Enhancing Fluency through Creative Practice in the EFL Classroom: Collaborative Course Planning in the International Blogosphere (Part 1)

posted by Jürgen Kurtz, Justus Liebig University (JLU) Giessen, Germany

Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, we have been forced to create and deliver virtual, online-only courses in our pre-service EFL teacher education program at JLU Giessen. Most of my colleagues in the English Department decided to adopt a synchronous approach to course delivery, using videoconfercing platforms or video chats to promote synchronous online learning. I chose to explore a different approach – one that seeks to promote learning, understanding and professional growth through asynchronous written online interaction in a research-informed, experience-based, task-driven, and inquiry-oriented instructional enironment. So, rather than talking to and interacting with students live and in-person in a computer-mediated setting, I made weekly reflective reading, viewing, and writing assignments available through the university’s learning management systems (StudIP, ILIAS). I also posted specific discussion forum prompts, a) to enhance the exchange of personal knowledge and experience between participants, and b) to provide professional support, expertise, and personal encouragment when needed. The course concept as a whole places particular emphasis on the gradual transformation of participants’ developing EFL teacher identities and their professional expertise, rather than on the mere transmission of teaching knowledge and skills in its traditional sense (lecturing).

In this year’s summer term (which has come to an end recently) I conducted the following four courses for advanced TEFL students in the asychnronous, written format outlined above:

• Communicative Language Teaching – The State of the Art
• Experience-based Learning in Projects
• Evaluating and Producing EFL Textbook Units
• Fostering Language and Culture Education in the EFL Classroom

In view of the largely positive student evaluation of these four courses, I would like to pursue this teaching project a little further; this time, however, inviting everyone interested to participate in a global professional exchange project on this blog. Everyone (scholars, practitioners, student teachers, etc.) sincerely interested in contributing to the development of the following asynchronous TEFL course (work in progress, the course will be held in the next winter term in Germany; extending from Nov 1, 2020 to Feb 17, 2021) is kindly invited and welcome to participate:

Enhancing Fluency through Creative Practice in the EFL Classroom

Course Description
Current research indicates that fluency is a neglected component of instruction and learning in the EFL classroom. This raises a number of issues and questions: (a) what does fluency mean, and what does it mean to EFL teachers and learners? (b) how familiar are teachers with research findings in foreign language fluency? (c) how confident are teachers in promoting fluency in class? (d) how do they actually go about promoting fluency in the classroom? (e) what practices and formats of interaction are most likely to contribute to fluency development in the EFL classroom? In this course, participants will gain a detailed understanding of fluency and systematic fluency development in various EFL classroom settings. Special emphasis will be given to fostering productive and receptive oral fluency through creative practice and improvisation at the secondary school level.

Due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, this course will be conducted in an asynchronous, computer-mediated virtual format only.  Since asynchronous online courses are not conducted live and in-person, participants are not required to be logged in at the same time as everyone else, for instance, to attend virtual lectures or participate in video conferences and chat sessions. Instead, the instructor will distribute coursework through a virtual course and learning management system (usually at the beginning of each week). Participants can then complete the provided writing assignments and reflection tasks at their own paces, adhering to the deadlines requested by the instructor (usually at the end of each week). This means that they can log on whenever they want, completing as little or as much coursework as they would like during each weekly block of learning time. The workload (in terms of active course participation, library work, preparation and thorough reflection  of each session) will be comparable to that of a regular face-to-face course.

