Narrative Frames as a Course Evaluation Instrument

Abstract

Although getting student feedback on courses via questionnaires has been practiced for a long time, empirical studies on the topic are not substantial enough, nor are alternatives adequately considered. This study introduces and evaluates an alternative qualitative instrument known as narrative frames, which uses prompts to stimulate written feedback. In order to investigate its feasibility, I collected data from 26 Japanese university students in an English Teaching Methods course. Findings suggest that these narrative frames served as a useful tool for eliciting the students’ experiences in the course, their impressions of it, and its impact on them. These findings led me, as the instructor of the course, to be able to critically reflect on its content. Pedagogical and research implications for the future use of narrative frames are provided. 学生による授業評価アンケートは教育改善のために必要な手段として長年定着しているが、それらに関する研究、またそれに取って代わる手段の議論は不十分である。本論では、質的研究手法の1つで、書き手の文章作成を助長するとされているナラティブフレーム（物語枠組み）を授業評価の手段として用い、その評価を行った。データは英語科教育法を受講した26人の大学生から収集した。結果、ナラティブフレームは授業評価手段としての機能を十分に果たし、学生の授業への印象や彼らが授業から受けた影響の詳細を明らかにできることが分かった。また、これらの結果内容は担当教員が授業を批判的に精査し、振り返り活動を行うことに役立った。本論では最後に、ナラティブフレームの使用、研究に関する提言を行う。

English goes digital: Framing pre-service teachers’ perceptions of a learning management system in their EFL studies

“…Framing works to shape and alter audience members' interpretations and preferences […] That is, frames introduce or raise the salience or apparent importance of certain ideas, activating schemas that encourage target audiences to think, feel, and decide in a particular way. (Entman 2007: 164) Recently, framing and framing analysis have been amply employed in research publications in applied linguistics, EFL studies, and teacher education (Barkhuizen, 2014;Benincasa, 2017;Germinario, 2019;Hiratsuka, 2018;Macalister, 2012;Pennington, 1999). The use of framing methodology in applied linguistics seems to follow the aforementioned approaches, namely cognitive (Benincasa 2017;Germinario, 2019;Lynxwiler 1999;Pennington, 1999) and socio-discursive (Barkhuizen, 2014;Hiratsuka, 2018;Macalister, 2012).…”

“…In contrast to the cognitive approach to framing, the studies conducted by Barkhuizen (2014), Hiratsuka (2018), andMacalister (2012) are associated with the socio-discursive approach to framing and framing methodology. Specifically, framing in these studies is operationalised as a structured and organised template that could be employed in facilitating EFL students' narrative skills in EFL writing.…”

“…Whereas Barkhuizen (2014) applies framing (referred to in that study as "narrative framing") to elucidate problems experienced by migrant and refugee EFL learners in New Zealand, Macalister (2012) reports the use of narrative frames in the needs analysis of an EFL curriculum for trainee seamen in Kiribati. Analogously to the abovementioned studies, Hiratsuka (2018) applies narrative framing to elicit written feedback provided by a group of Japanese L1 EFL students. The studies conducted by Barkhuizen (2014), Hirasuka (2018), and Macalister (2012, respectively, suggest that framing could be regarded as a practical tool in EFL teaching and learning.…”

Eliciting students' stories: Student perspectives on anecdote materials

“…Barkhuizen and Consoli (2021) described it as a form of qualitative research that derives power from stories and “examines people's experiences from their perspectives” (p. 2). This research methodology has gained traction in the TESOL field (Bell, 2002; Hiratsuka, 2018). The qualitative research was conducted within the epistemological approach of a constructivist‐interpretive theoretical paradigm in which reality is co‐constructed by participants and researchers (Hiratsuka, 2014).…”

Optimizing the Development of Prototype Learning Mode of Professional Ability Consolidation (PKP) Courses of the PGSD-UT Study Program in the Archipelago Region

“…Cycle II activities have repetitive stages, only distinguished by another 'new method' that is used as a result of reflection on the previous cycle. As a supplement to these two cycles, it is better to have an instrument to measure the success of the implemented 'new method' (Hiratsuka, 2018). The instrument is given to (1) students in the form of tests/questions to determine their level of understanding of the material provided;…”