be divided into three (3) categories: language level; self- confidence; learning situation level. In the language level category commandments 8 and 10 are included. Self-confidence include

(15)

commandments 2 and 5. The learning situation level can be divided into two sub-categories: Course specific motivational components which include points 6, 8 and 9, and teacher specific motivational components that include points 4 and 7.This may further help teachers

specify/narrow down/ focus their EFL classroom motivational aspects that, despite the large amount of different motivational factors the individual pupils’ may demand.

(16)

4. Methodology

The following section describes the methodology for this research study. First, a presentation of how we found the participants through strategic selection will be presented. Second, ethical considerations are discussed. Finally, instruments for data collection is unpacked and the procedure is presented.

4.1 Finding participants

To match the criteria for our research questions, we had to find teachers that actively incorporate pupils’ EE activities as classroom content, and therefore could provide valid data. Accordingly, a strategic selections process was our first option. Alvehus (2013) defines strategic selection as a way of exploring participants within a field that focus on the specific research questions. However, restrictions in finding participants and being too strategic regarding the selection of participants may be a risk pointed out by Alvehus (2013). Nonetheless, considering the specifics of our research these risks may not be limitations but rather a method for us to collect the

qualitative data we required.

We focused on social media to find teachers that wanted to be part of the study. We are members of a Swedish Facebook group for English teachers grades 4-6 with over 7000 members and posted a request in this group stating our inquiry for teachers with experience of

incorporating EE as in class learning materials. This generated a response from two separate teachers. Of these, one of the teachers was not relevant to the study due to her teaching grades and limited availability. The second teacher communicated that she and a colleague worked together with EE and both were interested in participating in the study. Their teaching grades matched our criteria, as well as their teaching approach of incorporating EE to their EFL classroom. Consequently, we chose to incorporate the two teachers that are colleagues

The teachers previously worked with a two-teacher system in grade five where they focused on EE as a learning material connected to motivation within the EFL classrooms. Part of the information they provided prior to us proceeding with specific participants, where them being newly graduated, and that they had co-written a degree paper focused on EE as a learning

material. Therefore, their knowledge of EE was a major factor for us when deciding to include them in our study. This created a new dimension to our degree work, working with teachers that were well informed of EE as an educational approach.

(17)

4.2 Ethical considerations

The study followed Vetenskapsrådet (2002) four main suggestions relating to research. The teachers were informed about their specific involvement in the study. The teachers, both of legal age, orally conceded to the agreements of their participation and to their interviews being

recorded. This oral consent was recorded.

Furthermore, the teachers were made aware of their anonymity and any data collected would only be used within this project. Thus, inline the confidentiality and usage requirement (Vetenskapsrådet 2002). We informed the teachers of how the data collected would only be made available to us and any data would be destroyed after the completion of the degree work.

4.3 Instruments used for data collection and Procedure

Our research questions are based on teachers' perception. Therefore, as Alvehus (2013)

describes, qualitative methods are appropriate to use for collecting data. When using qualitative methods, researchers are interested in gaining insights into subjects’ views of the world, in this case, views regarding the research questions. We conducted our qualitative research via semi-structured teacher interviews.

4.3.1 Semi-structured teacher interviews

A qualitative method used primarily to collect data effectively from the participating teachers, was semi-structured interviews. Alvehus (2013) and Bryman (1997) describes semi-structured interviews as a method where topics are discussed with possible follow-up questions. This choice of method functions as a way to understand the teacher approach better, with a focus on our research description. The questions were designed thereafter.

As explained by Nunan (2003) and Dörnyei & Ushioda (2011), in semi-structured interviews topics functions as a guideline during the interview. This may allow the interviewee to answer in their own manner, but the topics would navigate the interview in the right direction. Emphasizing the qualitative method of choice, the interview does not follow a specific schedule as quantitative research may do, and therefore allowing the respondent freedom in their answers (Bryman, 1997). We created a sheet of questions with a focus on our research questions that

(18)

would act as guidance to ensure we could highlight the answers throughout (see appendix). The topics were thereafter arranged in a hypothetical chronological order that also would build upon each other. This establishes the research was in focus despite the freedom in the interviewees' answers.

The interview was set up online through an audio and video chat and both teachers attended at the same time. The interview lasted for approximately 75 minutes. And to ensure specific phrases and sayings were not lost, as emphasized by Bryman (1997), the interview was recorded using a digital voice recorder and complemented by notes. This specific procedure allowed us to re-examine the data collected after the interview was conducted but also to focus on the interview to highlight both research questions. Additionally, the interview was conducted in Swedish, as this is the first language of both teachers. This to ensure they felt comfortable expressing themselves.