Prerequisites
Successful completion of introductory module TEFL 1 (introductory lecture, tutorial, introductory course on one particular aspect of learning and teaching in the EFL classroom) and TEFL 2 (intermediate-level course on a different aspect of learning and teaching English as a foreign language, completed internship)

Credits
Ungraded: regular attendance, active participation in virtual discussion forum, weekly written reflection on learning progress in personal learning journal
Graded: in addition to the above, a written exam

Session #1

Interested? Excellent. Please stay tuned …

 

 

 

TEFLhybrid@JLU: Learning to Teach English in the Digital Age

posted by Jürgen Kurtz, Justus Liebig University (JLU) Giessen, Germany

TEFLhybrid@JLU (TEFL = Teaching English as a Foreign Language; JLU = Justus Liebig University) is a newly developed course initiative which seeks to explore the potential of hybrid learning within the pre-service teacher education program at Giessen University. Broadly speaking, a hybrid format of course delivery combines face-to-face instruction with collaborative, increasingly self-regulated, online learning in virtual space to transform and enhance students’ learning experience (cf. Zibelius 2015). More specifically, hybrid learning refers to “a mixture of instructional modalities (i.e. onsite, web-based and self-paced learning), delivery media (e.g. the Internet, classroom sessions, web-based courses, CD-ROMs, video, books, or PowerPoint slides), instructional methods (i.e. face-to-face or technology-based sessions), and web-based technologies, both synchronous and asynchronous (e.g. chat rooms, wikis, virtual classrooms, conferencing tools, blogs, textbooks or online courses). The choice of a blend is usually determined by several factors: the nature of the course content and learning goals, student characteristics and learning preferences, teacher’s experience and teaching style, or online resources” (Klimova & Kacetl 2014: 478). At Giessen University, hybrid learning courses focus on the following nine dimensions of hybridity in learning and instruction:

In accordance with current research on technology-enhanced pre-service teacher education (cf. Benitt, Schmidt & Legutke (2019: 9), TEFLhybrid@JLU aims to reflect “the complex and multifaceted relationship between students, teachers, subject matter, and teaching and learning methods and technologies. It emphasizes the importance of the complexities of interactions between technological (e.g., using a computer program to teach pronunciation), content (English phonetics), and pedagogical knowledge (approaches and methods to teach pronunciation) in relation to specific teaching contexts (e.g., elementary school EFL learners in their first year learning the language).”

In short, TEFLhybrid courses @JLU seek to “not only build bridges between theory and practice but also, simultaneously, promote the growth of technological pedagogical content knowledge as an integrated dimension of language teacher education, taking into consideration dimensions of language, culture, and teacher self” (Benitt, Schmidt & Legutke 2019: 20). This graphic summarizes the underlying pedagogical concept (click to enlarge):

Developing language teachers’ digital competencies (Benitt, Schmidt & Legutke 2019) © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Typically, a TEFLhybrid course @JLU comprises four to six introductory classroom sessions (face-to-face), followed by six to seven weeks of student-regulated online learning (increasingly autonomous project work in small groups), and three to four final in-class sessions to give all participants the opportunity to present their project work. Throughout a hybrid course, specially trained student learning advisors (TEFLhybrid learning advisors) offer assistance both in technological and language pedagogical matters (weekly online as well as face-to-face office hours). Within this format, all interaction takes place in the English language (English Medium of Instruction Context).

“Current research in foreign language teacher education clearly indicates that keeping a learning log has a lot of potential for personal and professional development – for learners, teachers and researchers. […] The use of learning logs as reflective narratives has become an important instrument in teacher development research […] as they provide valuable insights into areas of interest that are very difficult to access otherwise” (Benitt 2015: 109). Thus, all students participating in a TEFLhybrid course are requested to keep weekly learning logs. The logs are usually peer reviewed; more complex questions arising in this process are discussed in depth with the course instructor.

In general, the TEFLhybrid team (see image above) typically starts planning courses six months before they are offered, employing pen and paper as well as digital materials, resources, and tools (here, in particular, the ILIAS learning management system). The next two slides are intended to illustrate the complexity (and hybridity) of the planning process (click to enlarge):

In April 2019, we launched the pilot course (“Designing an EFL Textbook Unit”), followed by two TEFLhybrid courses in Oktober 2019 (“Promoting Vocabulary Learning in Theme-based EFL Sequences”; “Fostering Oral Communication Skills through Task-supported Language Learning”). In April 2020, we are going to offer a total of four hybrid learning TEFL courses (“Developing Multisensory Material for Primary School”; “Mentoring Learners in Writing Activities”; “Fostering Language and Culture Education in the EFL Classroom”; “Evaluating and Producing EFL Textbook Units”).

