Overall Findings
Finding #1: Students lack exposure to information on EIL.
My first overall finding, and one that has been consistent since the beginning of the action research project, is that the amount of exposure students had to information regarding EIL prior to this project was significantly limited. This finding is supported by data from activities, interviews, and questionnaires collected throughout all three phases. The pattern can be clearly seen above through the comparison of the data from the Post-Intervention Questionnaires.
This finding is significant because it shows educators and researchers that students are not being made aware of where, why, or how English is being used globally. The primary purpose of this study was to expose students to a wide variety of information on EIL so that they could develop a comprehensive knowledge base relevant to the world we live in. The first phase began with basic information about English, such as the fact that English is in the top five most widely spoken languages in the world. The students were able to accept this type of information and create a foundation from it. As the phases continued, information progressed until it transitioned into detailed facts that were meant to elicit students’ interests and engage them in critical thinking.
The data from the 5 Facts Worksheets in phase two shows us that the piece of information that 100% of the students were able to recall was the fact that if you are not exposed to English before the age of six, it is highly unlikely that you will acquire a native-speaker accent. I attribute the students' recollection of this fact because it spurred a lengthy class discussion. The other facts that a substantial amount of students were able to remember were: English is spread through technology, 80% of English speakers are non-native, and 70 countries use English for official purposes.
While the explicit teaching of EIL information was useful, the second phase provided the students with practical information through inductive learning. The Accent Identification Activity gave the students the opportunity to recognize the comprehensibility of various accented individuals speaking English, not only native-speakers. One student wrote on her phase 2 Post-Intervention Questionnaire, “The information that was new to me was that I could not recognize any speaker’s accent but I could understand them all. I didn’t know that.” Another student supported this statement when he answered, “I know people from different countries have accents, but I thought I could identify them.”
Finally, the third phase, where the information was new or somewhat new to 90% of the students, focused on exposing students to different regional accents throughout the United States. Groups of students presented their assigned regional accent to the class and taught them about the characteristics and stereotypes as well as provided the class with their own reflections on the accent. Although the students had referenced being exposed to English through the media, they had not been privy to the variety of accents that the class discussed during this phase. For many of the groups, they did not even know what part of the United States their regional accent was from. One student wrote on his Post-Intervention Questionnaire, “It was completely new for me to hear the difference between the accents.” Another student commented, “I have always thought I sound funny with my accent, but now I know there are many strange American accents that sound funny too.”
This finding is significant because it shows educators and researchers that students are not being made aware of where, why, or how English is being used globally. The primary purpose of this study was to expose students to a wide variety of information on EIL so that they could develop a comprehensive knowledge base relevant to the world we live in. The first phase began with basic information about English, such as the fact that English is in the top five most widely spoken languages in the world. The students were able to accept this type of information and create a foundation from it. As the phases continued, information progressed until it transitioned into detailed facts that were meant to elicit students’ interests and engage them in critical thinking.
The data from the 5 Facts Worksheets in phase two shows us that the piece of information that 100% of the students were able to recall was the fact that if you are not exposed to English before the age of six, it is highly unlikely that you will acquire a native-speaker accent. I attribute the students' recollection of this fact because it spurred a lengthy class discussion. The other facts that a substantial amount of students were able to remember were: English is spread through technology, 80% of English speakers are non-native, and 70 countries use English for official purposes.
While the explicit teaching of EIL information was useful, the second phase provided the students with practical information through inductive learning. The Accent Identification Activity gave the students the opportunity to recognize the comprehensibility of various accented individuals speaking English, not only native-speakers. One student wrote on her phase 2 Post-Intervention Questionnaire, “The information that was new to me was that I could not recognize any speaker’s accent but I could understand them all. I didn’t know that.” Another student supported this statement when he answered, “I know people from different countries have accents, but I thought I could identify them.”
Finally, the third phase, where the information was new or somewhat new to 90% of the students, focused on exposing students to different regional accents throughout the United States. Groups of students presented their assigned regional accent to the class and taught them about the characteristics and stereotypes as well as provided the class with their own reflections on the accent. Although the students had referenced being exposed to English through the media, they had not been privy to the variety of accents that the class discussed during this phase. For many of the groups, they did not even know what part of the United States their regional accent was from. One student wrote on his Post-Intervention Questionnaire, “It was completely new for me to hear the difference between the accents.” Another student commented, “I have always thought I sound funny with my accent, but now I know there are many strange American accents that sound funny too.”
Finding #2: The implementation of a comprehensive and interactive EIL framework increases student confidence levels and strengthens feelings of membership.