The data, collected via audio recorder, was later transcribed using tape analysing (Dörnyei, 2007). Tape analysing may be used to focus on specifics rather than transcribe the whole interview. This allowed us to focus on the parts that featured our research questions. We believe this was the best approach for us to be time efficient when analysing the recording.

(19)

5. Results and Discussion

In this section, we will organize, present, and discuss the results from the semi-structured interview. First, we will present and discuss the results relating to our first research question: how do teachers use EE as an in-class activity to motivate pupils’ English production? We will also suggest a classification model regarding EE as an in-class activity (EE-ICA). Secondly, we will present and discuss the results concerning the second research question: what are teachers’ perceptions of using pupils’ EE in class to motivate pupils to speak English? Parts of the results will include quotes which have been translated by us. The results will be discussed related to relevant theory presented in the theoretical background.

5.1 How do teachers use EE as an in-class activity to motivate

pupils’ English production?

5.1.1 Teachers motivating their EE-ICA practice

When conducting the interview with the two teachers from our case study, it became evident that the teachers wanted to have a practice based on areas familiar to the pupils (elevnära) to

motivate pupils to speak English. This became clear on several occasions in the interview, for example, Anna says “they [the pupils] encounter English at home but the problem is there is a gap between the school English and the English the meet outside of school. That’s where our interest for incorporating EE started growing.”

As previously mentioned, the teachers are well endorsed with EE and when starting their teaching careers, they already had the vision of having a teaching practice based on elevnära content for the pupils. Basing the lesson content on the pupils’ EE activities was one way of achieving this view.

However, to include EE was primarily due to the pupils wanting it. The teachers expressed they wanted to create lessons based on what the pupils wanted to learn. When the teachers began teaching the English classes, they spent two to three weeks outlining what the pupils wanted to do, what their goals were regarding learning English, and what types of EE activities the pupils engaged in.

(20)

In general, all pupils expressed goals relating to EE activities which Moa explained “a lot circled around communication. To actually be able to speak. To understand the songs, they [the pupils] were listening to and to communicate with those they were playing with [online].” Anna

continues by explaining:

Goals the pupils set themselves. They have ‘goal-lessons’. They [the pupils] choose something they feel they want to develop. It is that they want to be able to carry oneself in English speaking contexts. They want to be able to speak English naturally, like when they go on vacation. They want to be able to watch a movie without reading the subtitles. Not specific words but being able to speak.

By including pupils to personally formulate goals and teaching towards these goals, pupils can receive an education that check the majority of the six concrete points for the ideal L2 self to be fulfilled (Dörnyei (2009). When pupils desire to learn English to be able to speak with people they play online with or interact with during vacation, they imagine themselves being fluent English speakers in these contexts clearly. This vision of being fluent is also plausible. One could argue, especially with the pupils that are online gamers, that this goal is constantly triggered. By including these EE goals, the teacher will also, presumably, provide strategies for reaching these goals.

Moreover, the teachers explained that the pupils expressed not finding the English used in school relevant. Moa says:

The pupils saw a major difference between the English they have in school and the one outside [of school]. The pupils don’t feel, at least not here, that the English in school is usable. They don’t think it can be applicable to the English they meet outside of school, which they believe to be the “real” English. In school, it is “school-English”.

We believe the teachers are witnessing the phenomenon also stated by SSI (2010). SSI (2010) reports pupils being more motivated to produce English outside of school than in school. SSI (2010) highlights the importance, though challenging, of bridging the gap between out-of-school English and in-out-of-school English. Thus, the teachers’ idea of incorporating EE in class as an attempt to create an elevnära atmosphere could be a way of bridging this gap.

(21)

The lessons can therefore draw upon the pupils’ own experiences and interests simultaneously connecting to the syllabus to create a learning environment that may work in favour of the pupils’ learning.

5.1.2 Teaching towards global English

During the interview, the teachers explained that they have witnessed that the pupils are gaining a first-hand experience of English in the globalized context McKay (2000) argue it has. This was due to the EE activities the pupils are engaged in. Anna explains this by saying:

they [the pupils] don’t reflect that it’s another language. English is a global language you need to get by, and they encounter it in games, apps, on the Internet, everywhere. /.../ They understand that they need English because of everything they encounter themselves. Furthermore, Moa emphasizes Anna’s explanation by saying:

pupils have come home from vacation [abroad] being all lyrical over being able to speak [English]. They did not understand anything, but it was fun! Like ordering food. They [the pupils] get an understanding of why it is good to know the [English] language. We believe these results support Dörnyei and Ushioda (2011) argument of motivation being a dynamic relationship between context, social and internal factors for interaction when learning L2 in a globalized community. Obviously, speaking and writing is a fundamental part of being able to engage in these international interactions. These results also indicate, as Dörnyei and Ushioda (2011) claim, that pupils are more motivated to learn English because of its

communicative role as an international language.