Our research interest centers around the project’s possibilities and limitations as perceived by all stakeholders. A mixed-methods approach is taken by juxtaposing data emerging from questionnaires as well as from the data generated on the online platform (students’ learning logs). For further information, please visit our brand-new TEFLhybrid-Website @JLU.

Stay tuned for a first analysis of student evaluations of the pilot course …

References

Benitt, Nora (2015). Becoming a (better) language teacher. Classroom action research and teacher learning. Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto (Giessener Beiträge zur Fremdsprachendidaktik / Giessen Contributions to Foreign Language Pedagogy).

Benitt N., Schmidt Torben, Legutke Michael K. (2019). “Teacher Learning and Technology-Enhanced Teacher Education”. In: Gao X. (ed.). Second Handbook of English Language Teaching. Springer International Handbooks of Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58542-0_58-1.

Klimova, Blanka Frydrychova; Kacetl, Jaroslav (2015). “Hybrid Learning and its current role in the teaching of foreign languages”. In: Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 182, 477–481.

Zibelius, Marja (2015). Cooperative learning in virtual space. Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto (Giessener Beiträge zur Fremdsprachendidaktik).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Neoliberalism and Global Citizenship Education

posted by Jürgen Kurtz, Justus Liebig University (JLU) Giessen, Germany

The four-day international Munich conference on global citizenship education and (foreign) language learning in the digital age ended today (cf. my previous post). In retrospect, it was well worth attending: very professionally organized, brilliant speakers, and inspiring, thought-provoking plenaries and talks.

Most talks and presentations I went to addressed contemporary issues and emerging challenges related to global citizenship education and language learning from a humanistic (or ‘philanthropic’) perspective. A humanistic concept of global citizenship is rooted in the supposition that there is a certain commonality among us, as we are all human, and that the notion of global citizenship education transcends the geopolitical borders of the nation-state, especially or even more so perhaps in the age of the internet, i.e. in virtual space. In the context of my talk on neoliberalism in (foreign) language education in Germany, I referred to this conceptualization as a romanticized, early 21st century interpretation of enlightenment. How appropriate, how realistic is this view?

As I see it, looking at global citizenship education in this way largely disregards that (foreign) language education in schools – and this is the context I wish to focus on here– is no longer seen in its educational context only. From the late twentieth century onwards, (foreign) language education has been coopted into other, political and socio-economic agendas and it is now conceived of by those who hold and control the political and economic power as a strategic instrument primarily (as well as a valuable commodity), which is declared indispensable for responding to (or even overcoming) real or imagined threats. The underlying narrative centers on the idea that educational ‘failure’ (whatever is meant by that und whoever claims the authority to define it) is detrimental to a country’s economic strength, competitiveness, wealth, and ‘well-being’. All this has culminated in the paradoxical, post-PISA logic of regulated deregulation (through standards-based instruction, testing of competencies and skills, monitoring measures, etc.).

In consequence, (foreign) language teachers are no longer viewed as (foreign) language educators primarly, but as political agents enacting neoliberal educational policies (which are, in essence, informed by a radical market orientation). I think it is high time to problematize how the humanistic (and as such utopian, idealistic, all too academic) approach to global citizenship is increasingly being turned into and misused as neoliberal propaganda. What about the ethics and moral implications of a neoliberal, radically market-driven, largely utilitarian approach to global citizenship education? In view of current, neoliberal regimes of educational governance world-wide and their reductive conceptualization and instrumentaliziation of education as performance training for international competitiveness and employability (the ‘can do’-perspective), how realistic is it to assume that (foreign) language learning in schools can be more than or different from producing useful multilinguals (in their role as consumers, employees, etc.) for the global economy? Language-sensitive global citizenship education, is this an educational (pedagogical) or a capitalist imperative (i.e. a global business model)?

