Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Concept-Paper - PPT 2
Concept-Paper - PPT 2
GROUP 1
OBJECTIVES
INTRODUCTION
THREE WAYS IN
CONCEPT PAPER EXPLAINIG A CONCEPT
GUIDELINES IN WRITING A
CONCEPT PAPER
OBJECTIVES
AT THE END OF THE LESSON, YOU WILL BE ABLE
TO :
• DEFINE A CONCEPT
• DIFFERENTIATE THE DIFFERENT APPROACHES
Click icon to add picture
TO EXPLAINI CONCEPT
• DETERMINE THE USE OF CONCEPT
• PARTS AND GUIDELINES OF CONCEPT PAPER
Definition
The method of identifying a given term and making its meaning clearer. It’s
main purpose is to clarify and explain concepts, ideas and issues by answering
the question “what does it mean?”
A Definition can be represented in three ways: INFORMAL, FORMAL AND EXTENDED
Example of informal:
Tocopherol (Vitamin E) is naturally found in vegetable oil, fish and nuts.
• An FORMAL definition explains a term by incorporating the term to be defined
(species) the general category of the term (genus), and the quality that makes the
term different from other terms in the same category (differentia).
Example of Formal:
Vitamin E is a light-yellow fat-soluble vitamin that acts as an anti-oxidant.
Explication
A method of explanation in which sentences, verses, quotes, or phrases are taken from
literary or academic work and then interpreted and explained in a detailed way. You
may BEGIN the body of explication by analyzing and explaining how the text was
constructed. The explication should END with a concise conclusion by restating your
thesis and major arguments.
CLARIFICATION
Method of explanation in which the points are organized from general abstract idea to
specific and concrete examples.
• The following signals words will help in writing this kind of text.
SIGNAL WORDS FOR CLARIFICATION
After all For instance Namely That is
As an example In other words Put another way To be specific
Consider the In particular Specifically To clarify
following In short Stated differently To illustrate
For example
1. Cover Page
• State the name of the proponents and their affiliations.
• State the addresses, contact numbers, and email addresses of the proponents.
• State the head of the agency and his/her information.
• State the date of submission.
2. Introduction
• State the information about the funding agency to show that you understand its mission.
• State the mission of the agency that the proponents represents and align it to the funding agency's
mission. Also, state the year the proponents' agency was established, its major accomplishments
and other details that demonstrate its capability to undertake the proposed project.
• Present and describe other partner agencies and why they are qualified as such.
• Provide reasons why the funding agency should support the project.
3. Rationale or Background
• State gap in knowledge to be addressed by the project.
• State the problem to be solved.
• State the project's significance.
4. Project Description
• State the goals and objectives of the project.
• Present the methodology (sometimes termed as Action Plan, Project
Activities or Approach.)
• Present the timeline expressed in months and year.
7. Include the overview of the budget if it is required. If nit, then skip the
budget section. In place of thus, you nay simply include the type of support
you may need such as personnel, travel and communication, and
equipment.
8. Be sure that basic format details, such as page numbers, are incorporated.
Another issue directly linked to the divergence between the theorizers and PR actioner is the lack
of models consolidating the recent theoretical and empirical research findings which will guide the
teachers in employing sound teaching practices (Brandi, 2002). The lack of such model may be
the factor that prompted language teachers to practice teaching without due regard for current
beliefs in language teaching and learning for reason that they teach the way they were taught
(Borg, 2003).
Teachers' skills are also an issue though teaches are capable of crafting curriculum, learning
experiences and assessment to diagnose the needs, weaknesses and strengths of the students
(Wiggins & McTighe, 2005), their skills are sometimes questioned particularly the nonnative English
teachers. As what Dat (2008) has pointed out, many teachers from Southeast Asia are known to be
incompetent language and pedagogically unskilled.
The overwhelmingly cognitive orientation in contemporary L2 pedagogy has been coitized by putting
much emphasis on the language itself and not L2 in use (Matsouka & Evans, 2004) in short developing
language pruriency is treated as the ultimate goals of any language course this leads to the next issue
which is the lack of emphasis on along with the difficulty in developing the learners' pragmatic and
sociocultural competence in the context oft.2 classrooms (Rosburg, 1995)
With the introduction of new pedagogical concepts, learning processes and information and
communication technology. It is imperative to develop a teaching framework that would reflect the most
current and generally accepted second language learning principles and integrate them with practical
knowledge. Since current trends in language teaching and materials design are evolutionary rather than
revolutionary (Nunan, 1999), this paper does not intend to reject previously held tried and tested
practices but to add value to what is already existing by consolidating the most recent and established
principles and communicate them clearly from practical use, particularly in materials preparations As
Omahgio-Hadley (1993) has pointed out, the mere proliferation of L2 research which is sometimes
contradictory would just lead to confusion unless the results are integrated and well communicated.
And since the study will be conducted in the context of a developing country, the findings of this
study will potentially contribute to the field of language teaching in the Southeast Asian region by
offering a framework that integrates both the socio-cognitive and transformative aspects of
language teaching and learning. This paper, through the developed framework will help teachers
expands their repertoire of techniques and best practices to effectively deal with the learners'
individual differences; consequently, re-skilling them. This study will primarily use qualitative
research combined with sone quantitative measure ( Tashakkori& Teddue, 2002 ). Such method
will provide the best opportunities for generating new and creative ideas (Jaccard & Jacoby,
2010). Specifically, the development of the teaching framework will be anchored in the grounded
theory (Glaser, 1992; Glaser & Strayss, 1967) through analysis of recent literature and studies
from the top TESOL and applied linguistics journal. Consequently, the framework that will be
developed will be validated from both theoretical (research-theorizers) and practical perspectives
(practioners) to ensure utmost applicability and usability.
The following instruments will be used for validation of the framework: rating scale for researcher-
theorizers validation, semi-structured interview for experienced teachers’ (practitioners) validation
and actual classroom teaching with observation. There will be five experienced teachers and five
researcher-theorizers who will validate the framework. Moreover, such triangulation will be used
to obtain a full picture of what is being investigated (Mackey & Gass, 2006).
Draft Budget
• Materials, Reproduction, Date Collection ₱100,000.00
•Digital Recorder w/rechargeable battery
•Bond paper (short)
•Bond paper (long)
•Computer ink (BCl830, black)
•Miscellaneous (Pens, Pencil, Folder, CD’s rewritable)
• USB flash drive
•Validatir’s Token (In kind) ₱50,000.00
•Transcriber’s Fee. ₱50,000.00
•Personnel
•This paper will only involve one research proponenr who will undertake the project. However,
other personnel will be involved not as researchers but as franework validators, instruments
validators and transcribers.
TIME TABLE FOR COMPLETION
DATE ACTIVITY