Learning Through Simulations: Ideas for Educational Practitioners (SpringerBriefs in Education) 3030655393, 9783030655396

Citation preview

SPRINGER BRIEFS IN EDUC ATION

M. Laura Angelini

Learning Through Simulations Ideas for Educational Practitioners 123

SpringerBriefs in Education

We are delighted to announce SpringerBriefs in Education, an innovative product type that combines elements of both journals and books. Briefs present concise summaries of cutting-edge research and practical applications in education. Featuring compact volumes of 50 to 125 pages, the SpringerBriefs in Education allow authors to present their ideas and readers to absorb them with a minimal time investment. Briefs are published as part of Springer’s eBook Collection. In addition, Briefs are available for individual print and electronic purchase. SpringerBriefs in Education cover a broad range of educational fields such as: Science Education, Higher Education, Educational Psychology, Assessment & Evaluation, Language Education, Mathematics Education, Educational Technology, Medical Education and Educational Policy. SpringerBriefs typically offer an outlet for: • An introduction to a (sub)field in education summarizing and giving an overview of theories, issues, core concepts and/or key literature in a particular field • A timely report of state-of-the art analytical techniques and instruments in the field of educational research • A presentation of core educational concepts • An overview of a testing and evaluation method • A snapshot of a hot or emerging topic or policy change • An in-depth case study • A literature review • A report/review study of a survey • An elaborated thesis Both solicited and unsolicited manuscripts are considered for publication in the SpringerBriefs in Education series. Potential authors are warmly invited to complete and submit the Briefs Author Proposal form. All projects will be submitted to editorial review by editorial advisors. SpringerBriefs are characterized by expedited production schedules with the aim for publication 8 to 12 weeks after acceptance and fast, global electronic dissemination through our online platform SpringerLink. The standard concise author contracts guarantee that: • an individual ISBN is assigned to each manuscript • each manuscript is copyrighted in the name of the author • the author retains the right to post the pre-publication version on his/her website or that of his/her institution

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/8914

M. Laura Angelini

Learning Through Simulations Ideas for Educational Practitioners

M. Laura Angelini Universidad Católica de Valencia ‘San Vicente Mártir’ Valencia, Spain

ISSN 2211-1921 ISSN 2211-193X (electronic) SpringerBriefs in Education ISBN 978-3-030-65539-6 ISBN 978-3-030-65540-2 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65540-2 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Acknowledgements

This book is humbly dedicated to the countless education practitioners who devote their time and energy to teaching and guiding students in the development of a foreign or second language, critical awareness of global issues, and metacognition. I am grateful to Dr. Amparo García-Carbonell, who introduced me to the wonderful world of teaching through simulations. I also thank the reviewers for their insightful suggestions, as well as my colleagues, who have always been supportive in adopting some of the simulations presented here in their lessons; namely, Neus Álvarez-Rubio, Chiara Tasso, Inmaculada López-Lull, Rut Muñiz-Calderón and Clara Gieure-Sastre. Special thanks to Dr. Vicente Gomar, Head of The Methodological Innovation Programme at the Catholic University of Valencia, for being supportive all these years. Sincere thanks go to my family: my mum; my brothers; my lovely husband; and my sunshine and source of inspiration, my daughter, Luján.

vii

Disclaimer

The simulations presented in this book were developed following direct input from educational practitioners, examples, anecdotes and concerns over certain educational issues that required further attention. To preserve individuals’ anonymity and confidentiality, all names and identifying information have been anonymised.

ix

Who is this book for?

This book is based on the following assumptions: (1) that as a reader, you are still looking for strategies to teach a foreign or second language in a more meaningful way; (2) that you are looking for active methodologies to develop critical thinking skills; and (3) that you are training students who will become teachers in the future. This book is designed to guide you through a series of simulations that provide challenging learning opportunities, similar to the ones experienced in real life. Each simulation is designed to support the development of participants’ language and critical thinking skills and their ability as future teachers. Most simulations in this book challenge you to put into practice what you know about classroom methodologies and whole-school decision making in support of better learning. In Chap. 1, this book starts by outlining simulations and their potential for language and critical thinking skills development in teacher training. Simulations become a reality only when participants engage in them and use their critical judgement and expertise. Chapter 2 presents four complete simulations and general considerations when creating a simulation. A simulation template is also provided. Chapter 3 delves into professional development and learning observations in the classroom. Chapter 4 then presents some case studies based on the implementation of the simulations proposed in Chap. 2. Chapter 5 offers some concluding remarks.

xi

Contents

1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 Towards a Reconceptualisation of Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 Simulations as Experiential Learning Across Disciplines . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 What Are the Phases of Simulations? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4 What Are the Affordances of Using Simulations in Education? . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 1 4 7 8 9

2 Simulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 Simulation 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Simulation 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Simulation 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 Simulation 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

13 15 21 30 36 42

3 Professional Development Through Peer Observation and Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 3.1 Observation Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 4 Case Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 Learners’ Perceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2.1 Case Study 2—Simulation in Initial Teacher Education . . . . . 4.3 Results and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.1 Case Study 3—Critical Thinking Through Simulation . . . . . . 4.4 Results and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

49 50 53 54 55 58 58 60

5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

xiii

About the Author

M. Laura Angelini I’m an associate professor and researcher at Universidad Católica de Valencia ‘San Vicente Mártir’, accredited by the National Quality Assessment and Accreditation Agency of Spain (ANECA) as associate professor, private university professor, assistant Ph.D. professor. My research aims to determine whether simulation and gaming can lead to improvement in English as a Foreign Language production skills along with critical awareness over global issues, especially educational issues. I’m the lead researcher of the Interdisciplinary Group on Active Learning and Assessment (IGALA) and an accredited trainer for Virtual Exchange by Erasmus+. In my classes, I integrate active learning methods and techniques to train future teachers. Through simulations, I attempt to promote understanding of social issues, respect for human and animal rights, and empathy. I have published several articles on the effectiveness of simulations in language learning that can be consulted at: • https://www.researchgate.net/profile/M_Laura_Angelini • https://scholar.google.es/citations?hl=es&user=9_7W3MEAAAAJ&view_op= list_works&sortby=pubdate Some Publications Angelini, M. L., & García Carbonell, A. (2014). Análisis cualitativo sobre la simulación telemática como estrategia para el aprendizaje de lenguas. Revista Iberoamericana de educación, 64(2), 1–15. Angelini, M. L., & García-Carbonell, A. (2015). Percepciones sobre la integración de modelos pedagógicos en la formación del profesorado: la simulación y juego y el flipped classroom. Education in the Knowledge Society, 16(2), 16–30. Angelini, M. L., García-Carbonell, A., & Martínez-Alzamora, N. (2017). Estudio de correlación entre la simulación telemática y las destrezas lingüísticas en inglés. Revista electrónica de investigación educativa, 19(1), 141–156. Angelini, M. L. (2017). Mindful global citizenship through simulations in higher education. Engaging Dissonance: Developing Mindful Global Citizenship in Higher Education, 157. Angelini, M. L., & García-Carbonell, A. (2019). Developing English Speaking Skills through Simulation-Based Instruction. Teaching English with Technology, 19(2), 3–20.

xv

xvi

About the Author

Angelini, M. L., & García-Carbonell, A. (2019). Enhancing students’ written production in English through flipped lessons and simulations. Int J Educ Technol High Educ 16, 2. https://doi.org/ 10.1186/s41239-019-0131-8.

Chapter 1

Background

1.1 Towards a Reconceptualisation of Simulations The specialised literature on education and training programmes often refers to simulations as games, role-plays or role-play simulations. In this chapter, I take a closer look at these concepts with a clear purpose in mind: to shed light on the differences between them and thus avoid misconceptions. To start with, let us think of what to simulate means. To simulate is to pretend to be or imitate somebody or something. Technically speaking, a simulation represents a set of ‘norms that define a specific model that reflects reality’ (Shirts 1975, p. 76). It is ‘a model of events, items or processes that do or could exist’ (Feldman 1995, p. 347). A simulation refers to an activity in which participants are assigned duties and are given enough key information about the problem to carry out these duties without playacting or inventing key facts (Jones 2013). A simulation is based on a representation of a system, with key information to carry out tasks, debate, negotiate from different points of view and seek a solution to a specific problem (Klabbers 2009). A simulation is an operating model of central features or elements of a real or proposed system, process or environment (Greenblat 1988). Simulations are appropriate for addressing issues related to education, environmental threats, sustainable economy or human rights. Through simulations, participants are involved in a reality in which they have to find solutions to certain problems or situations. They must do so by learning about the topic related to the scenario, proposing ideas, negotiating and making decisions. Participants are exposed to reading material, audiovisual resources and recent online news to familiarise themselves with the relevant topics (Duke and Greenblat 1981; Greenblat 1988; Crookall and Oxford 1990). It is crucial to instil ethical responsibilities in students and to use simulation scenarios as the basic tool to develop a global mindset (Warren and Lin 2012). A simulation is a reality in itself (Angelini and García-Carbonell 2019). This means that participants respond to action/situations with their own judgment and knowledge as they would in real life.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. L. Angelini, Learning Through Simulations, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65540-2_1

1

2

1 Background

In contrast, role-plays have typically been associated with ‘dramatic’ activities, mainly by teachers, probably due to confusion in the literature arising from their relationships with play, games and simulation (Jones 1985). In fact, McSharry and Jones (2000 p. 73) referred to role-play as a product of ‘play’, ‘games’ and ‘simulation’. However, they noted the increasing intellectual rigour involved as students move from play, to games, and on to simulations. Baruch (2006) linked role-playing with drama and the ability to act out a role. Role-plays usually present more guided/scripted actions, where participants have less opportunity to intervene or show their critical thinking. Other authors instead refer to role-playing or role-play simulation as simplified types of simulations that only include a few chosen factors from reality. Accordingly, they fall under the category of low-fidelity simulations as opposed to high-fidelity simulations (Thiagarajan 2003; Massoth et al. 2019). It is advisable to clarify this distinction before we move forward. High-fidelity simulations (HFSs) include objects and procedures that are as close to reality as possible. For example, in healthcare, HFSs involve the use of sophisticated life-like mannequins in realistic patient environments. These simulations give participants a true-to-life experience where they can discover underlying principles and develop specific and soft skills. They have traditionally represented replicas of on-the-job tasks and thus they have been categorized as scoring high on fidelity (Thornton and Cleveland 1990; Schmitt and Mills 2001; Thiagarajan 2003; Roth et al. 2005; Lane and Stone 2006; Thornton and Rupp 2006). Examples of high-fidelity simulations can be seen in Table 1.1. Low-fidelity simulations (LFSs), by contrast, are simplified models that only include a few chosen factors drawn from reality (Thiagarajan 2003; Massoth et al. 2019). These are used specially to uncover underlying principles and practice procedural skills. These are not really a new invention, in fact, they existed prior to World War II. Motowidlo, Dunnette and Carter (1990), coined the term “low-fidelity simulations” because participants had to act out in work-like scenarios solving a problem by choosing an alternative outcome from a list of predetermined responses (Lievens and Patterson 2011). Table 1.2 shows LFSs types. As these definitions and characteristics show, role-play is a simulation with a reduced scope (less flexibility and freedom than HFSs) because the characters follow a script. A number of books and manuals (Pike and Busse 1995; Stolovich and Keeps 2002; Thiagarajan 2003; Kumar and Lightner 2007) advocate this kind of pedagogical strategy as a form of low-fidelity simulation, mainly in corporate training (Fig. 1.1). In this book, I refer to high-fidelity simulations as simply ‘simulations’. I provide examples where the ending is unknown, decisions are made by participants covering several aspects of a specific topic, and there is no script limiting participants’ involvement. I also draw a distinction between computer-based simulations, computerassisted simulations and classroom simulations, which are typically used in higher education. Computer-based simulations involve participants’ interactions with a computer. They may use a specific application or program and the interaction is person-machine. In computer-assisted simulations (usually referred to as web-based simulations),

1.1 Towards a Reconceptualisation of Simulations

3

Table. 1.1 High-fidelity simulation types (adapted from Thiagarajan 2003) Simulations

Features

Description

Observable indicators

Action learning

Realistic strategic

The team participates in a critical project to draw principles and procedures out of reflections (a simulation to solve a real, strategic problem affecting an institution/company)

Participants develop skills and knowledge of the problem and contextual information, gain insights through reflections, and learn though debate and negotiations (dialogic learning)

Reflective teamwork activities

Task-based process-focused

This is a briefer, action-learning simulation. A task is given, and the process to go about it is closely examined

Debriefing the whole activity leads the participants to deeply understand the processes to complete the task

The case method

Case analysis possible solutions

This is a discussion-based activity in which participants gain skills in critical thinking, language use, and teamwork (cooperative) or group work (collaborative)

Participants work individually and in teams to analyse, discuss and provide sensible solutions

Training devices

Physical objects to Objects are specially simulate real processes designed to boost participants’ complex technical learning

Air simulators, flight simulators and others are used to observe participants’ interaction and technical procedures

Production simulations

Product design and creation

Team training sessions, materials and resources, and consultants are used along with an evaluation checklist

Procedural simulations

Rehearsals for real-life These are procedures events to follow in case of evacuating a building during an earthquake or fire, inspection by auditors, etc

A competition may take place to determine the best product created. Specifications for the final product are given to each team

Observable procedures are rooted in specific, real situations

(continued)

4

1 Background

Table. 1.1 (continued) Simulations

Features

Description

Observable indicators

Troubleshooting simulations

Problem-based cause identification

Participants practice their problem-solving skills in a safe environment. Roles often include service, support and quality engineers, analysts, technicians, problem and incident managers, auditors, and others responsible for the resolution of critical incidents

Participants apply their skills quickly and efficiently under pressure, including group discussions and real-time coaching from the instructor

Disaster simulations

Natural or organisational disaster management

These are widely used by organisations and institutions working in development and disaster response. These simulations are also insightful for training and for assessing decisionmaking processes, teamwork and coordination

Rapid collaborative decisions are made in changing situations

participants, who may be scattered around the globe, can interact with each other remotely. These simulations may be supported by specific software (Crookall et al. 1986). In this case the interaction is person-person, but a computer is used as communicating interface as in the International Communication & Negotiation Simulations Project (ICONS). Classroom simulations, on the other hand, take place in an everyday physical environment, where all participants share the same physical space. These can either be HFSs or LFSs depending on the learning outcomes expected. In short, it should be stressed that both HFSs and LFSs are part of a much bigger concept: experiential learning.