 

 

 

Educating the Global Citizen: International Perspectives on Foreign Language Teaching in the Digital Age

posted by Jürgen Kurtz, Justus Liebig University (JLU) Giessen, Germany

Upcoming, large scale international conference at Ludwigs-Maximilians- Universität (LMU) Munich, Germany in March 2019:

Scope of the conference:

In times of rapid and unprecedented global sociocultural change, urgent calls are being made for salient educational responses to current global and digital challenges. Such calls are being met in (re)formulations of global (citizenship) education, sustainability education, and service learning, which endeavor to promote a democratic and human rights culture in schools and the larger community.

Foreign language education is increasingly responding to these developments by updating and transforming FL pedagogies. In support of this nascent trajectory, this conference will engage with the epistemological and critical foundations of educating future global citizens across varied contexts. Accordingly, its aim is to explore citizenship and sustainability education from a wide range of perspectives, also interdisciplinary in scope, as regards developing theories, research and practice in FL education. The conference will also focus on how global education performs on a local level as well as in increasingly interconnected environments, and how digital settings, practices and methodologies are consequently implicated.

Confirmed Keynote Speakers (in alphabetical order):

Michael Byram, Durham University, UK & Université de Luxembourg, Lux.
William Gaudelli, Columbia University, USA
Glynda Hull, University of Berkeley, USA
Liz Jackson, University of Hong Kong, China
Claire Kramsch, University of Berkeley, USA
Greg Misiaszek, Beijing Normal University, China
Hugh Starkey, University College London, England

For further information, please click here

My personal contribution (paper presentation) to this event:

Neoliberal Narratives of Threat and the Recalibration of Language Teacher Identity – Fabricating Useful Multilinguals for an Expanding Global Economy?

Over the past twenty years, German governments have implemented a series of neoliberal policies designed to reshape the educational landscape and the character of schooling in this country. The proposed talk problematizes how neoliberal narratives of perceived threat (to economic prosperity, global economic strength and growth in particular) and the post‐PISA logic of regulated deregulation (through competency‐based standards and outcome‐oriented curricular frameworks) are beginning to affect language teachers’ professional status, autonomy and motivation. Based on recent scholarly work on neoliberalism and language education worldwide, particular attention will be given to the following questions:

1) How do EFL teachers in Germany actually perceive and respond to the key ideas of neoliberalism in foreign language education (i.e. performativity, measurability, comparability, competitiveness, accountability, surveillance and compliance)?

2) More specifically, what empirical evidence is currently available indicating how EFL teachers in Germany experience and cope with the potential tensions that (may) arise from ‘fabricating’ useful and employable multilinguals for the international job market vs. cultivating inter‐ and/or transculturally informed, emancipatory and participatory citizenship as envisaged in the academic
discussion?

3) In view of the discrepancies between theorizing intercultural citizenship and developing it under the current neoliberal regime in praxis, what alternatives to viewing EFL teachers as political agents enacting neoliberal political and, more specifically, curricular agendas are conceivable and, perhaps, necessary?

Due to the paucity of empirical research in this area, this talk will raise more questions than it can possibly answer or hope to resolve. Nevertheless, it is of great importance to address the conflicting, and somehow paradoxical conceptualizations and values underlying culture‐sensitive approaches to
learning and teaching in EFL classrooms in Germany (and, perhaps, in other language learning scenarios in other countries) today.