Furthermore, another goal the teachers are witnessing of is pupils wanting to learn English in regard to the globalized community. Since pupils are expressing goals of being more fluent in English in international contexts, they are imagining themselves being able to, and wanting, to be more accomplished communicators in a globalized society.

(22)

5.1.3 Teachers gaining insight in pupils’ EE activities

The teachers explained they gathered information about pupils’ EE activities through a series of different questionnaire activities. Such activities were using Padlet, post-it notes, and Google

forms. We believe these solutions are adaptations to Sundqvist and Sylvén (2016) proposal of

using questionnaires to gain insights in pupils EE activities. According to the teachers, pupils watch YouTube, listen to music, and play online digital games. This confirms the results by Sundqvist and Sylvén (2016) regarding the different types of EE activities pupils engage in during their leisure time. The teachers also added that using apps and browsing the Internet were common EE activities among the pupils. This was evident since the pupils showed the teachers different apps and Internet-sites

Another way of gaining insight into pupils’ EE activities have been to create a classroom culture where pupils show EE content and media that interests them to the teachers. This can be related, yet differentiated, to Sundqvist and Sylvén (2016) idea of interviews. By continuously encouraging pupils to show them EE activities, the teachers have found a more time efficient way of interviewing pupils than Sundqvist and Sylvén (2016) present. By only asking or telling the pupils to show the teachers EE activities rather than performing an actual interview, the same information that would have been gained during an interview can be achieved but with less effort. A way of describing this can be to use a ‘show, don’t tell’ approach. This can further be related to Henry’s (2013) argument of teachers needing to be well endorsed with pupils’ EE activities. When we asked the teacher how important they believed gaining first-hand insight into pupils EE activities, they did not find it that important since pupils show them what interests them. This would argue against Henry’s (2013) argument. It could however also be argued that teachers are getting the first-hand insight since pupils are, to some extent, showing the teachers the actual EE activity with both content and media.

5.1.4 How teachers are including EE activities

Based on the answers from the questionnaires the teachers did to gain insight into the pupils’ EE activities, the teachers exemplified how they incorporated the pupils’ EE activities as lesson content. This included, according to the teachers, EE activities that applied to most of the pupils on a general level, for example YouTube, and music. Other examples were playing online digital games. The teachers also mentioned including board-games, Would you rather, Heads up,

(23)

pictures, thematic lessons focused on English speaking countries and speaking activities. When the teachers provided these practical examples of how the activities mentioned above were incorporated, we perceived not all the activities qualified, in our opinion, as EE activities. For instance, when the teachers explained how they incorporate YouTube it was not always based on EE activities. One example is when the teachers incorporated silent movies from Pixar as an English-speaking activity. Since silent movies do not include spoken English, it would not qualify as an EE activity. Another example is when the teachers incorporated common Swedish games and board games only translated into English, would not qualify as an EE activity since it is based on Swedish being spoken outside of school.

This part of the interview created some uncertainty for us regarding if the teachers understood the EE concept. Although, the teachers were familiar with the term EE and what its definition was they did not, in fact, have the same understanding of what an EE activity is as we do. Therefore, a clarification of what EE activities were should have taken place at the start of the interview and could be a flaw in our research.

However, this uncertaintanty generated further questions. First, why are the teachers mentioning EE-ICA differently than EE activities? Secondly, could EE-ICA be broader and include activities in other ways than we believed prior to the interview? Lastly, how can we define EE activities that may include different aspects than, for example, playing Fortnite in class? Because of this dissonance, and potential flaw in our research, we discovered an

interesting phenomenon. The teachers are creating lesson tasks within an elevnära context and as a result create a fusion between EE and elevnära that at times becomes EE-ICA.

We believe the teachers, as they have expressed, are scouring after elevnära lesson content. Sometimes this includes EE, and sometimes not. Though we agree with EE in its nature being elevnära, they are not equal to each other. For example, translating an English song lyric chosen by the pupil would qualify as an EE activity that is elevnära because it is familiar to the pupil. However, playing a Swedish board game in English is not an EE activity since the game is played in Swedish outside of school, but elevnära since it is familiar to the pupil. Therefore, a way to explain it would be that EE is part of the elevnära concept.

To illustrate these results, we have made a venn-diagram to explaining the element of commonly between the tasks that are deemed elevnära and EE activities, thus EE-ICA.