1.2 Simulations as Experiential Learning Across Disciplines Simulations are nowadays applied in disciplines such as medicine, nursing, engineering or languages, amongst others. Today’s education is increasingly nurtured by true-to-life simulation scenarios. A large number of studies have shown the benefits of simulations by providing immersive experiential learning (Beckem 2012;

1.2 Simulations as Experiential Learning Across Disciplines

5

Table. 1.2 Low-fidelity simulation types (adapted from Thiagarajan 2003) Simulations

Features

Description

Observable indicators

Metaphorical simulation

Abstract reflections of real-world processes

Useful to tackle principles related to planning, testing alternatives, decision-making, etc

Participants’ attitudes and behaviours working under pressure

Interactive stories

Storytelling with participants

Fictional narratives to illustrate concepts, procedures, etc

Participants’ character roles; decisions made on the spur of the moment

Role-playing

Participants’ specific roles and characteristics

Participants adopt personalities and attitudes to handle a situation. Scenario and script

Participants’ performance of their roles

Cash game

Financial outcomes to explore interpersonal behaviours

Interpersonal skills through monetary transactions

Behaviours, emotions and reactions of participants

PC simulation

Playing cards to make micro worlds

Playing cards to foster interpersonal interaction and inductive thinking

Behaviours, emotions and reactions of participants

Jolt

Wake-up calls through brief experiential activities

Short, dynamic activities to pave the way to insightful, extended debriefing

Observing participants’ habitual behaviour patterns and participants’ creativity in discovering important principles

Note For further clarifications and examples, please refer to Thiagarajan (2003); https://www.thi agi.com/

AcƟon learning ReflecƟve teamwork acƟviƟes The case method

SIMULATION

Training devices

HIGH FIDELITY

ProducƟon simulaƟons Procedural simulaƟons TroubleshooƟng simulaƟons Disaster simulaƟons

Metaphorical simulaƟon InteracƟve stories

LOW FIDELITY

Role-playing Cash game PC simulaƟon Jolt

Fig. 1.1 Simulation types

6

1 Background

Ahmed and Sutton 2017; Pilote and Chiniara 2019). Kolb’s experiential learning cycle (Kolb 2007) can be considered the main conceptual framework for reflecting experiential learning in simulation. Experiential learning is a process through which knowledge is built by transforming experiences. Learners go through concrete experiences, reflections, conceptualisations and experimentations. The cycle begins with learners’ involvement in a specific experience (simulation). Next, learners reflect on the experience from different viewpoints (reflective observation). Through reflection, learners develop generalisations and principles and draw conclusions (abstract conceptualisation when explaining or thinking). Learners then use these principles and conclusions in subsequent decisions and actions (active experimentation such as applying or doing), which leads to new concrete experiences (Kolb and Kolb 2009; Kolb 2014). Figure 1.2 illustrates the interrelation between Kolb’s learning cycle and simulation developed by García-Carbonell et al. (2014). Kolb’s experiential learning model begins with: (1) a concrete experience—the tangible qualities of the immediate experience and the grasping of the knowledge that takes place. (2) reflective observation—a collection of data through observation and critical thought regarding the experience. (3) abstract conceptualisation— the process of analysing the data received and the internal process of developing concepts and theory from the experience. (4) active experimentation—a modification of behaviour and knowledge occurs, while the implications for? the future are

Fig. 1.2 Parallelism Kolb’s Learning Cycle and Simulation phases by García-Carbonell et al. (2014)

1.2 Simulations as Experiential Learning Across Disciplines

7

considered. The completion of this cycle puts into practice the concepts and theories that have been developed through the reflection and conceptualisation processes which in turn should create an environment for future experiences. This work-experience cycle meets the objectives in simulation as stated by Greenblat (1989: 16), which includes increasing motivation and interest, conveying information or reinforcing information already given in another format, skill development, attitude change and self/collective-evaluation.

1.3 What Are the Phases of Simulations? To better understand the simulation procedure, Fig. 1.3 illustrates the three phases of a simulation: Briefing (Phase I) consists of preparing the simulation. The facilitator must provide all necessary pieces of information and norms that pave the way for Action (Phase II). The briefing sessions are prior to the simulation action in which participants should analyse topics related to the simulation scenario. They will thus be more linguistically prepared to interact during the simulation. Different profiles are given to the participants, as explained in Chap. 3. Action (Phase II) is where the simulation takes place. All participants have goals and responsibilities that are clearly specified in their profiles. The team leader/head may start the activity by thanking members for being there and addressing the problems that need urgent solutions. Debate, discussions, negotiations and decision making are expected. Fig. 1.3 Simulation phases

8

1 Background

Debriefing (Phase III) takes place after the action. All participants (intra- or inter-group) reflect on the experience, their roles and their learning process. Some suggestions to carry out the debriefing session are presented in Chap. 3. For more information about simulations, see the ICONS platform.1

1.4 What Are the Affordances of Using Simulations in Education? Using simulations encompasses challenges that the trained educator/facilitator should be aware of. For instance, participants learn, and assimilate notions and content by doing actions (Dewey’s experiential learning, ‘learning by doing’, 1998). In doing so, specific and transversal skills are developed. Several authors have attempted to identify some of the challenges of simulations under the scope of learning (Fig. 1.4). McCrary and Mazur (2010) and Murphy and Cook (2020) have indicated that dialogic learning can be achieved by integrating simulations in education. Dialogue is central in classroom simulations. It leads to new understandings and new knowledge. This exploration, where participants construct meanings through dialogue, rather than meanings being imposed from the outside, leads to powerful learning. Most

Fig. 1.4 Specific and Transversal Skills through simulations 1 ICONS

Project (International Communication & Negotiation Simulations Project). Developed at the University of Maryland, this platform combines simulation tools and simulation development dialogue (SDD) methodology to provide clear insights into global socio-political affairs and evaluate alternative courses of action in crisis situations. Simulations performed using the ICONS platform are thus ideal for addressing social issues related to environmental threats, the sustainable economy and human rights, amongst others. https://www.icons.umd.edu/.

1.4 What Are the Affordances of Using Simulations in Education?

9

importantly, learning through dialogue leads not only to content knowledge but also to improved language and thinking skills. Several studies show that simulations prove beneficial in the development of language abilities, critical thinking and intercultural awareness (García-Carbonell et al. 2001; García-Carbonell and Watts 2009; Rising 2009; Watts et al. 2011; Woodhouse 2011; Burke and Mancuso 2012; Michelson and Dupuy 2014; Ranchhod et al. 2014; Angelini and García-Carbonell 2019). Scholars agree that simulations provide greater exposure to the target language, more purposeful interaction, more comprehensible input for learners, a reduced affective filter and lower anxiety in language learning. Moreover, considering that simulations are inspired in reality, participants should have delved into the theme or themes and the problems described in the scenario prior debate and negotiations. This would foster the development of critical thinking skills. Starting by a logical organization of information, participants would subsequently develop their creativity to find adequate solutions to the problems presented in the scenario, would assume responsibilities to take up a role and finally, would develop metacognitive abilities to reflect upon their own learning process (Daniel et al. 2005). Last but not least, another challenge facilitators should be aware of is the development of social skills. Simulations respond to Vygotsky’s social learning theory, where students first engage in learning on a social or group level and then on an individual level. Students progress through stages, from what they can do on their own, to what they can do with help, and on to what they are unable to do. Students cannot progress through the zones of proximal development (ZPD) without social interaction and collaboration with educators and peers (Vygotsky 1978). During a simulation, participants assimilate knowledge of the specific discipline and develop social skills that they could possibly transfer to professional settings (Havnes et al. 2016; Kourgiantakis et al. 2019). Thus, Chap. 2 presents a set of action-learning simulations that can be used as computer-assisted or classroom simulations, mainly in EFL/ESL learning and teacher training.

References Ahmed, A., & Sutton, M. J. (2017). Gamification, serious games, simulations, and immersive learning environments in knowledge management initiatives. World Journal of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development., 14(2), 78–83. Angelini, M. L., & García-Carbonell, A. (2019). Developing english speaking skills through simulation-based instruction. Teaching English with Technology, 19(2), 3–20. Baruch, Y. (2006). Role-play teaching. Management Learning, 37, 1. Beckem, J. M. (2012). Bringing life to learning: Immersive experiential learning simulations for online and blended courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(5), 61–70. Burke, H., & Mancuso, L. (2012). Social cognitive theory, metacognition, and simulation learning in nursing education. the Journal of Nursing Education, 51(10), 543–548. Crookall, D., & Oxford, R. L. (1990). Simulation, gaming, and language learning. New York: Newbury House Publishers.

10

1 Background

Crookall, D., Martin, A., Saunders, D., & Coote, A. (1986). Human and computer involvement in simulation. Simulation & Games, 17(3), 345–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/0037550086173005. Daniel, M. F., Lafortune, L., Pallascio, R., Splitter, L., Slade, C., & De La Garza, T. (2005). Modeling the development process of dialogical critical thinking in pupils aged 10 to 12 years. Communication Education, 54(4), 334–354. Dewey, J. (1998). The essential Dewey: Pragmatism, education, democracy (Vol. 1). Indiana: Indiana University Press. Duke, R., & Greenblat, C. (1981). Principles and practices of gaming simulation. Beverly Hills: Sage. Feldman, M. (1995). Import/export e-mail business simulation (pp. 216–217). Virtual Connections: Online activities and projects for networking language learners. García-Carbonell, A., & Watts, F. (2009). Simulation and gaming methodology in language acquisition. In V. Guillén-Nieto, C. Marimón-Llorca, & C. Vargas-Sierra (Eds.), Intercultural business communication and simulation and gaming methodology (pp. 285–316). Bern: Peter Lang. García-Carbonell, A.; Andreu-Andrés, M. A. and Watts, F. (2014). Simulation and gaming as the future’s language of language learning and acquisition of professional competences. In Back to the future of gaming (pp. 214–227). Germany: WB Verlag. Greenblat, C. (1988). Designing games and simulations. An illustrated handbook. Newbury Park Sage: Sage Publications Havnes, A., Christiansen, B., Bjørk, I. T., & Hessevaagbakke, E. (2016). Peer learning in higher education: Patterns of talk and interaction in skills centre simulation. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 8, 75–87. Jones, K. (2013). Simulations: A handbook for teachers and trainers. London, UK: Routledge. Klabbers, J. H. (2009). The magic circle: Principles of gaming and simulation. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Kolb, D. A. (2007). The Kolb learning style inventory. Boston, MA: Hay Resources Direct. Kolb, D. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. New Jersey: Pearson Education. Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2009). The learning way: Meta-cognitive aspects of experiential learning. Simulation & Gaming, 40(3), 297–327. Kourgiantakis, T., Bogo, M., & Sewell, K. M. (2019). Practice Fridays: Using simulation to develop holistic competence. Journal of Social Work Education, 55(3), 551–564. Kumar, R., & Lightner, R. (2007). Games as an interactive classroom technique: Perceptions of corporate trainers, college instructors and students. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 19(1), 53–63. Lane, S., & Stone, C. A. (2006). Performance assessments. In B. Brennan (Ed.), Educational measurement (pp. 387–431). Westport, CT: American Council on Education. Lievens, F., & Patterson, F. (2011). The validity and incremental validity of knowledge tests, lowfidelity simulations, and high-fidelity simulations for predicting job performance in advancedlevel high-stakes selection. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(5), 927. Massoth, C., Röder, H., Ohlenburg, H., Hessler, M., Zarbock, A., Pöpping, D. M., & Wenk, M. (2019). High-fidelity is not superior to low-fidelity simulation but leads to overconfidence in medical students. BMC Medical Education, 19(1), 29. McCrary, N. E., & Mazur, J. M. (2010). Conceptualizing a narrative simulation to promote dialogic reflection: Using a multiple outcome design to engage teacher mentors. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(3), 325–342. McSharry, G., & Jones, S. (2000). Role-play in science teaching and learning. School Science Review, 82, 73–82. Michelson, K., & Dupuy, B. (2014). Multi-storied lives: Global simulation as an approach to developing multiliteracies in an intermediate French course. L2 Journal, 6 (1), 21–49. Motowidlo, S. J., Dunnette, M. D., & Carter, G. W. (1990). An alternative selection procedure: The low-fidelity simulation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 640–647. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 0021-9010.75.6.640.