 

 

Evidence for the Bilingual Option: Re-Thinking European Principles in Foreign Language Teaching

by Wolfgang Butzkamm (RWTH Aachen) & Michael Lynch (University of Edinburgh)

In Europe and the western world in general, the monolingual approach has persisted in the guise of the communicative approach—clearly a direct method derivative—until the present day. This paper calls for a drastic revision of a methodology where the learners’ mother tongue is only a stopgap device. It presents different groups of learners who testify to the effectiveness of a bilingual approach. The evidence is in: For beginners, L1 [first language] support is an immediate solution, not a last resort. Detailed proposals are made to improve courses for immigrants with native languages unrelated to conventional European school languages. At the same time, this paper calls for a bringing together of foreign languages teachers and teacher educators to conduct combined research on what works best for foreign language learners. Please click here to read more.

14th BAAL SIG LLT Conference 2018

posted by Jürgen Kurtz, Justus Liebig University (JLU) Giessen, Germany

The 14th BAAL SIG Language Learning and Teaching will come together at the University of Southampton, UK from Thursday 12th July to Friday 13th July 2018. This year’s theme will be: “Language teaching and learning in unstable times, and in changing political landscapes”.

The conference will enable participants to discuss the many challenges offered to traditional language education policy and practice by increasing interconnected globalization and changing conceptions of identity, accompanied by a rise in global migratory flows, resurgent nationalism and social inequality. These challenges have both foreseen and unforeseen consequences for the development and implementation of language education policy, and for teaching, learning and assessment practices.

Confirmed plenary speakers:
Professor Fiona Copland, University of Stirling
Professor Tony Liddicoat, University of Warwick
Dr  John Gray, UCL Institute of Education

For further details, please click here. This is what I would like to discuss:

Standards-based EFL Education in Germany: Toward a checklist approach to instruction and learning?

In Germany and in many other countries around the world, proponents of standards-based education have (somehow) managed to elevate competence-based instruction and the demonstration of knowledge and skills in nationwide performance tests to an educational imperative. Opponents caution against placing too many expectations on standards-based reforms, on measurability, testing, and system monitoring, arguing that conceiving of school education in terms of measurable outcome primarily may eventually have some undesirable backwash effects (e.g. teaching to the test). However, up to now, little empirical research has been conducted to figure out how standards-based reforms affect learning and teaching in EFL classrooms. Against this backdrop, I would like to outline and problematize standards-based instruction and learning in Germany, placing special emphasis on the central findings and implications of a recent interview study conducted with 697 EFL teachers in the federal German state of Hesse.

ACTA 2018 International TESOL Conference: English Language Learning in a Mobile World

posted by Juergen Kurtz, Justus Liebig University (JLU) Giessen, Germany

The next ACTA International TESOL Conference will be held in Adelaide, South Australia from 2 – 5 October, 2018. The main conference theme is ‘English Language Learning in a Mobile World’.

Driving attention to the reality of local and global mobility for TESOL learners and educators, the conference will contribute to the ongoing examination of the theories and practices underpinning the TESOL field, and will project into future directions, whether as policy, pedagogy, materials design, assessment or community involvement.

In the context of increasing mobility through digital technology as well as global unrest and greater recognition of the need for improved outcomes for indigenous students, the conference offers an opportunity for a re-examination of the profile of our English language learners and the implications for TESOL practice.

The six sub-themes or strands are:

1. English language learners in a mobile world
2. English language learning and teaching for local and global participation
3. Embracing digital technologies in English language learning and teaching
4. Assessment from diverse stakeholder perspectives
5. English as a medium of instruction (EMI)
6. Professional standards and teacher identities in a mobile world

Through these themes, the breadth of mobility will be explored, ranging from local and global relocations to communication and intercultural negotiation across borders. With this in mind, the conference will be a space to critically examine ethical and practical challenges for TESOL.

I really look forward to attending this conference, not only because of my gowing interest in researching augmented reality for EFL textboook development and use,  but also because of the special atmosphere of the ACTA TESOL conferences in Australia. For further conference details, please click here.