My second significant finding within my action research project was that the implementation of a comprehensive and interactive EIL framework increases students’ confidence in their own accents and strengthens students’ feelings of membership within the international English speaking community. This finding was first seen in phase one when 80% of the students stated that their confidence levels had been somewhat or completely increased and 90% of the students reported that their feelings of membership had been somewhat or completely strengthened. The first phase presented students with a wide-range factual information on EIL. The two pieces of information that students continued to reference throughout the entirety of the project were: 80% of English speakers are non-native and if you are exposed to English after the age of six it is unlikely that you will be able to acquire a native-accent. An example of this is a student's response from the first set of Post-Intervention Questionnaires when she stated, "I now feel more confident with my accent because I know that I am in the 80% of English speakers in the world." Additionally, another student wrote, "I only started learning English a few years ago. So maybe I will keep my accent. Before I try to lose it, but because I cannot I am okay with it now." While these students identified specific reasons as to why their confidence levels increased, one student expressed a general reason for her strengthened feelings of membership when she wrote, "I now consider myself to be an English speaker because I can communicate in English."
Similarly to the data identified in phase one, the second phase produced strong corollary data as 90% of the students stated that their confidence levels had been somewhat or completely increased and 85% of the students answered that based on the information they had been given, their feelings of membership had been somewhat or completely strengthened. This second phase began with EIL information presented in a global framework. The students made connections with the material by identifying countries throughout the world where they thought English was spoken for official or special purposes. This activity implicitly encouraged students to think about their own experiences as well as the information provided to them during the first phase. After the world maps activity, the students were given a World Englishes Worksheet and asked to write down all the World Englishes that they could think of. This gave them the opportunity to work collaboratively with a partner which increased their understanding of others' opinions on what World English means and what are valid examples of that phrase. The most significant portion of phase two was the Accent Identification Activity, where along with my students, I realized the students' collective ability to distinguish native-speakers from non-native speakers and also their ability to understand the majority of speakers. This upheld the belief that it is intelligibility, rather than native-pronunciation, that is the most important. Many students expressed surprise that they were able to understand many of the speakers, yet they were not able to identify where they were from. In one interview, a student commented, "It was really nice to listen to many people with accents and try to guess. I could understand many of the speakers and it didn’t matter where they were from. It was really interesting."
The third phase produced less significant results than the first two. 85% of the students stated that their confidence had been increased by the information in this phase, however only 65% answered that their feelings of membership had been strengthened. From the qualitative data collected on the Post-Intervention Questionnaire, I found many students responding with humor and interest, "I did not know there were so many American accents and that they could sound so strange" said one student. Another student wrote, "I thought I sounded silly with my accent, but now I now that there are a lot of crazy native-accents too!" This was incredibly encouraging because it showed that my third phase had succeeded in doing what it intended to do, expose students to new native-accents and have them reassess their definition of what an American accent is. I believe this broadened their minds, and it showed in the results gained from the students redefinition of the American accent. When the students changed their definitions from ones with subjective, descriptive adjectives such as "clear" and "cool" I knew that the presentations had had the intended effect.
Similarly to the data identified in phase one, the second phase produced strong corollary data as 90% of the students stated that their confidence levels had been somewhat or completely increased and 85% of the students answered that based on the information they had been given, their feelings of membership had been somewhat or completely strengthened. This second phase began with EIL information presented in a global framework. The students made connections with the material by identifying countries throughout the world where they thought English was spoken for official or special purposes. This activity implicitly encouraged students to think about their own experiences as well as the information provided to them during the first phase. After the world maps activity, the students were given a World Englishes Worksheet and asked to write down all the World Englishes that they could think of. This gave them the opportunity to work collaboratively with a partner which increased their understanding of others' opinions on what World English means and what are valid examples of that phrase. The most significant portion of phase two was the Accent Identification Activity, where along with my students, I realized the students' collective ability to distinguish native-speakers from non-native speakers and also their ability to understand the majority of speakers. This upheld the belief that it is intelligibility, rather than native-pronunciation, that is the most important. Many students expressed surprise that they were able to understand many of the speakers, yet they were not able to identify where they were from. In one interview, a student commented, "It was really nice to listen to many people with accents and try to guess. I could understand many of the speakers and it didn’t matter where they were from. It was really interesting."