References

11

Murphy, K. M., & Cook, A. L. (2020). Mixed reality simulations: A next generation digital tool to support social-emotional learning. In Next generation digital tools and applications for teaching and learning enhancement (pp. 1–15). IGI Global. Pike, B., & Busse, C. (1995). 101 games for trainers. Minneapolis: Lakewood Publications. Pilote, B., & Chiniara, G. (2019). The many faces of simulation. In Clinical simulation. education, operations, and engineering (2nd ed.). Massachusetts: Academic Press. Ranchhod, A., Gur˘au, C., Loukis, E., & Trivedi, R. (2014). Evaluating the educational effectiveness of simulation games: A value generation model. Information Sciences, 264(1), 75–90. Rising, B. (2009). Business simulations as a vehicle for language acquisition. In V. GuillénNieto, C. Marimón-Llorca, & C. Vargas-Sierra (Eds.), Intercultural business communication and simulation and gaming methodology (pp. 317–354). Bern: Peter Lang. Roth, P., Bobko, P., & McFarland, L. A. (2005). A meta-analysis of work sample test validity: Updating and integrating some classic literature. Personnel Psychology, 58, 1009–1037. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00714.x. Schmitt, N., & Mills, A. E. (2001). Traditional tests and job simulations: Minority and majority performance and test validities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 451–458. https://doi.org/10. 1037/0021-9010.86.3.451. Shirts, R. G. (1975). Notes on defining “Simulation”. Gaming-simulation: Rationale, design and applications. A text with parallel readings for social scientists, educators, and community workers. Toronto: Wiley & Sons. Stolovich, H. D., & Keeps, E. J. (2002). Training ain’t telling. Alexandria, VA: ASTD Press. Thiagarajan, S. (2003). Design your own games and activities: Thiagi’s templates for performance improvement. CA: Pfeiffer. Thornton, G. C., III., & Cleveland, J. N. (1990). Developing managerial talent through simulation. American Psychologist, 45, 190–199. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.45.2.190. Thornton, G. C., III., & Rupp, D. (2006). Assessment centers in human resource management: Strategies for prediction, diagnosis, and development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Warren, S. J., & Lin, L. (2012). Ethical considerations for learning game, simulation, and virtual world design and development. In Handbook of research on practices and outcomes in virtual worlds and environments (pp. 1–18). IGI Global. Watts, F., García-Carbonell, A., & Rising, B. (2011). Student perceptions of collaborative work in telematic simulation. Journal of Simulation/Gaming for Learning and Development, 1(1), 1–12. Woodhouse, T. (2011). Thai University students’ perceptions of simulation for language education. Retrieved February 1, 2020, from https://www.thaisim.org/ts2011/docs/TS11_prog-book_f.pdf.

Chapter 2

Simulations

This chapter presents 4 simulation protocols and a template for practitioners who might like to venture to develop more. Each simulation indicates the following: • • • • • • • • • • •

simulation name, recommended number of team members, type of participants, English level, allotted time, simulation scenario (briefing information), general goal, profiles and individual goals, facilitator’s instructions, summary, debriefing proposals process.

All suggested simulations are fictional. Participants will find themselves entering into these simulations without knowing what to expect from the other members. This type of learning experience has been thoroughly created to mirror educational realities that take place when the whole educational community is involved and questions and concerns spring up. It may also happen that the simulations describe schools, teaching and learning proposals, institutional projects, profiles that may or may not resemble a familiar situation. One may say ‘this is not the kind of school I work with’ or ‘I remember having done a similar project when I was at school’. In any case, there is a common environment in all the simulation protocols: school. It is not feasible to construct simulations that exactly mirror each of the participants’ circumstances. These simulations have not been designed to place each of the participants in a deficit position from the very beginning. All the profiles provide the necessary information that would allow the participants to understand their responsibilities in the simulation. However, participants should do some research about the theme or themes tackled © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. L. Angelini, Learning Through Simulations, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65540-2_2

13

14

2 Simulations

in the simulation to be able to justify their responses during the action phase. The background and contextual information do not script or direct the interactions, decisions or verbalizations in the simulations. In fact, what the participants say, do and decide is up to them. As suggested before, it may be necessary to provide some general guidelines before using any of these simulations. As the facilitator, you may need to bring your students/participants together for some prior sessions. It is imperative for them to get used to working in teams, to learn the dynamics of turn-taking and decision making, and to trust each other. Some games or classroom techniques can help with this. See, for example, ‘The ARK’,1 in which students have to analyse a brief hypothetical scenario, discuss it together and make decisions. This exercise serves as preparation for more complex simulations, such as the ones that will be introduced further on. Post simulation dynamics consists of debriefing questions protocol and is usually guided by the facilitator. It is recommendable to answer the questions right after the simulation action is over. These questions are intended to identify participants’ perceptions of the whole proposal, of the problems addressed, team work decisions, and learning out of the experience. The goal of each simulation is to engage participants in a variety of worry-free situations that emerge from educational environments, and through them develop critical thinking. They may also serve to anticipate reactions, possible concerns and decisions that in reality are to be made at the spur of the moment. The facilitator needs to clearly understand the simulation and their role during the action phase. For example, some participants may be tempted to ask for some clarifications during the simulation action phase. It is precisely here that the facilitator should adopt a specific role to avoid distractions of the participants. The facilitator is no longer a teacher, but an observer that may interact occasionally if strictly necessary (the facilitator has to intervene if any of the participants or teams move away from the role or goal of the simulation). To round off, each simulation is an approximation to an educational reality and everyone participating in it should act accordingly. The following simulations have been used in pre-service EFL teacher training courses for primary and secondary education. The goal underpinning these specific simulations was to place the future teachers in educational contexts with some responsibilities. After receiving training on language teaching methodology such as classroom management, active learning methodologies, ICT, service learning, among others, they were expected to apply their knowledge to solve the different problems presented in the simulations. They had to develop their profiles as if in a real school.

1 The

ARK: https://www.randi-harzer.de/download/intermediate/ark—who goes.pdf, retrieved on 21 July, 2020.

2.1 Simulation 1

15

2.1 Simulation 1 Masterminders School.

1. Team members: 5–6 participants. Multiple teams can participate at the same time. 2. Type of participants: pre-service teachers; educational corporations 3. English level: B1 + and above 4. Time allotted: Background study: 20 min; Action: 40–60 min. 5. Learning outcomes It is important to note that other learning outcomes than the ones presented below may be addressed in accordance with the general course outcomes. Thematic approach. To learn and reflect about: • the impact of technology in education • pros and cons of wi-fi and electromagnetic radiation exposure • what actually brings innovation to a school project. Sociolinguistic approach: • • • • •

to develop social and language abilities to debate, negotiate and make decisions to control simple and some advanced grammatical forms to improve pronunciation at the segmental and suprasegmental levels to manage a wide range of vocabulary when speaking on a specific topic to produce extended stretches of appropriate language fluently.

6. Briefing Sheet Masterminders School provides a learning culture that embraces change and a desire for continual improvement, producing well rounded individuals with the skills and knowledge for success. Masterminders School encourages the development of enquiring minds and nurtures a love for learning. It develops perseverance and determination to complete challenging tasks. Children are encouraged to learn from their mistakes, and think about the consequences of their actions with regard to their work and their behaviour. Children are to be able to work in a variety of situations, developing cooperation, empathy and team spirit. Children actively work with the latest technology and do projects in teams. Sadly, very recently two Masterminders pupils have had serious health problems. One of them, Tim (11 years old) has been suffering terrible headaches which made him skip most of the second semester classes. He is in Sixth Grade Primary. The other pupil is Tiffany. Tiffany is only 15 and has been diagnosed with an insomnia unusual for someone her age. In both cases, their parents put the blame on the great exposure to electromagnetic radiation at school. Here’s an open letter from Tiffany’s mother:

16

2 Simulations

My name is Helen Miles and I live in Los Angeles, California. Recently, my daughter Tiffany, was diagnosed with sleep-maintenance insomnia. It is the inability to stay asleep. People with sleep-maintenance insomnia wake up during the night and have difficulty returning to sleep. Doctors have performed a Sleep Inventory Test considering: an extensive questionnaire about personal health, medical history, and sleep patterns. The inventory proved that Tiffany had proper habits in her daily life at home: she ate well, did sports, went to bed early, did not smoke. Doctors began to wonder about other possible causes to Tiffany’s problem. School was one.

They suggested that we remove Tiffany from school for a month and have her study at home with little or no WiFi exposure. It took a while, but Tiffany started sleeping well again. Now, the question is, shall we send her back to school where there is free WiFi? Is WiFi causing all these problems?

At school, Tiffany and the rest of the pupils work with tablets daily (in most of the subjects). I wanted to read about it and found the manual. In the owner’s manual, which no one takes the time to read, there is a clear message. Tablets and mobile phone manufacturers KNOW there is a danger; otherwise they would not have included it in their manual. Have you and your family taken the time to read the owner’s manual?

—Helen Miles. There is a last-minute meeting to deal with these two cases as several parents have begun to worry about this situation which may be damaging pupils’ health. The various stakeholders are also affected as the school project may be jeopardized. The stakeholders attend the meeting: 1. HEAD OF THE SCHOOL: Runs the school and is in charge of strategic developments for the school. Receives reports from the Head teachers. The HEAD OF THE SCHOOL strongly supports technology and educational innovation and is HEAD PARENT 1 s friend. 2. HEAD TEACHER 1: Specialist in charge of 5th Grade. Does not like technology very much. She/he needs the job to support the family.

2.1 Simulation 1

17

3. HEAD TEACHER 2: Specialist in charge of 6th Grade. Very ambitious. Would like to become the Governor in next election. 4. HEAD PARENT 1: Representative of the MASTERMINDERS PARENT GROUP and Helen Miles’ closest friend (Tiffany’s mother). 5. HEAD PARENT 2: Former MASTERMINDERS’ pupil. Loves the school. 6. FOMS: Friends of Masterminders School. FOMS’ mission is to raise funds for school projects. But it is not only about money, FOMS also want to create a sense of community and have some fun. FOMS have economic agreements with Apprit, the Company that has sponsored the families with free aPads (tablets). However, they fear their children are displaying similar symptoms as Tim and Tiffany. 7. General Objectives To elaborate a sound proposal that fully deals with WiFi at school, the school innovation project and compensation for health problems. 8. Profiles Head of the School, Head Teacher 1, Head Teacher 2, Head Parent 1, FOMS Member, Head Parent 2. 8.1 Profile 1.—HEAD OF THE SCHOOL Background. You are the HEAD OF THE SCHOOL. You run the school and are in charge of the school’s strategic developments. You strongly support the use of technology and educational innovations. Your school gets quite a lot of economic support to carry out the projects which require the use of electronic devices. You are HEAD PARENT 1 s friend. Goal. To convince the rest of the Governing Body to continue with the school projects which require pupils operating electronic devices. Masterminders School is a leading institution for its innovation programme and receives several grants from the regional educational department each year. To negotiate an innovative strategy. 8.2 Profile 2.—HEAD TEACHER 1 Background. You are the HEAD TEACHER 1, specialist in charge of 5th grade. You do not like technology very much. In fact, you also suffer from headaches while you are at school and use medication. You are afraid you might be dismissed if you do not support the school’s initiative. You want to ban WiFi but you need the job to support the family.

18

2 Simulations

Goal. To ban WiFi and discontinue ICT projects. To negotiate an innovative strategy. 8.3 Profile 3.—HEAD TEACHER 2 Background. You are HEAD TEACHER 2, specialist in charge of 6th Grade. You are very ambitious. You do not care much about education. You are in fact rather tired of the monotonous job and would like to become the Governor in two year-election. You will do whatever necessary to finally get it. You know you need the support of the current HEAD OF THE SCHOOL. However, parents have a very strong voting decision. Goal. To show you are a decision-maker and a very good candidate for running the institution in two years. 8.4 Profile 4.—HEAD PARENT 1 Background. You are HEAD PARENT 1: Representative of the MASTERMINDERS PARENT GROUP and Helen Miles’ closest friend (Tiffany’s mother). As a parent, you want the best type of education for your two children. As Helen’s friend, you firmly believe that Tiffany has been seriously affected by the continuous exposure to radiation at school. Goal. To mediate between the HEAD OF THE SCHOOL strong position and parents’ complaints about the exposure to radiation. To negotiate an innovative strategy. 8.5 Profile 5.—HEAD PARENT 2 Background. You are HEAD PARENT 2, a former MASTERMINDERS’ pupil. You love the school. Your only child is about to graduate next semester. Goal. To have the best-ranked school in the region. 8.6 Profile 6.—FOMS Representative

2.1 Simulation 1

19

Background. You are a FOMS member. As you know, FOMS mission is to raise funds to allow the school to have the things that the budget won’t stretch to! FOMS also wants to create a sense of community and have some fun! It organizes events for the families. FOMS have economic agreements with Apprit, the Company which has given all the families iPads for free. However, you know that most FOMS members fear their children might suffer in the future from similar effects as Tim and Tiffany. Goal. To continue receiving funds from Apprit. To negotiate an innovative strategy. 9. Facilitator’s Instructions Materials Needed: complete simulation. General Objective: This is a group activity which challenges and tests participants’ innovation competences. Profiles: 1. HEAD OF THE SCHOOL: Runs the school and is in charge of strategic developments for the school and receives reports from the Headteachers. The HEAD OF THE SCHOOL strongly support technology and educational innovation and is HEAD PARENT 1 s friend. 2. HEAD TEACHER 1: Specialist in charge of 5th Grade and does not like technology very much. She/he needs the job to support the family. 3. HEAD TEACHER 2: Specialist in charge of 6th Grade. Very ambitious. Would like to become the HEAD OF THE SCHOOL in two years-election. 4. HEAD PARENT 1: Representative of the MASTERMINDERS PARENT GROUP and Helen Miles’ closest friend (Tiffany’s mother). 5. HEAD PARENT 2: Former MASTERMINDERS’ pupil. Loves the school. 6. FOMS: Friends of Masterminders School. FOMS’ mission is to raise funds to allow the school to have the things that the budget won’t stretch to! But it is not only about money, FOMS also wants to create a sense of community and have some fun! FOMS have economic agreements with Apprit, the Company which has given all the families aPads for free. However, they fear their children suffer from similar effects as Tim and Tiffany. 9.1 Facilitating the Simulation Background. · The simulation will be performed in groups of 5–6 people. Multiple teams can participate at the same time. Participants are provided with the briefing sheet, if possible displayed on the smart board and a profile sheet. It is recommended that participants do not know about the others’ profiles.