 

Brian Tomlinson: Materials Development in TESOL – Trends and Issues (TESOLacademic.org)

posted by Juergen Kurtz, Justus Liebig University (JLU) Giessen, Germany

TESOLacademic.org is a knowledge dissemination site which links the work of TESOL scholars to teachers, teacher-trainers, teacher-trainees, decision-makers and other researchers. Edited by Huw Jarvis, it provides a global forum for people to talk about how their published research, or an aspect of it, impacts on language pedagogy. TESOLacademic.org only posts talks about research which have gone through the peer review process and this ‘guarantees’ the quality of the submissions.

In the following video webcast, Brian Tomlinson gives an interview about current trends and issues in TESOL materials development  (click on image to view):

Compare with my nine-part series of posts on the role of the textbook in the EFL classroom if you like (please use search function in the upper right corner of my blog and type ‘role of the textbook’).

The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: New Companion Volume

posted by Juergen Kurtz, Justus Liebig University (JLU) Giessen, Germany

The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), published almost 20 years ago, is currently under revision. In the context of the 38th Annual German Spring Conference for Research on Foreign and Second Language Learning and Teaching, held again at Castle Rauischholzhausen (February 15-17), Giessen University’s most beautiful venue for conferencing, roundabout 20 EFL/GFL/GSL professors from all over Germany will discuss the new CEFR companion volume with new descriptors and its implications for learning and teaching foreign and second language education in Germany and in Europe in more detail (a preliminary version of the companion volume is available here).

However, the major focus of this year’s Spring Conference will be on foreign and second language teacher education. In this particular context, the revision of the CEFR is just one of many other developments and aspects that need to be taken into consideration (e.g. the theory-practice divide, the interdisciplinary character of foreign and/or second language teacher education, the role of teacher identity and ethos, the functions of physical learning place and digital learning space, the question of teaching expertise, the significance of teachers’ language proficiency and skill, etc.).

Developing Video Game Literacy in the EFL Classroom: A Qualitative Analysis of 10th Grade Classroom Game Discourse

posted by Roger Dale Jones, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Germany

The following presents a brief summary of my dissertation project (Justus Liebig University Giessen, Germany) which focuses on the intersection of popular video games and the EFL classroom. Popular video games, the communities of gamers and even their forms of online communication (like fan-fiction, Let’s Play videos, game maps, etc.) present sources of English contact, as well as digital multi-literacies, for many young learners of English in Germany. Connecting to this contact and informal learning in the classroom can show the relevance of the EFL classroom to the everyday lives of young learners, provide them with skills and strategies for further English learning in digital gaming contexts, and introduce multiliteracies relevant for learning and communication in the 21^st century. In order to support this connection, my study first defines video game literacy for connecting games and game-learning into the EFL classroom. Next, the project collects and analyzes empirical data on three 10^th grade English classes in which game-topics, experiences and media were introduced to examine the affordances and problems of video game literacy in the EFL classroom. Finally, the study presents suggestions for educators, teaching materials designers, and future researchers.

Research Interest
This qualitative-exploratory research project aims at developing a model of video game literacy (VGL) to support learner participation in the English language cultural discourse on digital games. This approach recognizes digital games as a substantial source of English language contact and that digital games, as highly complex, interactive ‘texts,’ not only embed, but also are embedded in a complex network of cultural discourses. Until recently, the acceptance of other media, like literature and film, into EFL classrooms has been slow; nevertheless, initial attempts to define respective literacy models have already been undertaken. Digital games appear to have been ignored, as no model of VGL currently exists for the EFL classroom. This study addresses this gap by proposing a discourse model of VGL and by exploring the potentials and problems of EFL classroom game discourse.

Central Research Questions
The research questions address both the theoretical development of a discourse model and the empirical description of classroom game discourse. The first question addresses the theoretical, conceptual and empirical modeling of VGL including defining features and categories (and their interrelationships) of cultural game discourse. The second question explores EFL classroom game discourse to identify challenges and opportunities and investigates the potential of the cultural discourse model of VGL developed in the theoretical section as an analytical tool for understanding (and supporting) classroom game discourse.