(24)

Figure 1. Venn diagram

From the results, it became evident that EE-ICA were conducted on different levels depending on whether both EE content and media were incorporated into the activity or not at all. Based on Sundqvist (2009) outline of EE, the activities in figure 1 qualify as EE-ICA. However, the way the activities are used within the EFL classroom, different amounts of EE were present in the EE-ICA. For instance, some EE-ICA included the EE-content but not the EE media. An example from the interview could be when talking about Fortnite (EE content) but not playing Fortnite (EE media). Due to the limited research regarding the EE-ICA concept, we believe these results must be explained by adding new concepts. Therefore, based on the results from the teacher interview, we will classify four subcategories of connection between the usage of pupils’ EE activities and how to define it as learning material; Primary EE-ICA, Secondary

EE-ICA, Tertiary EE-ICA and Non-EE.

Primary EE-ICA, occurs in in-class activities which include the same EE-media and content as the pupils’ EE activity. One example, provided by the teachers, includes working with

songs and lyrics. When using the same songs pupils listen to with the same media the pupils use during their EE activity as an origin for further learning, it will be organized as primary EE-ICA. Consequently, an increase in the pupils’ motivation may be achieved, which was confirmed by Anna: “motivation increase when the pupils pick their own songs rather than when the teacher

EE-ICA • Translating English song lyrics • YouTube • Music Elevnära

• Would you Rather • Heads Up • Pictures • Thematic lessons • Speaking activities EE-Activities • Playing Fortnite • Speaking on vacation

(25)

chooses the songs.” A change in motivation occurred, as Moa explained “when working with a song they pick, it is easier for them to continue [to speak].”

Secondary EE-ICA, consists of in-class activities in which the EE-media does not correspond but the EE content does. For instance, the teachers provided us with an activity of

explaining the game Fortnite, but not actually playing Fortnite in school. To clarify, the pupils played the game Heads Up. Each player would a take turn explaining a word the opponent player place on their forehead. Would this word be connected to the pupils’ EE activity, for example,

Fortnite, the task would be categorized as secondary EE-ICA. This is due to the lack of

correspondence between the EE-media and EE-content, since the pupils are not actually playing the game Fortnite, only talking about it.

Tertiary EE-ICA, consist of in-class activities in which the EE-media corresponds but the EE-content does not. For example, both teachers described utilizing YouTube and displaying

video clips connected to specific themes. However, the clips are often what the teacher chooses to include. We believe YouTube is a common EE-media source the pupils are familiar with, however, when used with different video clip than what the pupils watch during their EE

activities it classifies as tertiary EE-ICA. For example, the teachers both describe showing silent animated clips, as a discussion base during lessons. The EE-media is the same as during the pupils’ EE activities but what is viewed is not, therefore the EE content is absent. The content is also not an EE activity since English is absent during silent movies. Moreover, the media itself may not be specifically used for EE activities. Videos on YouTube may be watched in several different languages, however, when used within an EE context the clips must be in English and therefore the media classifies as an EE-media.

Non-EE, consists of activities where the learning material does not involve EE media or

content, but still being elevnära. Basing our results on the teacher interview, we are therefore using examples they provided us to define this category as well. One activity they explained included Swedish board games, as mentioned above, Med andra ord, fruktsallad and Pest eller

kolera. The games provided are examples of Swedish games and board games that the teachers

translated and played in English within their EFL classroom. Since these games are not played in English during the pupils’ spare time, it does not classify as an EE activity. However, since the pupils are familiar with the games it classifies as elevnära. Nonetheless, Anna expresses uncertainty when asked if they categories board-games as EE, while Moa explains they try and incorporate games they play at home within the classroom.

(26)

Our four classifications can be exemplified using a triangle, with the top part being

Primary-ICA; second part, Secondary-ICA, third part, Tertiary-ICA, and the bottom part, Non-EE. Figure 2.EE- ICA triangle

It follows that the group and the individual play a large role within the subcategories for the EFL classroom. EE-ICA may differ between the group and the individual. For instance, in the

interview the teachers provided an example when working with specific themes. Thereafter, a pupil provided one of the teachers with a YouTube clip suitable within the theme. This clip was later used in class, thus creating primary EE-ICA for the individual pupil but tertiary EE-ICA for the group. For the individual, both the media and the content corresponded but only the EE-media for the others. Anna concludes regarding the usage of EE-ICA by saying “it is always different [EE-activity] but there is always something in common.” Not included within these subcategories are EE activities that do not match any category and cannot be adapted into learning material within the classroom.

Non-EE

Nether EE-media or content correspond

Secondary EE-ICA

EE-media dose not correspond but content dose

Primary EE-ICA EE-media and content correspond

Tertiary

EE-media correspond but not the content

(27)

5.2 What are teachers’ perceptions of using pupils’ EE in class

to motivate pupils to speak English?