20

2 Simulations

• Participants must read and think of persuasive arguments to fulfil their objectives. • An innovative strategy must be negotiated. Briefing. Begin the exercise by dividing participants into groups of 5–6. Allow group members 20 min to read over their briefing/profile sheets and become familiar with the situation described. Clarify any questions before beginning the exercise. Have each group begin by having participants introduce themselves in their role and personal situation. Remind participants about their background and goals. During the simulation. Each group should spend about 40–60 min discussing the rights of each represented sector. Participants will use their own personal strategies to persuade the others by negotiating possible, innovative alternatives. A consensus solution should be achieved. Note. All members should come to a decision (i.e. a consensus). If multiple groups perform simultaneously and the session is recorded in order to assess the participants’ performance later, it is advisable to hold the sessions in separate rooms in order to get clear sound and avoid the different groups’ influencing one another. 10. Summary 1. Divide participants into teams of 5–6 members. 2. Allow participants 20 min to read the briefing sheets. 3. Answer as many questions as they may have on the briefing sheet. Make sure they fully understand the scenario and identify the problems to be solved. 4. Assign a different profile to each participant. Give them 5–10 min to assimilate their responsibilities and objectives. 5. Tell each team to begin by having the HEAD OF THE SCHOOL open the meeting and review the several problems. Allow each team about 40–60 min to discuss options. 6. Let the groups make their final decisions to reach an innovative consensus. 7. Debrief with participants. 11. Debriefing When all of the groups have arrived at their final decision allow them to discuss: • • • • •

The situation itself. Their performance. The innovative option agreed upon. Their feelings and proposals for improvement. Their learning. (add some questions). About the activity.

1. How did things go? Did it work? 2. What happened in your group?

2.1 Simulation 1

21

3. How easy or hard was it compared to other activities? Why? 4. How realistic was the simulation? 5. Have you changed your points of view during the negotiations? About feelings and reactions. 6. How confident were you about your participation? 7. What did you like best about the simulation? 8. What did you dislike about the simulation? About learning. 9.

What have you learned from the simulation? (the impact of technology in education; pros and cons of wi-fi and radiation exposure; what actually brings innovation to a school project; others). 10. How confident were you using the target language? What have you learned? (language abilities to debate, negotiate and make decisions; grammatical forms; pronunciation, stress and intonation; specific vocabulary; fluency).

2.2 Simulation 2 The National School of Valtance. 1. Team members: 4–5 participants. Multiple teams can participate at the same time. 2. Type of participants: pre-service teachers; educational corporations 3. English level: B1 + and above 4. Time allotted: Background study: 20 min; Action: 40–60 min. 5.Learning outcomes It is important to note that other learning outcomes than the ones presented below may be addressed in accordance with the general course outcomes. Thematic approach: • To learn and reflect about: teaching methodologies in ESL—language teaching/skills/ classroom management shared teaching and open classrooms storytelling and drama in the language class others. Sociolinguistic approach: • to develop social and language abilities to debate, negotiate and make decisions • to control simple and some advanced grammatical forms

22

2 Simulations

• to improve pronunciation at the segmental and suprasegmental levels • to manage a wide range of vocabulary when speaking on a specific topic • to produce extended stretches of appropriate language fluently. 6. Briefing Sheet At the National School of Valtance we take our responsibility seriously in order to prepare children for life in the twenty-first century. The acquisition of fundamental values lies at the heart of everything we do and all areas of the curriculum are a vehicle for underpinning these values. The school aims to expose every child, every day, to experiences that will help them understand the need for mutual respect, tolerance and understanding of people from different cultures. We pride ourselves on our success in this area as we see our students embrace difference with respect and integrity. In order to achieve our values and goals, National School of Valtance will: • have only an initial fee of 140 e to cover administrative costs; • maintain a school culture of excellence in teaching, student achievement, innovation and self-advancement; • maintain a supportive, healthy and secure environment for teaching and learning; • utilise technology and innovative pedagogy to advance student learning; • raise student awareness and engagement in social, environmental and intercultural activities, both within and outside the academic programmes of study; • provide excellent facilities and resources to support the programmes of study, minimizing negative environmental impact; • recruit, develop and retain teachers and support staff, who inspire students, contribute to the professional learning community and are positive role models for our students; • maintain stable and effective governance focused on financial soundness, operational efficiency and the long-term advancement of the school; • engage parents, alumni and the local and wider community in support of the school. • Early Years Foundation Stage. The Pre-School caters for children from 18 months to 4 years of age and follows the Early Years Foundation Stage curriculum. The main approach of the Early Years Foundation Stage is to recognise and develop the many ways in which children express themselves. This involves following a curriculum rich in language, movement, play, painting, drawing, sculpture, music, role play and most importantly outdoor experiences in the natural environment. • The Primary School. The Primary School aims to offer a balanced curriculum that promotes the acquisition of key skills through inquiry based learning. The IB philosophy and approaches to learning provide a curriculum that is engaging, relevant, challenging and significant to learners.

2.2 Simulation 2

23

This thirst and enthusiasm leads children to developing the self-confidence and capacity to realise their expectations. Children are on a journey, discovering themselves and their future place in the world. We achieve this special environment by employing inspirational teachers who respect every child and believe that whatever background or prior learning the child has, he/she has the capacity to excel. We design fun learning experiences that build on children’s prior knowledge and interests challenging their thinking. Learning experiences are both individual and collaborative, with every child encouraged to be a team player and a valued member of his/her class, year group, the school and society at large. Languages are fostered, English being taught through English lessons, Physical Education and Arts and Crafts. • Secondary School Secondary School programmes of study build on the firm foundations established in the Primary School. All programmes of study centre around guiding questions that open up and develop thinking skills, subject knowledge, concepts and ideas. Technology is rapidly changing in our world and this stage of learning is a vital time for our students, who need to become skilled in its use as a tool for learning. The National School of Valtance will be part of a consortium and will share the same principles. The National School of Valtance has been providing accessible education for 10 years now. As a new model of education, several issues still have to be discussed and improved. An elected Committee meets three times a year to discuss and share information pertaining to the whole school. This term, the Committee is meeting to deal with some inquiries presented to the Head of the school. This Committee is made up of the following people: • • • •

Head of the National School of Valtance ValPE, the Valtance Pedagogical Advisory Board ValPAR, the Valtance Parent Association ValED, the Valtance English Department (×2). The inquiries and requests for clarification are classified into:

1. 2. 3. 4.

Teaching methodologies in ESL—language teaching Classroom management Shared teaching through lesson study Storytelling and drama in English.

Inquiries and requests for clarification. 1. Teaching methodologies in ESL—language teaching/skills/ Innovation characterises The National School of Valtance. Teachers are annually trained in the latest methodologies and teaching resources. However, the school is finding it difficult to reach an agreement on which methodologies are actually best for the different subjects. It is true that educational practices, teaching methods, and curriculum vary from school to school; nevertheless, in The National School of

24

2 Simulations

Valtance, there exists a basic concept of education. Children are required by law to attend an educational institution whose responsibility is to impart knowledge and understanding of the traditional subjects: mathematics, Spanish, Valencian, English, social studies, and sciences. A certain level of non-traditional teaching style and subject emphasis has been tolerated but recently non-standard educational movements have become widespread, such as flipped teaching, project-based approaches, service learning, thinking-based learning, and other active methodologies. The ValPE, the Valtance Pedagogical Board, have criticised the lack of consensus as their children seem not to understand how to proceed in class and at home. As regards English teaching, the ValED, the Valtance English Department, finds it difficult to carry out a real L2 immersion. They rely on the differentiation of language skills and they assume they should develop more efficient techniques to implement communicative lessons. By adopting the C-Wheel approach by Carol Read (2008), in which they take account of the whole child, they are likely to be more effective and successful in their work as language teachers. However, ValPE experts have compared the C-Wheel to the CLIL 4Cs (Coyle et al. 2010) in the way that content, cognition, communication and culture are embedded in a whole range of considerations about the child’s overall development and needs, and would be very interested to know what ValED teachers think about this. Regarding skills, ValPE wonders why 75% of the students surveyed highlight listening and speaking as their biggest problems. Would it be partly because of the demands of listening and speaking; and partly because of the way speaking is often taught and listening strategies are not taught consistently? ValPE requires more specifications about the development of listening and speaking skills, and how they are both related. They maintain that it is important to plan and organize a listening lesson in order to support students and help them succeed at listening in English. How can teachers help these students develop their listening skills and identify where they need to improve? As for speaking, classroom-based speaking practice seem not to prepare students for the real world. It usually consists of language practice activities (discussions, information-gap activities etc.) or is used to practise a specific grammar point. Neither teaches patterns of real interaction. So what can ValED teachers do in the classroom to prepare students for real interaction? Pronunciation is very often neglected. In line with developing speaking, how can pronunciation be improved? Reading and writing can be especially hard for students. Can ValED consider a few approaches to making classroom reading more communicative? That is, by integrating reading with other skills, so that students can see its value. Writing, unlike speaking, is not an ability people acquire naturally, even in our first language —it has to be taught. Unless L2 learners are explicitly taught how to write in the new language, their writing skills are likely to get left behind as their speaking progresses. But teaching writing is not just about grammar, spelling, or the mechanics of the Roman alphabet. Learners also need to be aware of and use the conventions of the genre in the new language.

2.2 Simulation 2

25

What strategies are ValED teachers going to employ to teach grammar, vocabulary and writing? 2. Classroom Management Ten formal complaints have been registered about ineffective learning environment during English lessons. ValPAR, the Valtance Parent Association, has required measures to control discipline and the management of the classes during the English lessons bearing in mind that teachers are supposed to maintain order and to keep the group on task and moving ahead. How can ValED teachers anticipate when misbehaviours are likely to occur and intervene early to prevent them? The most effective interventions must be subtle, brief and almost private. They should not, therefore, interfere with classroom activities. ValED teachers are to specify: Class rules, students’ seating, eye contact, learning students’ names, teacher talk, drawing attention, giving instructions, using pair and group-work, setting time limits, tasks for early finishers, whole class feedback, and using whiteboard. 3. Shared teaching through lesson study.2 The National School of Valtance is committed to teacher development. It is very common to see two or more teachers within the same classroom. Children seem used to being observed while they are learning. However, ValPAR, the Valtance Parent Association seem to question the presence of teachers and practice teachers in the classrooms to just observe their children. They also criticize the fact that so many people inside a classroom disturb some children with shorter attention span. ValPAR is asking for the educators’ reconsideration of the usefulness of shared teaching. On the contrary, the ValPE and the Head of the School have expressed their support for lesson study. How could they disseminate the benefits of lesson studies? 4. Storytelling and Drama in English ValPE and the Head of the School find that storytelling in English is a great way to allow students to express themselves freely and creatively in an authentic way. However, more specifications are required from ValED about the following in light of the Christmas festival they are organizing: How to choose and prepare a story, how to use transition activities during storytelling, how to use flashcards or story-cards effectively, how to introduce games and pre/post telling activities, how to develop language skills. 7. General Objective Those who work at the National School of Valtance must try to analyse different points of view with sound arguments and negotiate innovative strategies and proposals so that the National School of Valtance can guarantee a solid thriving model of education in the specific field addressed (English). **Notes must be taken to elaborate a complete report (including bibliographic references to support the improvements). 8. Profiles

2 Lesson

study is collaborative approach of classroom inquiry in which several teachers observe, plan, teach, revise and share the results of a single class lesson.

26

2 Simulations

8.1 PROFILE 1. Head of the National School of Valtance Background. The Head of the National School of Valtance runs an institution that places the wellbeing of its students and the interests of the community at the heart of everything the school does. The school mission is to foster “Enjoyment, Aspiration, and Achievement”, where students thrive in a nurturing yet challenging environment. Latetly, the Head of the National School of Valtance has received numerous complaints and inquiries about certain measures and decisions taken by the ValED, the Valtance English Department. An important factor is that the Head of the National School of Valtance is a linguist and has taught English as a foreign language for more than 15 years before becoming the Head of this school. Goal. The Head of the National School of Valtance must analyse the weaknesses in the approach to teaching English at the school, drawing on English teaching methodology experts at school in order to satisfy the needs of each party, guaranteeing the high quality standards. 8.2 PROFILE 2. ValPE, the Valtance Pedagogical Advisory Board Background. ValPE, the Valtance Pedagogical Advisory Board provides a range of services to the school and community in support of instructional activities that impact on student achievement and success. ValPE assists the school by providing: • support and guidance in the implementation of active learning methodologies; • training and support for teachers and principals in effective instructional strategies and models via workshops, symposiums and other professional activities; • support to teachers in the development of learning and evaluation situations that can be used in the classroom; • examples of effective technology integration in the curriculum that enhance student learning; • help in the writing of lesson plans, lesson studies, standards and procedures, professional development project proposals, and other projects. These coming weeks are extremely demanding as they have to prepare ‘the Standards for Students’ Learning and Practice’ to be presented to the Council for Education Accreditation. Unfortunately, ValPE has been overwhelmed with complaints regarding methodological aspects in the English classes. Now, an urgent meeting must help shed light on these aspects; otherwise, ValPe may not be able to finish ‘the Standards…’ on time. They have already taken too long with the initial draft. Time is tight.