Data Collection
Data collection focused on three EFL classroom case studies from various schools and school forms. Over a period of two weeks per case study, data was collected via videography, non-participatory observation, classroom documents and, when necessary, photographic documentation. In-class data collection preceded retrospective, semi-structured teacher and student (group) interviews. Multiple data collection tools and methods were utilized to enable data triangulation in the analysis phase.

Data Analysis
The first step of data analysis included identifying critical incidents in classroom game discourse based on observer field notes and videography, then identifying and reviewing further related data. Relevant videography and classroom products were transcribed, analyzed and coded using thematic and qualitative content analysis á Mayring that involved both a top-down process (applying the discourse model of VGL as an analytical tool) and bottom-up processes (inductive analysis of unforeseen events and patterns.) The analysis of individual data sources then underwent a process of triangulation in order to establish causal relations and increase intersubjective validation of results and findings.

Results
The central results of the study can be summarized in the following points:

Discourse Model of Game Literacy: The discourse model of VGL can serve as an analytical and categorical tool to identify and address the challenges and opportunities of classroom game discourse. Furthermore, it can also illuminate the complexity of classroom game discourse. The following points reflect the findings of this study and are organized according to the discourse model of VGL.

The Game: Game complexity and stark differences in background knowledge of students and teachers pose serious challenges for classroom game discourse. These challenges emerge in student difficulties conceptualizing and articulating game experiences and relating them to others, and in teacher difficulties developing suitable tasks and materials and in evaluating student contributions. The fictional world of games offers points of connecting classroom game analysis to existing teacher competences and classroom processes, while systemic aspects of games are largely ignored.

The Player: The topic of games is personal for both students and teachers. Video games play a substantial role in the identities of students, as digital gaming is bound up in their lives (present and past) and is a significant part of their social and familial networks (and memories). Though teachers are interested in the lives and gameplay experiences of their students, they are also concerned about the dangers of games and wish to initiate critical reflection. Questions concerning cultural, social and cognitive functions of digital games and play are largely ignored.

The World: Students and teachers have limited access to game discourse. This is in part due to the complexity of games and game experiences, to difficulties articulating game knowledge and experiences (especially on an abstract level), to differing background experiences, and possibly to the questioned value of games in a school context. As a practical application of real-life game discourse, gamification offers access to game discourse and initiates reflection on games and real-life institutions. The impact of gaming on the constitution of cultural worldviews is largely ignored.

Classroom Game Discourse: Teachers and students have discourse goals which only partially overlap. This is in part due to differing beliefs, values and intentions. Both teachers and students are interested in learning more about games and each other, but teachers are more interested in initiating reflection and articulation – focusing on negative topics of games – while students are interested in sharing their knowledge about and experiences with games. ‘Switching’ roles – or students taking on ‘teaching’ functions and vice versa – presents opportunities but also serious challenges.

Conclusion and Outlook
The discourse model of VGL reveals interrelated dimensions inextricably tied up in cultural experience, communication and discourse.  Empirical classroom research reveals complex interactions that constitute classroom game discourse and the differing goals, intentions and perspectives of teachers and students and, additionally, it reveals the challenges and opportunities facing the development of VGL in the EFL classroom. Perhaps equally important, however, this study identifies areas of further research and development. 1) Future research should focus on the model, its conceptual development and its operationalization into teaching methods and learning materials. 2) Future research should focus on teacher training, determining what skills teachers require to support VGL in the classroom. 3) Future research should focus on learners to uncover more about their (vastly heterogeneous) game experiences, articulation abilities and contact to the English language. 4) Finally, future research should focus more on the curricular integration of VGL to deal with the multiliteracies complexity of digital games and their embeddedness in superordinate networks of cultural discourse.