As mentioned previously, we believed the teachers struggled with separating the elevnära context from the EE context when designing in-class activities. Therefore, these results may not be purely related to EE, but in a more general way of an elevnära context with EE being a part of it.

5.2.1 A comparison between traditional classroom and EE-ICA contexts

The interviewed teachers explained that when they started teaching the pupils, the pupils were accustomed to a more traditional English learning approach. According to the teachers, this meant only using textbooks. Therefore, we asked the teachers to compare the traditional classroom to their EE approach and what affects the perceived motivation to speak were. Anna comments on this by saying:

pupils’ that have cried during the previous traditional English teaching that now come and say English class is amongst the most fun subjects. It is not as hard anymore. It becomes extra clear amongst those that perceived English as hard previously. /.../ The lower ability pupils are those that speak most of all. They estimate their ability higher as well [than before]. The pupils have said that they actually know this, that they can do this.

Moa continues this argument by saying “we’ve had pupils that did not reach the knowledge requirements before but do now.” We believe the results show that the traditional learning approach created anxiety amongst some pupils, especially those with perceived lower ability, which is now absent with the EE learning approach. As Lightbown and Spada (2013) explain, anxiety can interfere language learning and it is important for the teacher to create learning situations that eliminate anxiety. This view of creating teaching situations is a commandment by Dörnyei and Csizér (1998). These results indicate that the EE-ICA is more beneficial for

lowering anxiety levels, thus increasing EFL learning, than the traditional textbook approach does.

(28)

The results also confirm Lundahl’s (2012) argument of pupils’ motivation being linked to their in-school success. The teachers perceived pupils estimating their EFL ability higher with the EE-ICA approach than the traditional approach. Yet, it is not clear whether the pupils actually have gained a higher ability but they themselves perceive that they do with the EE-ICA approach. This means because the pupils perceive higher in-school success now, their motivation to speak has increased.

However, using EE may not be beneficial for all pupils. Moa comments on this:

there is a risk of ending up in the idea of this being really great and that it fits everyone. That everyone [the pupils] agree that using extramural English is fun. That is not the case. I have some in my class that like the traditional, well, that likes using the textbook more. That thinks this way of working [with EE] is actually tough. Because they have to perform in another way.

This can be related individual motivation differences argued by Lundahl (2014) as well as Dörnyei and Csizér (1998). The authors argue that no motivational strategy can be generalized. Therefore, aspects considering different variables should be considered when changing the educational aspects of the classroom. Moa describes the fundamental reasons for lesson content, whether it is within the traditional or elevnära contexts spectrum, is thus the connection to the syllabus. She says “at the end, it is about the syllabus, even if the syllabus focuses a lot on communication. As long as you do not forget the reasons why we actually do what we do.”

5.2.2 Enforcing pupils’ EFL confidence with EE

The teacher describes an overall focus on pupils’ linguistic confidence throughout the interview. The reason is to connect their EFL classroom to the pupils’ EE meetings. Anna describes:

they have not learnt English naturally, rather than learning single words. So, from not daring to say anything in English to just throwing themselves out there and using Swenglish words, sometimes there is a Swedish word in the middle of a sentence, but they dare to. That is what is the difference now from then. That it has become more natural to speak, which the pupils convey, and then they are more motivated.

(29)

The linguistic confidence, the teachers’ aim to infuse is well connected to Dörnyei and Csizér (1998) commandments that target self- confidence. Emphasizing, the teachers’ part to increase the pupils’ linguistic self-confidence and highlight the pupils’ perception of being able to achieve higher within their individual linguistic spectrum.

Moa points to allow the pupils to express themselves without being restricted as part of increasing the pupils’ linguistic confidence. She explains this by stating, “do not always correct them.” According to Dörnyei and Csizér (1998) second commandment, this approach may lower the L2 learners’ anxiety by creating a relaxed atmosphere within the classroom.

The linguistic confidence is a recurring topic from the teachers during the interview when discussing the pupils’ motivation to produce English. Our interpretation of the situation is that the teachers’ aim is to increase the pupils’ linguistic confidence through EE-ICA speaking exercises. The desired effect may be an increase in motivation that is well connected to pupils’ in-school success as stated by Lundahl (2014). However, the pupils’ individual background, for example, different EE activities, is a factor the teacher may need to consider when focusing on motivational aspects. Nonetheless, it is clear that the teachers’ experience increasing linguistic confidence among the pupils.