2.2 Simulation 2

27

Goal. ValPE, the Valtance Pedagogical Advisory Board must analyse different aspects concerning English teaching in light of the several complaints received by students, students’ parents and some teachers who require more guidance. ValPE, together with the School Committee, must urgently come up with sound solutions. 8.3 PROFILE 3. ValPAR, the Valtance Parent Association Background. ValPAR, The Valtance Parent Association is the structure through which parents/guardians in the school can work together for the best possible education for their children. ValPAR can advise the Head of the school and the School Committee on policy issues and incidents that may require a review of school policy, e.g. bullying, safety, homework, enrolment, behaviour problems etc. ValPAR is a support for parents in the school. ValPAR can invite speakers to address the parents on issues which are topical or relevant. ValPAR is not a forum for complaints against either an individual teacher or parent. The Complaints Procedure is the mechanism for this. Unfortunately, ValPAR has resorted to the Complaints Procedure by meeting with the Head of Valtance School and ValPE. Some students and teachers from the English Department (ValED) have detected a sort of mild disagreement, some may suggest ‘irritation’ related to methodological and procedural choices. The main representative of ValPAR is a teacher of English in another school in the region and the Head of Valtance School trusts her/him. Goal. ValPAR, The Valtance Parent Association have detected misbehaviour during the English lessons that hinders students from learning more effectively. ValPAR has to elucidate the core problems and help find a reasonable solution. 8.4 PROFILE 4. ValED, the Valtance English Department (2 Members Allowed) Background. ValED, the Valtance English Department is dedicated to fostering student success by providing a solid exposure to the target language and maximizing intellectual potential in each individual within a nurturing yet academically challenging environment. As a result of studying at the National School of Valtance students will communicate effectively, access information by various means, think critically and solve problems in a timely manner, successfully meet state standards, and achieve success

28

2 Simulations

through efficient organizational and time management skills. The rich educational experience provided by the English Department will train children who will become active, fulfilled, positive and resourceful young adults. The great demands in today’s society to have a good command of the English language have led ValED to design a proposal for quality education in English. Some uncertainties, though, have brought about a cascade of inquiries and complaints from several sectors that may jeopardize the ValED programme. Action must be taken to better clarify the different aspects under supervision. ValED representatives have a great deal of experience in teaching English. Some are planning to apply for an international scholarship to better learn about other educational systems. Goal. ValED, the Valtance English Department has to meticulously refine their proposal for quality education in English in light of the several complaints received. Sound academic justification of the measures is required. 9. Facilitator’s Instructions Materials needed: complete simulation. Time allotted: This simulation can be split in two parts. First, analysing the background study in 30–40 min; Action of 2 different sessions to address two of the problems at a time. Dealing with the problems may require plenty of time. The facilitator may adapt and assign 60–90 min. to each part. Number of participants: 4–5 per team. Multiple groups can participate at the same time. 9.1 Facilitating the Simulation: Background. The simulation will be run with groups of four-five people, meaning there is one representative for each of the profiles: • • • •

Head of the National School of Valtance ValPE, the Valtance Pedagogical Advisory Board ValPAR, the Valtance Parent Association ValED, the Valtance English Department (×2).

Participants are provided with a profile sheet. The parties must negotiate an innovative strategy so that they analyse different points of view with sound arguments and negotiate an innovative strategy. The National School of Valtance must guarantee a solid thriving model of education. Briefing. Begin the exercise by dividing participants into groups of four-five. Allow group members 30–40 min to read over their briefing and profile sheets and become familiar with the roles. Participants may consult their notes. Make sure to clarify any questions before beginning the exercise. Tell each group to begin by having participants introduce themselves and their role. Remind participants about their background and objective/s. During the simulation. Each group should spend about 60–90 min in total discussing the different aspects that they need to reach a consensus about.

2.2 Simulation 2

29

Facilitators must not intervene with the participants unless strictly necessary. Notes must be taken to elaborate a complete report (including bibliographic references to support the improvements). Note. All members must agree on the same decision (i.e. a consensus). If multiple groups are run simultaneously and the action is recorded to assess the participants’ performance later, it is advisable to hold the sessions in separate rooms to ensure a clear sound and to prevent the different groups from influencing one another. 10. Summary. 1. Divide participants into teams of 4–5 members. 2. Allow participants 30–40 min to read over the briefing sheets. 3. Answer as many questions as they may have on the briefing sheet. Make sure they fully understand the scenario and identify the problems to be solved. 4. Assign a different profile to each participant. Give them 5–10 min to assimilate their responsibilities and objectives. 5. Tell each team to begin by having the Head of the School open the meeting and review the several problems. Allow each team about 60–90 min to discuss options. 6. Let the groups make their final decisions to reach an innovative consensus. 7. Debrief with participants. 11. Debriefing When all groups have reached their final decisions, let them discuss: • • • •

the situation itself; their performance; the improvements made to the programme; their feelings and suggestions for improvement. Debriefing questions: About the activity.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

How did things go? Did it work? What happened in your group? How easy or hard was it compared to other activities? Why? How realistic was the simulation? Have you changed your points of view during the negotiations? About feelings and reactions.

6. How confident were you about the proposals you made? 7. What did you like best about the simulation? 8. What did you dislike about the simulation? About learning. 9.

What have you learned from the simulation? (teaching methodologies; classroom management; shared teaching; storytelling and drama; others).

30

2 Simulations

10. How confident were you using the target language? What have you learned? (language abilities to debate, negotiate and make decisions; grammatical forms; pronunciation, stress and intonation; specific vocabulary; fluency).

2.3 Simulation 3 EDUN.

1. Team members: 5 participants 2. Type of participants: EFL/ESL business English students; Business Administration students; companies 3. English level: B1 + and above 4. Time allotted: Background study: 30 min; Action: 40–60 min 11. Learning outcomes It is important to note that other learning outcomes than the ones presented below may be addressed in accordance with the general course outcomes. Thematic approach: • To learn and reflect about: micro, small and medium-sized enterprises business management research funding, competitiveness and innovation funding human resources others. Sociolinguistic approach: • • • • •

to develop social and language abilities to debate, negotiate and make decisions to control simple and some advanced grammatical forms to improve pronunciation at the segmental and suprasegmental levels to manage a wide range of vocabulary when speaking on a specific topic to produce extended stretches of appropriate language fluently.

6. Briefing Sheet EDUN is an international, philanthropic, ethically focused company. It encourages fair trade all over FAIRLAND, the Headquarters being settled in MASTERFEED, the region on the west coast. It promotes trade in the neighbouring regions by sourcing production from all over FAIRLAND. EDUN’s mission is to secure long-term production by creating opportunities for individuals, especially women, to work, study, design, and provide for their families. EDUN has retail stores in most FAIRLAND, with over 80 stores. EDUN stores provide a wide selection of organic food and natural products as well as clothing. EDUN conducts its business

2.3 Simulation 3

31

ethically and respectfully and donates to organizations in need. Falling sales have had a cascade effect on the different sectors that depend on EDUN.

Masterfeed

• FAIRLAND

Lawrite

WearUP

EDUN has delayed payment to the small and medium-sized enterprises that work exclusively for EDUN. The delay is destabilizing the very existence of these enterprises. One medium-sized enterprise in MASTERFEED in charge of the food industry maintenance for EDUN has been severely affected. None of the workers has received a salary for three months. Likewise, the workers in the medium-sized enterprise in the WEARUP REGION, in charge of fashion design, have not been paid for two months. A third case is the firm in charge of EDUN’S legal services, whose team of lawyers, made up of people from LAWRITE, has not been paid for four months. The lawyers have called an urgent meeting with the manager of EDUN to discuss the situation and seek solutions to avoid dismissals. In addition to representatives from the legal team, the fashion designers, and employees from the food industry maintenance firm, the CEO of EDUN, who is in fact from MASTERFEED, and the Chief Financial Officer, who is from LAWRITE, will attend the meeting to discuss the matters at hand. 7. General Objective Those who are owed money must try to persuade the EDUN representatives to pay the company’s debts immediately, while the EDUN representatives will argue that this is currently impossible and will request that the different groups continue with their work commitments. The parties must negotiate an innovative strategy so that EDUN can pay what it owes to the different groups involved. 8. Profiles Representative of the food industry maintenance firm, Representative of fashion designers, Representative of legal services (a lawyer), Chief Financial Officer; and the CEO.

32

2 Simulations

8.1 Profile 1.—The representative of the food industry maintenance company. Background. You represent the food industry maintenance company for EDUN. All of the company’s 35 employees are from MASTERFEED, including you. You will describe the state of your company and try to negotiate a decent way to resolve the current situation. As a MASTERFEED citizen you feel certain contempt for your people. Goal. To get the full amount of money due to your firm, you should play up to the Chief Financial Officer, who is a fellow from WEARUP. You know that WEARUP people are easy to get along with. You are willing to negotiate only for the company you represent. 8.2 Profile 2.—the Representative of the Fashion Design Company Background. You are the representative of the fashion design company. You are from WEARUP region. You will describe the state of your company and try to negotiate a decent way to resolve your situation. As a WEARUP citizen, you feel proud of your good taste, and you feel your work is worth more than all the cotton production in FAIRLAND. Goal. Your goal is to obtain the full amount of money due to your company, but you are willing to settle individually because you are the fashion company’s prized asset. Your opinion of EDUN is that without you and your firm, it is worth nothing. You like EDUN CEO because you think that, like any good FAIRFEED, she or he appreciates your good taste. You are willing to negotiate for yourself because you think that you are the most ingenious fashion designer in the company. 8.3 Profile 3.—the Representative of the Legal Services Firm Background. You are the representative of the legal services firm. You will describe the state of your firm and try to negotiate a decent agreement. You were born in WEARUP and have lived there for 15 years. You obstinately defend your ideas to find solutions to all the parties affected. Goal. You are fond of FAIRFEED citizens, and you think this will help you when dealing with the CEO. You are willing to negotiate a settlement for everyone because you know that everyone knows that lawyers are necessary.

2.3 Simulation 3

33

8.4 Profile 4.—the Chief Financial Officer of EDUN Background. You are EDUN’sAccounting Manager. As a LAWRITE citizen, you feel a deep love for your region and are very open about it. You sympathize with your fellow citizens in WEARUP and you are inclined to favour them. Goals. You do not get along well with the CEO, although you know you should support his or her position. You are clearly in favour of helping your compatriots, but not at the risk of losing your job. 8.5 Profile 5.—EDUN CEO Background. You are the CEO of EDUN. You are a FAIRFEED citizen. You will listen to the statements regarding the situation of each company before trying to negotiate. Your vast experience in the business makes you sound convincing, although not necessarily resolute. You hold yourself in high esteem, and you feel superior to the other participants in the negotiation. Goal. You know that EDUN must continue to make a profit in spite of the temporary cash flow problems. Paying your supply chain is your top priority but you do not know when the payments can be made. You will try to convince the different groups of the need to continue working together. You have such confidence in yourself and your organization that you have not taken the time to talk with the Accounting Manager before the meeting. 9. Facilitator’s Instructions Materials needed: complete simulation. Number of participants: Five per team. Multiple groups can participate at the same time. Goal. This group activity challenges and tests participants’ innovation competencies to detect skills and capabilities in the individual, interpersonal, and networking dimensions. • Two participants play the role of members of EDUN’s board of directors. • Three participants play the roles of the employee representatives of the small— and medium-sized enterprises that work exclusively for EDUN [see participant briefing sheet or individual profile sheets]. The goal consists of reaching an understanding with EDUN, in which the objectives are pursued individually, i.e. getting paid. The challenge is two-fold: to use

34

2 Simulations

innovation skills in order to reach an agreement that is best for one’s individual interests and to use persuasion to influence EDUN’s decision. Those who are owed money must try to convince the Company to pay its debts immediately, while the Company will argue the impossibility for the moment and will require the different groups to continue with their work commitments. An innovative strategy must be negotiated to retrieve the money that EDUN owes the different groups involved. 9.1 Facilitating the Simulation: Background. · The simulation will be run with groups of five people, meaning there is one representative for each of the five profiles: food industry maintenance representative, fashion designer representative, legal services representative, CEO of EDUN, and Accounting Manager of EDUN. · Participants are provided with a profile sheet. · Those who are owed money will defend their right to be paid immediately. EDUN’s representatives will argue that it is currently impossible to pay and will ask the different groups to continue with their work commitments. · The parties must negotiate an innovative strategy so that EDUN can pay what it owes to the different groups involved. Briefing. Begin the exercise by dividing participants into groups of five. Allow group members 30 min to read over their briefing and profile sheets and become familiar with the countries and nationalities involved. Clarify any questions before beginning the exercise. Tell each group to begin by having participants introduce themselves, their role, nationality, and personal situation regarding payments owed. Remind participants about their background and goals. During the simulation. Each group should spend about 40–60 min in total discussing the rights of all representatives to be paid for the work carried out. The employees will use their own personal strategies to persuade EDUN to pay its debts by negotiating viable innovative alternatives to lump-sum payments despite EDUN’s financial problems. The members of the group should reach a consensus. Note. All members must agree on the same decision (i.e. a consensus). If multiple groups are run simultaneously and the action is recorded to assess the participants’ performance later, it is advisable to hold the sessions in separate rooms to ensure a clear sound and to prevent the different groups from influencing one another. 10. Summary. 1. Divide participants into teams of 5 members. 2. Allow participants 30 min to read over the briefing sheets. 3. Answer as many questions as they may have on the briefing sheet. Make sure they fully understand the scenario and identify the problems to be solved. 4. Assign a different profile to each participant. Give them 5–10 min to assimilate their responsibilities and objectives.

2.3 Simulation 3

35

5. Tell each team to begin by having the CEO open the meeting and review the several problems. Allow each team about 40–60 min to discuss options. 6. Let the groups make their final decisions to reach an innovative consensus. 7. Debrief with participants. 11. Debriefing When all groups have reached their final decisions, let them discuss: • • • •

the situation itself; their performance; the innovative payment plan agreed upon; their feelings and suggestions for improvement. Debriefing questions: About the activity.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

How did things go? Did it work? What happened in your group? How did the time allotted affect the quality of your work? How easy or hard was it compared to other activities? Why? How realistic was the simulation? What particular negotiation skills or strategies did you use to try to achieve your goals? 7. How effective do you think they were? 8. Did your goals change during the negotiations? 9. What types of negotiation strategies did other participants use? About feelings and reactions. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14.

How do you feel about the problem-solving task? How confident are you about your performance? Did you give priority to your company’s goals or to your personal interests? How do you feel about the process? How do you feel about the time allocated to negotiating?

About learning. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19.

What did you like best about the simulation? What did you dislike about the simulation? What did you learn from the simulation? What do you still need to learn? Which personal objectives in your role have been addressed?

About applications. 20. How would you change the role of the participants? 21. How would you change the role of the facilitator? 22. Are there any ways you would like to see this simulation changed to make it a better and more effective learning experience?