The third phase produced less significant results than the first two. 85% of the students stated that their confidence had been increased by the information in this phase, however only 65% answered that their feelings of membership had been strengthened. From the qualitative data collected on the Post-Intervention Questionnaire, I found many students responding with humor and interest, "I did not know there were so many American accents and that they could sound so strange" said one student. Another student wrote, "I thought I sounded silly with my accent, but now I now that there are a lot of crazy native-accents too!" This was incredibly encouraging because it showed that my third phase had succeeded in doing what it intended to do, expose students to new native-accents and have them reassess their definition of what an American accent is. I believe this broadened their minds, and it showed in the results gained from the students redefinition of the American accent. When the students changed their definitions from ones with subjective, descriptive adjectives such as "clear" and "cool" I knew that the presentations had had the intended effect.
Finding #3: Raised confidence levels and strengthened feelings of membership are not dependent on altered pronunciation goals.
The third finding from my action research project was that my original hypothesis, that if I was able to change students' pronunciation goals I would be able to successfully increase their confidence levels as well as their feelings of membership. Immediately, this hypothesis was proved wrong. In fact, raised confidence levels and strengthened feelings of membership are not dependent on altered pronunciation goals. The results from the Post-Intervention Questionnaires from phase one showed me that although my students confidence levels were increased (80%) and their feelings of membership were strengthened (90%), only 35% of my students claimed that their pronunciation goals had been altered. Through informal observations, I overheard students stating that the native-speaker pronunciation was "cool" and they referenced pop stars and movie stars for examples. This showed me that although students still wanted to sound like a native-speaker, their confidence was still able to be increased and their feelings of membership as well. There was no correlation between pronunciation goals and confidence levels or feelings of membership within the first phase.
The second phase proved to be different, as the amount of students who changed their pronunciation goals changed from 35% in the first phase to 75% in the second phase. This was a significant change, and it was largely in part to the Accent Identification Activity where the students had to try to identify where the speaker was from and rate the speaker on his or her intelligibility. While most of the students were able to distinguish between a native-speaker and a non-native speaker, the majority of them rated the speakers are intelligible overall. Paired with the facts presented to the students in phase one, this caused a significant change in pronunciation goals. During an interview a student stated, "When you are speaking with an accent, you are being you." This sentiment was echoed by students' responses where 90% of the stated that they had increased confidence levels and 85% said their feelings of membership were strengthened. Although there may have been a connection, this data is more reflective of how beneficial an interactive, practical application of EIL is and does not necessary showcase the corollary relationship between pronunciation goals and confidence or membership levels.
The third phase showed a mediocre connection between the change in pronunciation goals and feelings of membership and confidence levels. 45% of the students stated that their pronunciation goals were changed by the third phase, which focused on the definition, exposure, and reassessment of the American accent. Furthermore, 85% of the students said there confidence levels were increased and 65% stated that their feelings of membership had become stronger. Like the first phase, this phase does not show any connection between pronunciation goals and confidence and membership. Although I was unable to interview any students after this phase due to a lack of students volunteering, this leads me to believe that although one's confidence can be increased and feelings of membership can be strengthened, these factors are not dependent on changed pronunciation goals. Rather, these changes are a result of the implementation an EIL framework.
The second phase proved to be different, as the amount of students who changed their pronunciation goals changed from 35% in the first phase to 75% in the second phase. This was a significant change, and it was largely in part to the Accent Identification Activity where the students had to try to identify where the speaker was from and rate the speaker on his or her intelligibility. While most of the students were able to distinguish between a native-speaker and a non-native speaker, the majority of them rated the speakers are intelligible overall. Paired with the facts presented to the students in phase one, this caused a significant change in pronunciation goals. During an interview a student stated, "When you are speaking with an accent, you are being you." This sentiment was echoed by students' responses where 90% of the stated that they had increased confidence levels and 85% said their feelings of membership were strengthened. Although there may have been a connection, this data is more reflective of how beneficial an interactive, practical application of EIL is and does not necessary showcase the corollary relationship between pronunciation goals and confidence or membership levels.
The third phase showed a mediocre connection between the change in pronunciation goals and feelings of membership and confidence levels. 45% of the students stated that their pronunciation goals were changed by the third phase, which focused on the definition, exposure, and reassessment of the American accent. Furthermore, 85% of the students said there confidence levels were increased and 65% stated that their feelings of membership had become stronger. Like the first phase, this phase does not show any connection between pronunciation goals and confidence and membership. Although I was unable to interview any students after this phase due to a lack of students volunteering, this leads me to believe that although one's confidence can be increased and feelings of membership can be strengthened, these factors are not dependent on changed pronunciation goals. Rather, these changes are a result of the implementation an EIL framework.