5.2.3 Pupils’ influence over lesson content

The results from the interview showed pupils’ influence over lesson content is a beneficial factor for increasing their motivation to speak English. The teachers explain this phenomenon in

several ways. Anna starts by saying:“you open vents. Allow the pupils to come with suggestions and incorporate them into the lesson. The pupils understand the purpose with the education and see the relevance of it. The pupils are allowed to be part of deciding lesson content. That’s what creates motivation.” Moa comments this further and explains: “it becomes a receipt that it is fun and interesting. They think it’s fun. They can sit for 20 minutes and talk in English or perhaps Swenglish.” Anna continues Moas comment by saying “they [the pupils] talk loads more. They are joyful and want to continue working. If one [the teacher] allow the pupils to talk about what they want to talk about they can keep talking endlessly.” The teachers are referring to strategies encouraging pupils to show and being able to affect the lesson content. This way of including pupils in designing lessons in relation to EE activities can further be related to Dörnyei and Csizér (1998) ten commandments list for motivating language learners, and more specifically the

(30)

commandments regarding course specific motivational component. By using pupils’ influence over lesson content, pupils will formulate own goals that are interesting and relevant which may benefit motivation for learning L2 English.

The results also show there can be a difference between when the pupils choose EE-ICA and when the teachers do. Moa talks about the difference in motivation to speak English when the teacher has chosen a song for them and when the pupils choose themselves: “[they are] still motivated when we are doing it [choosing a song], but the motivation is entirely different when they choose themselves. They are more motivated when they choose a song themselves.” Anna continues by saying:

When we [the teachers] choose a song, it is more apparent when they do not understand the meaning of the lyrics. I [the pupil] have never really listened to this song. Then you notice it was not really their kind of song. But when they choose themselves is it easier for them to continue [working].

These statements can be related to Henry (2013) saying if the teachers should choose EE activities, the teacher should be well endorsed with the meaning of the EE activity. In this example, the teacher has not chosen a song related to pupils’ EE. The consequence is that

motivation to speak English decreases. The results can also relate to points 6 and 8 of the ‘course specific motivational components’ of the ten commandments by Dörnyei and Csizér (1998). When the pupils choose the EE-ICA themselves, the lessons become both relevant and

interesting for the pupils which increases their motivation to perform speaking tasks. It also can be connected to one of the three pillars of motivation: how long someone can withstand the chosen act (Dörnyei and Ushioda, 2011). Not only will EE-ICA be relevant and interesting for the pupils but choosing lesson content also helps them endure the duration of the activity, thus making them motivated during a long time during the activity.

However, Anna describes it is not always beneficial for pupils to choose an EE-ICA task themselves and that is more beneficial when the teachers choose. “It is hard for someone that does not have the vocabulary to present themselves. Then it can be nice when we [the teachers] have chosen the task. Motivationally speaking.” We believe Anna perceptions can be related, yet again, to linguistic self-confidence and in-school success. When the teachers notice a task may be too hard for them, it can create situations causing anxiety and therefore affect their

(31)

motivation. The teachers then solve this motivational issue by removing the demand for choosing the EE-ICA themselves and choose something more appropriate for them. We do not exclude the possibility of it being an EE-ICA, but the difference is the pupils’ influence over lesson content is removed to benefit motivation to produce English.

(32)

6. Conclusion

In the following section we will first present a summary of the results. Secondly, the limitations within this degree project will be presented. Finally, suggestions for further research is given.

6.1 Summary of results

The purpose of this paper was to research teachers’ perceptions regarding using EE-ICA to motivate pupils to speak English. Therefore, the result is based on two teachers’ perceptions of how they incorporate EE-ICA to increase motivation among their pupils. The teachers were interviewed, and the result and conclusion are therefore based upon their answers. The teachers explained how their teaching practice is based on elevnära content for the pupils. Incorporating the pupils’ EE activities was one way of achieving this view.

The teachers have shown successful ways of gaining a pre-understanding of what types of EE activities the pupils engage in by different questionnaires and using pupils’ influence of the lesson content as a way of ensuring potential motivation throughout lessons. These activities included YouTube, music and playing online digital games. According to Sundqvist and Sylvén (2016) these are typical EE activities children engage in during their leisure time.

Furthermore, the teachers have created a teaching practice based on pupils’ goals that were related to the pupils’ EE activities. We believe the teachers have created a teaching practice highly likely to endorse pupils’ motivation to produce English related to global English and the

Ideal L2 self.

The results show that the teachers were well indorsed with the term EE and what its definition was but created lesson activities based on an elevnära context and not only EE activities. Therefore, a fusion between EE and elevnära that becomes EE-ICA. From these results, EE-ICA could be divided into four categories: Primary EE-ICA, Secondary EE-ICA,

Tertiary and non-EE.