36

2 Simulations

23. How can understanding this activity/process help you academically and professionally? 24. How do you think you might use this activity in your career? 25. What would you do differently in a real situation in the future? Proposals for Improvement:

2.4 Simulation 4 PawsUp.

1. Team members: 5–6 participants. Multiple teams can participate at the same time. 2. Type of participants: EFL/ESL students; secondary school students; pre-service teachers. 3. English level: B1 and above 4. Time allotted: Background study: 30 min; Action: 40–60 min 5. Learning outcomes Thematic approach: • • • • • •

To learn and reflect about: community needs raising money for charity school projects human and animal rights others. Sociolinguistic approach:

• • • • •

to develop social and language abilities to debate, negotiate and make decisions to control simple and some advanced grammatical forms to improve pronunciation at the segmental and suprasegmental levels to manage a wide range of vocabulary when speaking on a specific topic to produce extended stretches of appropriate language fluently.

6. Briefing Sheet For the “Good Deeds Week” this year, Salton School is organizing a drive to provide supplies to the local animal sanctuary in town. Clearly, the school is very sensitive towards animal needs and wants to take action through institutional activities. Recently, the local animal sanctuary has gone through a hard time. A fire destroyed most of the installations but volunteers could rescue most of the animals, though many have been injured. Unfortunately, some also perished. The Local Government has lent the sanctuary a provisional parcel to keep their animals but

2.4 Simulation 4

37

a new place needs to be found soon. This sanctuary has been operative for many years in the outskirts of town and has provided shelter for different kinds of animals from all over the region, from stray dogs and cats to rabbits, mice, guinea pigs, hamsters, farm animals, and birds. Salton School has proposed that some credits can be fulfilled helping out at the shelter after school. The activities for this special week are listed below: • Salton School has reached an agreement with the city Library to team up for a literacy programme that gives school students a chance to earn academic credit and help the shelter. With this initiative, it is expected that students write persuasive letters about the animals in the shelter and the reasons these animals should be adopted. • Another action is the reading programmes so that students spend an hour everyday with the animals, playing, reading and singing in the shelter. In this way, the animals get affection, attention, and socialization, while students learn about volunteering and practice reading aloud. • A PawsUp Marathon with the dogs from the sanctuary to get the students involved in raising money and promoting adoption. • A special lunch to help raise money for the sanctuary on the last day. However, a massive tide of criticism from some parents, teachers and some students has jeopardized the Good Deeds Week. Amongst the most controversial arguments are: a. Money should be raised for homeless people instead. 1 Not all the animals in the shelter are worth caring for. Some support animal experiments to develop new medicines and to test the safety of other products. They consider that mice and rabbits should be given to laboratories for testing. 2 The marathon with the animals will get the animals stressed. 3 The school needs new funds for the summer and more tablets as 15% more students are expected to enrol in the next year course. 4 A reading programme should be offered to the Home for the Elderly in town, not animals in a shelter. The Good Deeds Week is planned in three weeks’ time and at this point it is uncertain if it will take place. The Head of the school has called up an urgent meeting for today with some students, parents, and school teachers to come to terms with the arguments for and against this initiative. 7. Objectives To address all the arguments against and reach an agreement for the Good Deeds Week. 8. Profiles Head of the School, Students (×3), Parent 1, Science Teacher.

38

2 Simulations

8.1 Profile 1.—Head of the School Background. You are the HEAD OF THE SCHOOL. You are strongly convinced of the values the school instils, among them, Ethics and Respect for all species, human and animal. You keep an active presence with local institutions such as the Animal Shelter, Library, the Home for the Elderly. You are PARENT 1 s friend. Goal. To defend the ethical underpinnings of the initiative. To listen to everyone and help reach an agreement. 8.2 Profile 2.—Parent 1 Background. You are very sensitive about social justice. It is not that you do not care for animals but your priorities are different. This year, there has been a 45% rise in homelessness in town, according to the statistics released by the government. A local night shelter, running since last January, has taken over a quarter of the officially counted people off the streets each night. Guests receive a warm bed, meals and company. More shelters and volunteer workers are also needed. You have offered to volunteer yourself. Goal. To convince the participants in the meeting that there are other causes worth assisting, such as the homeless people in town. 8.3 Profile 3.—Science Teacher Background. You are a science teacher and you are aware of animal testing. You firmly believe that medicine students and other scientists must experiment on animals. It would only be acceptable if suffering is minimised in all experiments and human benefits are gained, which could not, in turn, be obtained by using other methods. The thing is that animal experiments produce such great benefits for humanity that it is morally acceptable to harm a few animals. You have access to first-hand information and can show some of the experiments and the benefits during the meeting. Goal. To show the importance of science research. 8.4 Profile 4.—Student 1

2.4 Simulation 4

39

Background. You are a student who find it hard at times to do things with your pals. You are not an extrovert type and sort of think of yourself as an outsider in your group of friends. You see them as too obsessed by stuff like technology, the latest video game… Last year, your family adopted a cat who was run over near your home. Now, you have learned to live with your cat and you find a loving connection with your pet. You think that through this special week, your friends could experience something different…do something for somebody else. You will support the school initiative, of course. Goal. To show your support for the initiative of the Good Deeds Week based on your ideas that everyone should do one’s bit in a community. 8.5 Profile 5.—Student 2 Background. You find the school initiative in line with the caring kind of education you receive from school. However, from a personal perspective, you would like to do something for the Elderly in the residency as your granny is living there. Goal. To support the initiative of the Good Deeds Week though you would like to go for something else. 8.6 Profile 6.—Student 3 (Extra) Background. You agree with the proposal for the Good Deeds Week but you will let the people know that the local sports club also needs some roofing work. You play basketball and really care about the club. Goal. To support the initiative of the Good Deeds Week though you would like to go for something else. 9.1 Facilitating the Simulation: Background. • The simulation will be performed in groups of 5–6 people, Each will be the representative of the 5 or 6 profiles involved. • Participants are provided with the briefing sheet displayed on the smart board and a profile sheet. • Participants must read and think of persuasive arguments to fulfil their objectives. Briefing.

40

2 Simulations

Begin the exercise by dividing participants into groups of 5–6. Allow group members 20 min to read over their briefing/profile sheets and become familiar with the situation described. Clarify any questions before beginning the exercise. Have each group begin by having participants introduce themselves in their role and personal situation. Remind participants about their background and goals. During the simulation. Each group should spend about 40–60 min discussing the arguments and will use their own personal strategies to persuade the others by negotiating possible, innovative alternatives. A consensus solution should be achieved. Note. All members must agree to a decision (i.e. a consensus). If multiple groups perform simultaneously, the action can recorded in order to assess the participants’ performance later. It is advisable to hold the sessions in separate rooms in order to get clear sound and avoid the different groups’ influencing one another. 10. Summary. 1. Divide participants into teams of 5–6 members. 2. Allow participants 20 min to read over the briefing sheets. 3. Answer as many questions they may have on the briefing sheet. Make sure they fully understand the scenario and identify the problems to be solved. 4. Assign a different profile to each participant. Give them 5–10 min to assimilate their responsibilities and objectives. 5. Tell each team to begin by having the Head of the School open the meeting and review the several problems. Allow each team about 40–60 min to discuss options. 6. Let the groups make their final decisions to reach an innovative consensus. 7. Debrief with participants. 11. Debriefing When all of the groups have arrived at their final decision allow them to discuss: • • • • •

The situation itself. Their performance. The innovative option agreed upon. Their feelings and proposals for improvement. (add some questions). About the activity.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

How did things go? Did it work? What happened in your group? How easy or hard was it compared to other activities? Why? How realistic was the simulation? Have you changed your points of view during the negotiations? About feelings and reactions.

6. How confident were you about the work you did?

2.4 Simulation 4

41

7. What did you like best about the simulation? 8. What did you dislike about the simulation? About learning. 9.

What have you learned from the simulation? (charity causes, school projects, animal rights, community work, others) 10. How confident were you using the target language? What have you learned? (language abilities to debate, negotiate and make decisions; grammatical forms; pronunciation, stress and intonation; specific vocabulary; fluency). 5. Special Considerations and Template In order to design a simulation, first decide on the following: • Theme: Think of the topic you would like to delve into. For example, simulations can be used to complement the treatment of literature. Identify the themes of the book or film your students are studying. • Learning Outcomes: List the learning outcomes-what you would like your students learn to do/develop/assimilate. • Scenario: Build the simulation scenario based on the themes chosen and make sure you clearly state the problems. Simulation scenarios must have problems to be solved. This justifies the debate, negotiations and decision-making. • Team-making: 4–6 members per team. • Resources: Make sure you have the briefing sheets for each participant, their profiles and a comfortable room. Even 2 rooms may be necessary to prevent the place from being too noisy. Participants will speak loudly. For assessment purposes, you may decide to record the simulation. • Facilitator’s role: Monitor the teams, that is, take active notes of the interaction, language restraints without interfering in the action. In some cases, for clarifications, the facilitator adopts a profile as well (the pedagogical advisor, the psychologist, and so on). • Debriefing: Make sure you have planned the debriefing discussion in advance. It could be done intra-teams or inter-teams (whole-class reflection). Here is a template to create your own simulation: Simulation Template.

42

2 Simulations Simulation name:

Suitable for:

Allotted time:

Nº Participants

Language:

Level:

Simulation based on (piece of literature/film/other topic): Simulation scenario (briefing):

General objective:

Profiles + individual goals

Debriefing questions:

References Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: CUP. Read, C. (2008). 500 Activities for the primary classroom. London: Macmillan Books.

Chapter 3

Professional Development Through Peer Observation and Feedback

Unfortunately, it is very common to see educators teaching behind closed doors. One of the principles underpinning the teaching profession is ‘generosity and sharing’. As we know, teachers teach more than just content and never stop developing and learning. Sharing their teaching with other colleagues would be the ideal cornerstone for today’s educational programmes. Observation may be conducted not only by peers but also by external judges. School inspection agencies or school management teams usually conduct these observations, creating a stressful situation for teachers. Thus, feedback may not be representative of what actually occurs in the classroom (Muijs and Reynolds 2017). Even worse, lessons may turn into ‘performances’ designed to please the observer. Observations, however, can offer valuable insight for both teachers and observers. In simulations, observers watch the action that takes place and make notes on the interactions, language restraints, and strengths and weaknesses of the dynamics in each team. But, above all, observers can help teachers identify engagement and participation styles through the quality and frequency of participants’ involvement and language choices, amongst other factors.1

1 Observations may involve post-lesson discussions with teachers about classroom practices. In another one of my research projects, I explore the advantages of lesson study, usually referred to as ‘shared teaching’. I suggest examining this method for conducting research by observing students’ interactions during the simulation. This would help identify learning typologies collaboratively with other peers and sharing observations and good practices. Plenty of information and useful material can be found in studies by Arani et al. (2010), Hurd and Lewis (2011), Bjuland and Mosvold (2015), Dudley (2015), Larssen and Drew (2015), Cajkler and Wood (2016), Bahçivan (2017), Angelini and Álvarez (2018), and many others.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. L. Angelini, Learning Through Simulations, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65540-2_3

43

44

3 Professional Development Through Peer Observation and Feedback

3.1 Observation Instruments Note-taking has always been the core instrument in classroom observation. However, it is imperative to identify ‘what’ and ‘who’ to observe and to systematically collect as much information on as possible. Is the observer going to observe the simulation dynamics (briefing-action-debriefing)? Or the teacher/facilitator’s role instead? Or both? When observing simulations, observers can use behavioural protocols to look at the occurrence of specific behaviours (whether participants are complying with their profiles and responsibilities; whether speaking turns are respected; whether debate and negotiations are biased or unbiased). Value-oriented protocols, in turn, help teachers with global value judgements about the simulation (overall comments about the briefing, action and debriefing phases). Specific instruments may help evaluate a particular part of the simulation, whereas a general instrument provides an overview of the teaching proposal. I propose three observation templates for simulations in the classroom: Holistic observation, Team observation and a Rating scale. Model A—Holistic observation Simulation: Number of teams: Date/s: Facilitator: Observer: Protocol

Comments on participants

Comments on facilitator

Behavioural (specific behaviours) Value-oriented (specific notes on simulation phases) Final remarks:

The instrument in Model A—Holistic observation aims to collect information on both the teacher/facilitator and the participants during the simulation. Every time the teacher/facilitator does a specific activity, the observer writes down if it is a wholeclass interaction or individual instruction, noting participants’ receptive attitudes and involvement (behavioural). The observer writes down what exactly occurs in each of the simulation phases with the participants, the teacher/facilitator and the simulation itself (value-oriented). In the final remarks, the observer can also provide a judgement of the simulation scenario and a general point of view about the action.

3.1 Observation Instruments

45

Model B—Team observation Simulation: TEAM 1. Team members + profiles 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Date/s: Facilitator: Observer: Protocol

Comments on team profiles

Behavioural (specific behaviours)

(Profiles)

Value-oriented: (briefing phase) ACTION phase (debriefing phase) Final remarks:

Model B—Team observation focuses on each team and its members. The observer moves amongst the teams, remaining as unnoticeable as possible, trying to avoid any interference with participants during their interactions. The observer writes down intra-team interactions, leadership, problem-solving strategies and any behavioural aspects related to the profiles and participants’ performance (behavioural). The observer must write down what exactly occurs during the action, treating the briefing and debriefing approach in a more holistic manner (value-oriented). In simulations with various teams, several observers are recommended during the action phase (one or more per team). Model C—Rating scale The Model C—Rating scale is designed for participants to rate the simulation itself, their own performance, the facilitator’s involvement, their feelings and reactions, and their learning. It consists of a Likert-type questionnaire rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (totally unsatisfied) to 5 (highly satisfied). It is important to give participants the opportunity to have a say about the experience (their performance, strong points of the simulation, weak points of the simulation, things to be done differently next time, other).

