Problem Solving in the EFL Classroom: Job Hunting Relevance Tasks Using "Reason + x"

Writer(s): 
Christina Maxwell, Asia University

Many EFL instructors are faced with the challenge of getting their students to participate in the language classroom. As language instructors, part of this challenge is creating interesting activities to increase students' motivation. "We must find out what our students are interested in" (Rivers, 1976, p.96). Part of providing conditions for language learning is building on existing motivations in order to increase students' knowledge of the new language (Rivers, 1976). When there is engaging content that will involve learners and in which those learners have a stake, students become intrinsically motivated (Stevick, 1996; Taylor, 1987). I have found that activities in which students use L2 as a means to solve a problem are not only meaningful to EFL learners but also increase their motivation, participation and use of the target language. The reason for this high interest and involvement lies in the fact that students have to use their cognitive skills and logic to arrive at solutions to problems relevant to their own lives. Students learn and acquire the target language by using it for critical thinking and problem solving.

Critical thinking and problem solving

The critical thinking and problem solving unit described here includes the goals, target language, an anticipation task, a reading, partner interviews, problem solving discussions, and summary writing. The activities are based on the theme working. The unit focuses on important aspects of finding employment in Japan after graduation from university, specifically academic history versus work experience and ability. Many of my students, who will soon be looking for jobs, find this issue meaningful; the activities give them a chance to think, talk, and form their own opinions about employment situations in Japan. They also consider the value of one's university ranking, and the advantages and disadvantages of having work experience when looking for a job.

Goal and targeted language

The goal of this activity is to encourage students not only to express their opinions about a work-related issue but also to support their opinions with a strong argument. Supporting personal opinions requires students to validate their stances. The targeted language is opinion language (I think, I feel, in my opinion), conditional statements using modal constructions (I would, he should, they could, if I were in his position, etc.), and comparisons (X is better than Y; X is not as good as Y, etc.).

Anticipation activity

Students are assigned a brief anticipation task before reading a three-paragraph passage which highlights the issue of ability versus academic history in Japanese society. To encourage students to think about academic history and school affiliation, I write the names of three high ranking Japanese universities on the blackboard. The students then brainstorm any words or ideas which the names of these universities bring to mind. This anticipation activity allows the students to verbalize their ideas about university affiliation and employment future and sets the stage for the reading.

Reading

The passage describes three major points of a government report highlighting the merits of working ability and experience as desirable aspects for job seekers in Japan as opposed to university affiliation only (Appendix A). The students read the passage out loud with partners or small groups and try to find the three main points of the passage.

Partner interview

The interview activity includes eight statements about the passage or ideas related to the passage (Appendix B). In pairs, students interview each other and record their partner's responses to the statements. Some of the statements concern American work practices and encourage students to think about what roles academic history and ability might play in another country. These statements are included to set the stage for a brief discussion on the similarities and differences between American and Japanese work-related issues. By comparing and contrasting, the students form more ideas and opinions about working and hiring practices in their own country.

Critical thinking task

The problem involves two university graduates seeking employment in Japan. One student graduated from a high ranking university and another from a mid-ranking university (Appendix C). The students first make a grid and list the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate. After the target language is introduced, students try to use the new phrases to tell their partners who they think should get the job and who should not get the job, providing one reason to support each opinion. They write three sentences using the target language to explain who they think should get the job and why. Then they write three sentences concerning who they feel should not get the job and why. Below are some of the responses from two students. (Note: There was no mention of the gender of the university graduates characterized in the example, so students base their opinions primarily on the candidates' academic history and ability).

Student 1 responses:

a. I think that the University A graduate should get the job because he went to a good school.

b. I think that the University A graduate would get the job because he has a strong academic history.

c. I think the University B graduate shouldn't get the job because he has too much working experience.

Student 2 responses

a. I think that the University B graduate should get the job because he has a lot of working experience.

b In my opinion, the University B graduate would get the job because he can speak English and has international experience.

c. I don't feel that the University A graduate should get the job because he does not have any working experience.

Reason + x (R + x)

The students express some interesting opinions and reasons as to who they think is better suited for the job. The R + x component requires learners to add more supporting information to their reasons (reason + more information). R + x can also be adapted so that students expound on the reasons for x, depending on the amount of supporting information. As a communicative activity, students, in pairs, read their opinions and reasons to their partners and then question each other. More supporting statements are provided for their original reasons. For example, one student's opinion, "I think the graduate from the mid-ranking university shouldn't get the job because he has too much working experience" is further developed with, "Too much working experience in Japan is a disadvantage because companies think that such people will be difficult to train." The communicative inquiry can continue until students feel that they have made their point or cannot think of any more supporting information. Students then write down their complete opinions with R + x. Below are some examples.

Student 1 opinions and R + x:

"I think the University B graduate shouldn't get the job because he has too much working experience. Too much working experience in Japan is a disadvantage because companies think that such people will be difficult to train. If a person who looks for a job has too much working experience, maybe he thinks that he can do everything and does not want to listen to the boss."

"I think that the University A graduate would get the job because he has a strong academic history. In Japan, the name of the university is important. If a student graduates from a high level university, he is probably intelligent and hard working because he passed the entrance examination. The name of a university is also important because this is traditional thinking in Japanese society."

Student 2 opinions and R + x:

"In my opinion, the University B graduate would get the job because he can speak English and has international experience. Speaking English and international experience are important for getting a good job because now companies are international. Companies need employees who can speak foreign languages and know how to work with foreigners. This is why University B graduate should get the job and not the University A graduate. University A graduate can only speak Japanese."

"I think that the University B graduate should get the job because he has a lot of working experience. Working experience is important because the new employee can work soon. The new employee does not need training. So, the company can save money. If the person has working experience, he knows how to work."

Follow-up questions

In groups or pairs, students ask their classmates' opinions about other issues related to working and finding employment (Appendix D). The follow-up provides students with an opportunity to use their opinions and supportive reasoning skills, as well as newly acquired language, in order to discuss related issues.

Summary writing

The teacher can end the activity after the follow-up or add a writing component. Writing summaries allows students to tie all the parts of the activity together. Students write one to two paragraphs in response to one of the follow-up questions or the issue presented in the critical thinking task.

Conclusion

Meaningful activities which use language as a means for students to express their ideas often lead to successful language teaching and learning. Intrinsic student motivation can serve as both a cause and effect of language learning (Stevick, 1996). Implementing tasks that require learners to solve problems is one venue instructors can take to increase student motivation and participation in the classroom. Such problem solving and critical thinking in the EFL classroom can also lead to enjoyable communicative language sharing for both teachers and learners.

References

  • Rivers, W. M. (1976). Speaking in many tongues: Essays in foreign-language teaching. Newbury House.
  • Stevick, E. W. (1996). Memory, meaning & method. A view of language teaching. (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
  • Taylor, B. T. (1987). Teaching ESL: Incorporating a communicative, student-centered component. In M. H. Long & J. C. Richards (Eds.), Methodology in TESOL: A Book of Readings (pp. 45 - 60). Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.