Browsing by Subject "http://www.yso.fi/onto/yso/p5354"

Goals. This study focuses on a game and playing as a method of supporting the student’s independent language production in the beginning of language learning. For long games have been used to facilitate language teaching, and lately, they have gained academic interest. Whilst the majority of studies deals with digital games and applications, this study the focuses on interactional and non-digital games played in groups. The theoretical basis is functional and usage-based view on language learning, together with the idea of grammar learning as an implicit-driven process that ensues language usage. The view is in the initial stage of language learning and development of oral language profiency. This study explores a traditional method of language learning through new data and current theory. This study examines what kind of structure does the game provide for the interaction of language learner, what kind of speech does language learner produce during the game and what is the role of teacher in the game session. Methods. The study was carried out as part of the project Meeting in the middle at the University of Helsinki. Research data was collected in a preparatory classroom in Helsinki. The study was a qualitative case study that examined a game session where four preparatory class pupils and an instructor play an educational game called ‘Fish Game’ for 20 minutes. The video data was analysed with microethnography and with simple quantitative mapping. Findings and conclusions. The game appeared vital in supporting student’s own language production and verbal communication in the target language, Finnish. The factors that supported students to understand and produce new language were identified: the structure, rules and visual and physical clues of the game, the familiarity and frequency of interaction, the lingual schemas of other players and a frequent phrase. In addition to the actual game phrases, the interaction consisted searching for words and simultaneous conversations, expressions of turns and negotiations of the rules. The teacher’s presence appeared meaningful to the practice of playing, as she coordinated and guided the pupil–pupil interaction, helped pupils when needed and answered their question, solved conflicts and problems, created positive atmosphere and formed connections in between the pedagogic goals and playing. In comparison to previous research, this study emphasizes teacher’s role as a lingual model, support for language production and language corrector. According to these data, it seems that affordances appear continuously during the game, but teacher’s presence and actions among other things affect on how the pupils make use of the affordances.

Mikael Soininen (1860–1924) and Matti Koskenniemi (1908–2001) were two of the most distinguished thinkers in Finnish educational thought in the 20th century. Soininen's books Yleinen kasvatusoppi (General Pedagogy) and Opetusoppi I and II (Didactics I and II) dominated Finnish teacher education from the turn of the 19th and 20th century until World War II. Then Koskenniemi's Kansakoulun opetusoppi (Elementary School Didactics) abolished Soininen's former works. This denoted a major change in Finnish educational thought. This Master's Thesis is a historical and philosophical analysis of the educational systems of Soininen ja Koskenniemi. I compare and assess Soininen's and Koskenniemi's views on the nature and history of pedagogy as well as their worldviews, anthropology and views on education in order to find out what this paradigmatic change in Finnish educational thought consisted of. Soininen's approach is philosophical whereas Koskenniemi's is more pragmatic. According to Soininen, the task of pedagogy is to combine psychology with ethics in order to generate moral human beings. Both Soininen and Koskenniemi see pedagogy as consisting of an old bad and a new good one while both seeing themselves as representing the latter. Soininen focuses on the moral upbringing of the individual whereas Koskenniemi stresses the inseparable connection of the individual and the community (school class, home, nation). Soininen wants to foster first moral and then patriotic human beings while Koskenniemi wants to foster first patriotic and then moral human beings. Despite their many differences, Soininen and Koskenniemi agree on many basic educational principles. Former research has not adequately stressed this point.