46

1. Very poor

3 Professional Development Through Peer Observation and Feedback

2. Poor

3. Just fine

4. Very good

5. Outstanding

1–5 scale Overview

1

2 3 4 5

1. Our team worked very well during the whole simulation 2. The allotted time was sufficient 3. The simulation was more difficult than other activities performed in class 4. The simulation was realistic 5. I changed my points of view during the negotiation About feelings and reactions 6. I felt capable of solving problems 7. I felt confident about my participation in the simulation 8. I gave priority to my team’s goals 9. I gave priority to my personal interests 10. I felt motivated during the simulation About learning 11. I learned about the topic 12. I learned from other participants’ opinions 13. I learned new vocabulary 14. I have understood the potential of simulations in teacher training (teacher training programmes) 15. I learned to make myself understood 16. I learned to consider others’ opinions 17. I learned to find good sources of information 18. I would like to have more simulations in other classes 19. I know why simulations are powerful pedagogical strategies in English classes (teacher training programmes) 20. I know how to use simulations in English classes (teacher training programmes) The facilitator 21. The facilitator gave detailed explanations and instructions 22. The facilitator provided the material for the simulation 23. The facilitator monitored the teams 24. The facilitator corrected behaviour constructively 25. The facilitator gave accurate feedback during the debriefing (continued)

3.1 Observation Instruments

47

(continued) 1–5 scale Overview

1

2 3 4 5

Write your comments about: • Your performance • Strong points of the simulation • Weak points of the simulation • Things to be done differently next time

To conclude, observation with peers will enhance the informed approach to teaching, the knowledge of students’ learning, the weak and strong points of the simulation and its implementation, and the assessment design. Teachers/facilitators, together with observers, can design instruments that better reflect the occurrence of behaviours in the simulation, as well as reflections about the teacher/facilitator’s role and students’ performance in each of the simulation phases.

References Angelini, M. L., & Álvarez, N. (2018). Spreading lesson study in student-teacher instruction. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 7(1), 23–36. Arani, M. R. S., Fukaya, K., & Lassegard, J. P. (2010). Lesson study as professional culture in Japanese Schools: An historical perspective on elementary classroom practices. Nichibunken Japan Review, 22, 171–200. Bahçivan, E. (2017). Implementing microteaching lesson study with a group of preservice science teachers: An encouraging attempt of action research. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 9(3), 591–602. Cajkler, W., & Wood, P. (2016). Lesson study and pedagogic literacy in initial teacher education: Challenging reductive models. British Journal of Educational Studies, 64(4), 503–521. Bjuland, R., & Mosvold, R. (2015). Lesson study in teacher education: Learning from a challenging case. Teaching and Teacher Education, 52, 83–90. Dudley, P. (2015). Lesson study: Professional learning for our time. London: Routledge. Hurd, J., & Lewis, C. (2011). Lesson study step by step: How teacher learning communities improve instruction. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Larssen, D., & Drew, I. (2015). The influence of a Lesson Study cycle on a 2nd grade EFL picture book-based teaching practice lesson in Norway. Nordic Journal of Modern Language Methodology, 3(2), 101–107. Muijs, D., & Reynolds, D. (2017). Effective teaching: Evidence and practice. London: Sage.

Chapter 4

Case Studies

The present chapter gathers case studies conducted with some of the proposed simulations. These studies have been carried out to determine whether simulations were effective for the pre-service teachers in applying their knowledge to solve certain problems from their field of study. Also, they aimed at developing critical thinking, a global mindset towards issues of social interest together with pre-service teachers’ communicative abilities in English. Case study 1 demonstrates that simulation as a pedagogical strategy results in great interest for the future secondary school teachers, especially for treating literature and social issues. In this particular case, simulation was used as a complimentary activity after analysing some pieces of literature. The idea was to take a step further and delve into a more realistic situation after the traditional literary analysis. In this way, by participating in a simulation themselves, the pre-service teachers could get the gist of the dynamics of the simulation and this experiential learning action could also enable them to later use simulations with their own students. Case study 2 demonstrates that pre-service teachers in Initial Teacher Education applied the notions and concepts of the theoretical framework underpinning the didactics of English language teaching to solve the problems that the simulation scenario presented. It was used as a teaching strategy to place the pre-service teachers in different roles with specific responsibilities. Finally, case study 3 demonstrates the effectiveness of the simulation in an ESL course for pre-service teachers. Again, the simulation scenario delves into an educational context and practical decisions should be made to solve a specific problem. Pre-service teachers acknowledged they did not only have to use the English language in a purposeful way, but also they had to do research in order to take part in the discussion with sound arguments and be able come to terms with personal and institutional interests. Subsequently, the 3 case studies are presented. Case Study 1. Postgraduate students’ preparation to create simulations. After receiving training on simulation potential in secondary education and doing EDUN Simulation, postgraduate students [N = 176] over 4 consecutive years were © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. L. Angelini, Learning Through Simulations, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65540-2_4

49

50

4 Case Studies

asked to design their own simulation scenarios during an official postgraduate course for high school teachers of EFL and literature. Most students, aged 23–30, were philologists specialized in English language. Only some had teaching experience and were already working in schools or language institutes. Preparation consisted of reading some pieces of literature in English (e.g.: John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath, Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart, Linda Sue Park’s A Long Walk to Water, or Kay Kennedy’s poem Words Hurt). They watched some recommended videos on the issues addressed in the literature which highlighted controversial social issues, which are often overlooked in education. Doing so gave them a deeper understanding of the issues, most of which depicted the deprivation of human rights and a lack of global mindset (Fig. 4.1). These activities allowed postgraduate students to create their own scenario simulations to be later applied in their own classes in secondary education. Students worked in teams of up to five members on the design of human rights scenarios. The goal was to help learners become more aware of global issues, building an “affective mirror” that encourages reflection on learners’ own feelings and the influence of these feelings on the learning experience. Creating simulation scenarios challenged students to reflect on and develop a sense of global awareness. The procedure was to develop scenarios, profiles, pre-action protocols, and debriefing instructions in teams. Teamwork and collaborative learning were fostered through work in learning corners on scenario design. By doing collaborative intergroup work, peers gave participants feedback on their proposals. The postgraduate lessons were transformed into learning communities where students exchanged points of view on their scenarios. After participating in a simulation, learning about the procedure, effectiveness and research on simulation, postgraduate students delved into designing and presenting their scenarios, wrote about the teaching proposal by answering the question: “What are your views on the course?” The postgraduate students uploaded their written responses [N = 176] onto the university intranet platform. Facilitators then downloaded the responses for analysis.

4.1 Learners’ Perceptions The students’ perceptions on the course were sorted into three categories: using simulation scenarios as a teaching–learning tool, using literature to promote human rights, and building students’ mindful global citizenship. Most students expressed positive views about the first category, using simulation scenarios as a teaching–learning tool. They found designing simulation scenarios innovative. Many reported that designing scenarios had broadened their view on teaching literature in class. For some, the issues addressed in some of the texts were not new. Such themes included hunger, education deprivation, and child labor. The students noted that alarming news on human rights abuses are widespread nowadays.

4.1 Learners’ Perceptions

In class

1 Choose a literary text for high school students to read. The text should deal with human rights and world issues. Justify your choice.

4. Write the first draft of a possible simulation scenario based on one of the themes from the text, considering the following aspects: setting in terms of place (where does the action take place; what is relevant to mention about the place?); current situation (what problem should be discussed/solved?); personal profiles (decide who may intervene in solving the problem bearing in mind it is advisable to design profiles from different sectors of society); pre-action protocol (specify a pre-action protocol with several guidelines to explain the rules to participants before the simulation starts, e.g., you are not allowed to interrupt the course of action in any way; all participants must respect the rules during the simulation).

5. Share the first draft with another team for feedback. Accept or discard suggestions.

6. Hand in a revised draft for correction and feedback on proposals

Fig. 4.1 Scenario design procedure

51

Outside the class 2 Read the literary text and identify themes and subthemes concerning human rights. Carry out traditional literary analysis (plot, characters, action, themes, setting in terms of time and place). 3. Watch a list of videos from Technology, Entertainment, Design (TED) to learn more about human rights and global citizenship.

52

4 Case Studies I found it really dynamic, and I would like to know more about it. I see great potential in the method. Teachers can benefit from this to create more active classes. (L 2). Some topics are not actually new and students are familiar with them in one way or another. Through simulations, our students will definitely be able to connect with reality in some way. I think I will use it with my students because what they want are practical rather than theoretical lessons. (L 31). In language lessons, we all want our students to speak. Language knowledge is a barrier in countries like Spain, where English is a foreign language. I personally find that through simulations, students can learn more about the world, while at the same time they receive real language input and use the language to communicate purposefully. (L 44).

In terms of the second category, using literature to promote human rights, participants approved of working in a safe environment where they could speak their minds on controversial issues. In most high schools, literature is taught in the conventional way. By designing a simulation, students discovered that they themselves could deviate from the text and gain a broader understanding of social issues because of the interactive value of the simulation. Teamwork fostered interpersonal relationships, and teacher trainees exchanged their views with others. Only a few participants found it difficult to agree on some issues because of racial, religious, social, gender, or other prejudices, which led to confrontation. I really believe in the potential of simulation, and I can see how my own students can benefit from it and become more conscious of social problems. […] It definitely fosters communication, and understanding others’ realities is central to building a civilized society. (L 14). I found it hard because we had to defend our ideas. Moral issues and diversity of opinions led to some misunderstandings. I felt bad about that, although I experienced some catharsis and real immersion in the discussion. Needless to say, I’ve questioned my own position on certain topics as well. (L 29). I liked the fact that in class I got the opportunity to hear what others thought about important issues. I was very surprised to learn that we all have some kind of prejudices against other people. I had not stopped to think about this until we had to design a scenario in which social justice and social integration had to be fostered. (L 31).

Most postgraduate students found the experience enriching. The literary texts used in class helped participants gain insights into human rights as well as their own feelings on the issue. According to responses in the third category, building students’ mindful global citizenship, most students found they had learned more about themselves and their position on several issues in the literature. Such issues included discrimination against women, child labor, torture, and the oppressive global economy. Most teacher trainees also found they had learned more about their responsibility as citizens to take a stand on human rights abuses. I will use simulations, carefully selecting the material to be discussed because my students are 13–14 years old. I’m afraid maturity is necessary to fully understand these problematic issues. All the same, empathy development will be a must on the course syllabus next year. (L 16).

4.1 Learners’ Perceptions

53

I find it extremely important to deal with global issues in class. We should find real topics and teach our students to be better citizens by showing interest in world issues and participating actively in society. As teachers, we should be mindful of this. (L 49). I may work with simulation scenarios at school and start building on empathy and global citizenship, which are both so necessary nowadays. (L 96).

A powerful idea seemed to have gained approval among the postgraduate students. As one postgraduate student reported, “I do not want to carry out the kind of teaching I have always rejected.” The traditional form of education may be beyond the experience and maturity of young learners. Learning here means memorizing what is already found in books. Rejection therefore seems the natural reaction by learners. The key to education today must be participation and transformational experiences that lead students to become better citizens. I believe this can be done in every single subject. There is no need for memorization and a final exam. We shouldn’t lose sight of the process. (L 89).

Most participants acknowledged the power of simulations as a transformational tool in education because of the way they mirror other people’s feelings. They can thus offer profound insight into the human condition, awakening empathy and building mindful citizenship.

4.2 Conclusions The qualitative analysis of student perceptions confirmed the participants’ approval of the method, namely literary analysis to promote human rights awareness. In our study, reading and then analyzing literary texts seemed appropriate, although for most of the teacher trainees, taking a step further and including a simulation that addressed social problems seemed even better. Learners understood the notion of global belonging, which is particularly relevant in today’s territorial, fragmented Europe. Students also found that simulation scenarios had great potential to enhance global citizenship because they themselves were immersed in a reality where they had to interact, exchange ideas, and make decisions. By designing scenarios, the postgraduate students played the role of both teacher and student. As future teachers, they had to select the reading material, identify the topics, and create the scenario and all the necessary supporting materials for the simulation whilst as postgraduate students, they analyzed their scenarios and those of their peers to determine the applicability of these scenarios in high school classrooms. Some of the teacher trainees who actually worked in schools indicated the need to re-direct their syllabuses toward greater social awareness. These postgraduate students recognized that the school has an added layer of responsibility within society. As education professionals, the postgraduate teacher trainees agreed they had to promote social or community values in some way. Making teachers aware of their responsibility in the classroom and ensuring their teaching is rooted in real life so as to advocate values that improve society must be the cornerstone

54

4 Case Studies

of all teacher training degrees. The question, therefore, is why not use simulations to turn lessons into rewarding, communicative learning environments? This study takes the first step toward creating a science of mindful global learning based on personal teaching experience.

4.2.1 Case Study 2—Simulation in Initial Teacher Education The participants in the second case study were a group of pre-service teachers [N = 68] enrolled in EFL didactics in the official undergraduate course Teaching EFL and Children’s Literature. They were at a B1 + and above level of English. After revising the specialised literature, they participated in a classroom simulation. The simulation consisted of analysing an educational institution (the National School of Valtance simulation) and the numerous problems identified by different agents in that educational community. Pre-service teachers in groups of four to five members adopted profiles to solve these problems: The main aim of using this simulation was to assimilate and apply the notions and concepts learnt in the subject in a real-life context, making learning more meaningful. The simulation consisted of three parts: briefing (learning about the scenario and gaining insight into the inquiries/problems), action (the simulation itself) and debriefing (reflections post-simulation) (Fig. 4.2). The briefing took place some weeks in advance to give students the opportunity to become acquainted with the simulation scenario and to perform research to find sound solutions to the problems presented. Figure 4.2 shows that the students were first acquainted with some professional literature within Methodology of TEFL.