• Primary ICA occurs when in-class activities which include the same EE-media and content as the pupils’ EE activity.

• Secondary EE-ICA, consists of in-class activities in which the EE-media does not correspond but the EE content does.

(33)

• Tertiary EE-ICA, consist of in-class activities when the EE-media corresponds but the EE-content does not.

• Non-EE, consists of lessons when the learning material does not involve any EE activities.

The results also point to an EFL classroom where the teachers incorporate elevnära contexts to lower speaking anxiety amongst a majority of the pupils and increase their self-confidence which resulted in an increase in motivation to speak English. However, EE-ICA may not suit all pupils since some want a more traditional teaching approach to be motivated to speak English. Despite this, our results show that the pupils’ influence over lesson content and the inclusion of pupils’ EE activities may be a beneficial factor for increasing pupils’ motivation to speak English for a majority of pupils.

We found with this study that creating lesson tasks based entirely on EE activities may be difficult to achieve. However, creating lesson content within the EE-ICA concept may be a well-functioning base for increasing pupils’ motivation to speak. We believe the interviewed teachers are implementing EE activities innovatively and act as role models of how to implement EE in class to increase EFL motivation to produce English.

These results should not be taken as an absolute truth and cannot be generalized to all situations were EE is being used within classrooms. The results are based on two teachers’ perceptions that are based on specific contexts and pupils. However, we still believe these results can shed some light of using EE in class to motivate pupils to speak English. It can therefore act as indications for how for teachers can include EE into their teaching.

6.2 Limitations

This study was conducted within the guidelines of a degree work constructed by Malmö

University. Due to these guidelines, there are some limitations that we wish to address. First, an overall limitation was the restricted time frame for this degree work. The limited time frame was 10 weeks which reflects upon the amount of time invested to the degree work. Secondly, the size of degree project was encourage not being too long by our supervisor. Lastly, the combination of time frame and size of the degree paper forced us to limit the results to the teachers’ perceptions only. Therefore, we choose not to include the pupils’ perceptions. As a result, we can only assume that some of the teachers’ answers regarding the pupils’ perceptions reflect correctly.

(34)

6.3 Further research

Due to the findings, we believe there is a need for further research on the EE-ICA classifications, as this may be beneficial towards pupils’ motivation to learn EFL. It would be interesting to see the results of a study conducted over a longer period of time. This study could implement the specific EE-ICA classifications as learning materials and measure their effects on pupils’

motivation to produce English. We believe including pupils’ perceptions would be an interesting approach to such a study.

(35)

7. References

Alvehus, J. (2013). Skriva uppsats med kvalitativ metod: en handbok. (1. uppl.) Stockholm: Liber.

Bryman, A. (1997). Kvantitet och kvalitet i samhällsvetenskaplig forskning. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed

methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In: Dörnyei, Z. & Ushioda, E. (Ed.) (2009).

Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 9-42.

Dörnyei, Z., & Csizer, K. (1998). Ten commandments for motivating language learners:

results of an empirical study. Language teaching research, 2(3), 203-29. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249870250_Ten_commandments_for_motivati ng_language_learners_Results_of_an_empirical_study

Dörnyei, Z. & Ushioda, E. (2011). Teaching and researching motivation. 2nd edition. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited.

Forsell, P. (2017). Gaming and school language: a study of gamers’ use of a second language

and attitudes towards English during online gaming and in the classroom (dissertation).

Retrieved from http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-23592

Henry, A. (2013). Digital games and ELT: bridging the authenticity gap. In: Ushioda, E. (Ed.) (2013). International perspectives on motivation: Language learning and professional

challenges. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 133-155.

(36)

onlinespels influenser på ungdomars engelska språkutveckling (dissertation). Retrieved

from http://su.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A538530&dswid=4152 Lightbown, P.M. & Spada, N. (2013). How languages are learned. (4. ed.) Oxford: Oxford univ.

press.

Lundahl, B. (2014). Texts, topics and tasks: teaching English in years 4–6. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Matsuda. A., Friedrich. P. (2011). English as an international language: A curriculum blueprint.

World English, 30(3). 332-344.

McKay, S.L. (2000). Teaching English as an international language: implications for cultural materials in the classroom. TESOL, 9(4). 7-11.

Nault, D. (2006). Going global: Rethinking culture teaching in EFL contexts. Language,

culture and curriculum, 19(3). 314–328.

Nunan, D. (2003). Research methods in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Olsson, E. (2012). "Everything I read on the Internet is in English" - on the impact of

extramural English on Swedish 16-year-old pupils' writing proficiency. Licentiate's

thesis. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/2077/30417

Skolinspektionen (2011). Engelska i grundskolans årskurser 6-9. Stockholm: Skolinspektionen.