Fig. 4.2 Procedure followed in the course

4.2 Conclusions

55

However, the roles were given to each member on the day of the action/simulation. After analysing their roles and responsibilities for 20 min of the lesson and asking any questions, the pre-service teachers were ready to start the action phase of the simulation. The simulation negotiation lasted one hour. The debriefing came afterwards and lasted approximately 40 min. This last stage encouraged pre-service teachers to reflect upon their experiences. This was performed orally and within simulation groups. During the course, the pre-service teachers carried out two simulations following the procedure outlined in Fig. 4.2. The roles were rotated amongst the group members each time, although the groups remained the same. This rotation was suggested by the pre-service teachers to experience different points of view. After the simulation, pre-service teachers started planning a lesson with real children from a local school through storytelling. Pre-service teachers were now in charge of designing a complete lesson that followed the teaching sequence of pre-telling, actual telling and post-telling. During the pre-telling stage, activities were designed to anticipate vocabulary and grammar structures that would be reinforced in the subsequent stages. The actual telling stage consisted of interactive storytelling in which children were invited to participate actively in the activities. During the posttelling stage, activities were planned to assimilate the story plot and the language that had already been introduced. This last stage provided pre-service teachers with an indication of how effective their proposal was from a learning point of view. It also provided them with instant feedback on the use of language and teaching techniques from the course instructors and the rest of the pre-service teachers. Four micro-teaching sessions were devoted solely to rehearsing the complete teaching sequence. During the debriefing session after the storytelling, the 68 pre-service teachers were asked to respond to a questionnaire of Likert-type items and to the open question: What are your perceptions of the subject Teaching EFL and Children’s Literature? In the present study, we carried out descriptive analysis of pre-service teachers’ perceptions of the different methodologies applied in the course in relation to the preservice teachers’ own learning. The answers to the questionnaire of Likert-type items were analysed using SPSS V.24 (refer to Template Simulation Likert Questionnaire).

4.3 Results and Discussion The quantitative study of pre-service teachers’ perceptions yielded the following results. In the exploratory study of the instrument dimensionality, we used CATPCA as an alternative to conventional ANOVA and 4 dimensions were identified. Dimension 1: Teamwork cooperation. Pre-service teachers’ overall perceptions about the teamwork indicated that most of them were satisfied with their interaction and participation during the simulation. Furthermore, most felt self-confident with their interaction, which implies that

56

4 Case Studies

language was not perceived as a barrier to successful communication. Most preservice teachers also reported that they had assimilated how to design and lead activities to develop speaking skills, that they had learnt about the effectiveness of games in the ESL classroom, and that they assumed that they could apply them in the future. Dimension 2: Engagement. Pre-service teachers reported that they were engaged during the simulation. This activity was communicatively dynamic and allowed them to exchange their opinions on the different issues. They reported that they would like to participate in more simulations in other subjects. Dimension 3: Metacognitive development. As regards language skills, the pre-service teachers realised that they had become more aware of the development of listening skills. We inferred this finding from the high degree of exposure to the oral language during the lessons, including microteaching sessions. The vast majority considered the simulation realistic, and they realised that the negotiation dynamics made them change their viewpoints. Most pre-service teachers agreed on the overall satisfaction with the simulation and its value for expanding specific vocabulary. Most pre-service teachers found that they could manage a class in the target language. The development of speaking skills and classroom management were the two most highly valued variables. Pre-service teachers highly valued the benefits of including storytelling in ESL lessons by scaffolding content to aid learning. Only a minority seemed to have some insecurities when planning a story-based lesson. As regards teaching strategies, most pre-service teachers found that they had ample reading practice and had learnt how to develop reading skills whilst they developed storytelling techniques during the course. Dimension 4: Technical considerations. Most pre-service teachers felt they could cope with the problems presented despite the time restrictions. This finding implies that the insufficient time to carry out the negotiation was not because of difficulties with the simulation or with language but rather with fully understanding the roles. This time-related aspect should be improved in subsequent simulations because certain students might require more time to assimilate their roles and responsibilities and to plan their strategies for the negotiations. Following this analysis, a correlation study was carried out to identify relationships amongst dimensions. Dispersion graphs (Fig. 4.3) show only the significant correlations on students’ dimensions (SD1 with SD4 and SD2 with SD3). Interesting conclusions may be drawn by analysing the correlation between SD2 and SD3. The results indicate that pre-service teachers highly valued simulation in EFL teacher training. During negotiations, they did not necessarily prioritise their responsibilities in the negotiation and their personal goals. There was some dispersion in their perceptions, probably associated with the interference of their personal interests (i.e. their roles) with the group goals. Nonetheless, the pre-service teachers

4.3 Results and Discussion

57

Fig. 4.3 Significant correlations

showed their flexibility to change their points of view to seek a better solution to the problems presented in the simulation. The vast majority agreed that they felt highly motivated during the simulation and would like to participate in more simulations in different subjects. Most pre-service teachers found the simulation relevant to their specialisation and were satisfied with the subject because it provided opportunities for practising the language and teaching techniques through the micro-teaching sessions and provided immediate feedback prior to teaching the model lesson with children. As for the correlations between SD1 and SD4, most pre-service teachers did not encounter major difficulties with the simulation but were critical about the time allotted. We believe that this issue was not due to the simulation itself but rather the responsibilities associated with the roles. Again, most pre-service teachers agreed on the benefits of this proposal for the teaching of EFL didactics because language skills were applied in a meaningful way in a classroom-based approach. The results show that the pre-service teachers found the simulations useful as an introduction to real-life educational contexts. They were able to identify their own strengths and weaknesses during the course. They were able to assess their own learning processes both linguistically and in relation to the teaching competencies that were presented and implemented through the combination of different methods (i.e. simulation and micro-teaching) used in the subject. The pre-service teachers internalised the theory they learnt in class to support their ideas during the simulation interaction. They developed solutions to some of the educational problems that arose. As for the pre-service teachers’ realisation of their own progress and learning, they were satisfied with the use of simulations to develop fluency in English and vocabulary acquisition.

58

4 Case Studies

4.3.1 Case Study 3—Critical Thinking Through Simulation The present case study explored using simulation to discuss, negotiate and arrive at a decision over an educational issue: the use of WiFi in schools through the simulation Masterminders’ School. The participants [N = 23] were pre-service teachers in 3rd year at university. They accredited a B1 + and above in English. These students were expected to conduct some research outside the classroom flipped classroom approach (watching videos or reading texts on the specific topic -the use of WiFi in schools, its benefits and dangers). In this way, class time was saved for the scenario analysis and the simulation action and debriefing. A Likert-scale questionnaire of students’ perceptions about the simulation and its phases, teamwork, their own participation and learning was used after the simulation as a value-oriented instrument. The answers to the questionnaire of Likert-type items were analysed using SPSS V.24. The quantitative study yielded the following results. Again, in the exploratory study of the instrument dimensionality, we used CATPCA as an alternative to conventional ANOVA and 2 dimensions were identified. As for the last open question, a qualitative study of the answers was carried out to complement the quantitative study.

4.4 Results and Discussion The analysis identified 2 dimensions: • simulation phases. • critical thinking. Dimension 1: simulation phases. Regarding the briefing phase, pre-service teachers manifested a certain relief as they found they could cope with the simulation topic. They had watched a number of videos and reading about the dangers of electromagnetic radiation during that week as part of the course content. Most of the pre-service teachers broadened their range of language-related skills. Some participants stressed the benefits of the freedom of working with reading texts which served as a springboard to introduce the simulation later. I liked learning about a topic in this way. I didn’t know what a simulation consisted of and in my team we did not have problems to understand the simulation, I think because we had to learn about wi-fi pros and cons in advance. (L11). I did not like the topic but I liked the way we prepared it. It was not difficult to do the simulation as I learned about radiation through the documentaries and articles. (L19).

During the action, pre-service teachers felt challenged to decide on the benefits of a leading project at school and the dangers technology may bring about.

4.4 Results and Discussion

59

It was a great idea to make us decide on something related to our professional career. We had to be creative to deal with the positive and negative aspects and try to solve the problem. (L4). We designed a complete plan to adapt the school, save the project and protect children. It was intense but I liked it! (L15).

The debriefing phase provided reflective learning and self-awareness of learning behaviours. Most teacher trainees considered the experience to be fruitful, as they found themselves capable of maintaining meaningful interactions with their peers and reaching agreements. However, only a few pre-service teachers acknowledged they lacked specific vocabulary and that they should have devoted more time to learn about the topic. For the next simulation, I will learn more vocabulary. I did not prepare the topic with enough anticipation and could not speak well (L2). I am rather slow at learning English and I found this difficult. I think simulations can help me learn more English and specific topics. (L17).

Dimension 2: critical thinking. Pre-service teachers’ reflections suggested that by doing the simulation, they gained more comprehensive insights into the educational context. Not only did they learn about a specific topic, but they had to fully understand the role and find alternative solutions. Both critical thinking dimensions, logical reasoning (conceptualization and justification of viewpoints) and creative reasoning (transformation of ideas) were applied in the treatment of the problems (Daniel et.al. 1). In fact, preservice teachers searched for meaningful relations when dealing with the scenario. They drew on their experience as practice teachers in some schools to propose some solutions in relation to the institutional project and infrastructure. I have studied architecture for two years so I understand about building design. I first made a list of health problems and their possible causes. I wanted to find connections between them. Then I listed the school’s educational plan. I had to imagine the school structure in this case to provide some solutions, though. I had in mind my last practice school. (L10). I realised that my teammates had similar visions about the problem. We all agreed on keeping the the children safe and we could find solutions by investing money on adapting the building and carefully plan the amount of time children were exposed to wifi. (L11).

Responsible thinking (Daniel et al. 1) was also evidenced through the pre-service teachers’ testimonies. I understand the need for innovation but since there are health problems, we should identify the real causes. (L5). Everybody in our team assumed their role. We found we lacked information about this same situation in others schools, so in our proposal, we suggested a deeper research on other neighbouring schools. (L6). We phoned one of our mates’ relatives who is a radiation engineer at the Polytechnic University to learn about the causes and possible solutions to protect the children and school staff. It was really helpful to better understand the problem. (L19).

60

4 Case Studies

Reflection about their own learning also prompted meta-cognitive thinking. Preservice teachers’ adaptation to the simulation, the challenges it proposed, and their emotional setbacks also produced interesting results. Some pre-service teachers acknowledged they found it hard to participate in the simulation. It was the first time they had to take up a responsibility within a specific simulation framework. I got anxious even before the simulation took place. I watched videos and read about the topic but didn’t know what to expect from the simulation and the responsibility I would have. Probably, I felt unsure because I knew this activity counted as a speaking exam. (L2). I learned by listening to others. I realised that some of my classmates had better ideas than me. I think I did not understand the importance of the institutional project until later during the simulation. I only wanted to ban wifi to protect children. (L18).

We can conclude that learning to analyse problems and find solutions cooperatively in a critical manner is not an easy task. The simulation in its different phases helped pre-service teachers manage content knowledge and diversity of opinions for collective enrichment; and understand that their professional experience in practice schools was necessary to attain a significant solution.

Reference Daniel, M. F., Lafortune, L., Pallascio, R., Splitter, L., Slade, C., & De La Garza, T. (2005). Modeling the development process of dialogical critical thinking in pupils aged 10 to 12 years. Communication Education, 54(4), 334–354.

Chapter 5

Conclusions

This book attempts to serve as a springboard of ideas about simulations in teacher training and language learning, amongst other applications within social studies. Simulations as a learning strategy help participants learn about the world. Coinciding with Crookall and Oxford (1990), the reasons for using simulation may differ from area to area. There is a common assertion that simulation enables education practitioners and participants to achieve certain objectives that other methodologies or techniques cannot. In education and teacher training, as this is the case of the present book, simulation encompasses a significant, fun and motivating learning experience. Simulation as treated in this book is in line more with the learning process mirroring the real world rather than the traditional lessons. Some of the educational advantages are the greater insights of specific topics and critical analysis of content. In addition, throughout this book I have tried to reconceptualise simulation drawing special attention to Thiagarajan’s categorization into high-fidelity simulations and low-fidelity simulations. To ease understanding, we could speak of ‘playing a game’ or ‘playing a role, but we do not say ‘play a simulation’. It is true that features of a simulation can be found in role-play or game, to mention some. However, simulation is such a broad concept that includes role-play, game and others. Simulation is representational of a reality and there is no error cost. Simulation is open ended and participants have profiles with specific responsibilities, have freedom to discuss, negotiate and decide. The finalization of a simulation is uncertain, then. There is no script, no winner or loser. Role-play and game, in turn, are more limited, being closed-ended, they are not as much representational of reality as high-fidelity simulation and have high error cost consequences, thus, these are considered as part of low-fidelity simulations instead (Thiagarajan 2003). In this book, I have attempted to illustrate simulation as a powerful pedagogical strategy from the point of view of the realities they depict. Worry-free practice is so needed in almost every area of education. Bringing students the possibility of performing in a true-to-life situation through simulation makes their learning

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 M. L. Angelini, Learning Through Simulations, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65540-2_5

61

62

5 Conclusions

more significant and memorable. The simulations presented in Chap. 2 provide realistic learning environments in which participants can gain knowledge of the subject matter, develop their abilities to conduct research, debate and negotiate, and acquire specific vocabulary. These challenging opportunities to learn are designed to support participants’ development of critical thinking abilities and social and professional skills. As explained in Chap. 3, professional development goes hand in hand with the opportunity to make teaching practices more flexible. Shared teaching and learning observations should be at the heart of any educational programme. This way, a real community of teaching and learning is allowed to form, gathering the synergies provided by collaborations with one other. I present the case studies in Chap. 4 to, in some way, evidence the effectiveness of simulations in the classroom from the point of view of the learning process. Preservice teachers found simulation as a learning opportunity, being challenged by each scenario to apply their knowledge, reflect, and share viewpoints to solve the problems presented. Pre-service teachers were also challenged by language demands as they were expected to use English as accurately as possible. Finally, I hope this book meets your expectations and encourages you to introduce simulations in the classroom.

References Crookall, D., & Oxford, R. L. (1990). Simulation, gaming, and language learning. New York: Newbury House Publishers. Thiagarajan, S. (2003). Design your own games and activities: Thiagi’s templates for performance improvement. CA: Pfeiffer.