Skolverket (2011). The curriculum for the compulsory school 2011. Fritzes & Skolverket. Sundqvist, P. (2009). Extramural English matters: out-of-school English and its impact on

(37)

Swedish ninth graders' oral proficiency and vocabulary. Karlstad University Studies.

Retrieved from http://kau.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:275141/FULLTEXT03.pdf Sundqvist, P., & Olin-Scheller, C. (2013). Classroom vs. extramural English: teachers dealing with demotivation. Language and linguistics compass, 7(6), 329-338. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264370900_Classroom_vs_Extramural_English _Teachers_Dealing_with_Demotivation

Sundqvist, P., & Wikström, P. (2015). Out-of-school digital gameplay and in-school L2 English

vocabulary outcomes. System, 5165-76. doi:10.1016/j.system.2015.04.001

Sundqvist, P., & Sylvén, L. K. (2012). Gaming as extramural English L2 learning and L2 proficiency among young learners*. ReCALL : the Journal of EUROCALL, 24 (3), 302-321. Retrieved from https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/recall/article/gaming-as-

extramural-english-l2-learning-and-l2-proficiency-among-young-learners/47000F4B1842ED58569C99A94AAA59A5

Sundqvist, P., & Sylvén, L. K. (2014). Language-related computer use: Focus on young L2 English learners in Sweden. ReCALL : the Journal of EUROCALL, 26 (1), 3-20.

Sundqvist, P. & Sylvén, L.K. (2016). Extramural english in teaching and learning: from theory

and research to practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Ushioda, E. (2013). Motivation and ELT: Looking ahead to the future. In: Ushioda, E. (Ed.) (2013). International perspectives on motivation: Language learning and professional

challenges. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 233-239.

Vetenskapsrådet (2002). Forskningsetiska principer inom humanistisk-samhällsvetenskaplig

(38)

8. Appendix

8.1 Teacher Interview guide

Interview guide

Bakgrund information:

När tog ni lärarexamen och från vilken skola? Vilken inriktning hade er utbildning?

Hur länge har ni arbetat som lärare? Vilka årskurser arbetar ni i?

Background information:

When did you graduate and from which school? What orientation did your education have? How long have you been working as teachers?

Vad är er relation till EE?

What is your relation to EE?

Hur medvetna är ni om EE aktiviteter?

How aware are you of the pupils’ EE activities

Hur har ni tagit reda på elevernas EE aktiviteter?

How have you gained information regarding the pupils’ EE activities?

Varför ville ni inkludera EE i undervisningen?

Why did you want to include EE into your teaching practice?

Vad är era uppfattningar om hur eleverna tänker kring engelskans status i världen?

What are your perceptions of how pupils think of the status of English in the world?

Hur inkluderar ni EE i undervisningen?

How do you include EE in your teaching?

Hur uppfattar ni att elevernas motivation för att tala på engelska påverkas när/om ni användander er av deras EE aktiviteter i undervisningen?

(39)

How do you perceive pupils’ motivation to speak is affected when you use their EE activities in the teaching?

Hur använder ni elevernas EE för att öka deras motivation att tala?

How do you use pupils’ EE activities in your teaching to increase their motivation to speak?

Vilka faktorer tycker ni är viktiga för att eleverna ska vara motiverade att tala på engelska?

What factors do you believe are important for pupils to be motivated to speak English?

Hur mycket tycker ni att ni som lärare måste sätta er in i vad dessa aktiviteter menas med?

How much do you believe you as teachers have to know the meaning of the pupils’ EE activities?

Påverkas elevers motivation av språkliga produktion av den (specifika) EE aktivitet de är engagerade i?

How is pupils’ motivation to speak English affected depending on what EE in-class activities they are engaged in?

Är det någon skillnad i motivationen när eleverna väljer EE aktivitet och när lärarna väljer EE aktivitet?

Is there a difference in pupils’ motivation to speak English when the pupils choose EE activity in the teaching compared to when you as teachers choose EE activity in the teaching?

Vad kan vara fördelarna med att använda EE i lektionerna?

What are possible benefits with using EE in class?

Vad kan vara nackdelarna/risker med att använda EE i lektionerna?

What are possible the disadvantages or risks of using EE in class?

Vad anser ni är skillnaden med att använda EE och att inte använda EE i klassrummet för att motivera språklig produktion?

What do you perceive is the difference between using EE in the classroom compared to not using EE to motivate speaking English?

Teachers’ perception of extramural English as lesson content

Degree Project in English Studies in Education