Pyramid discussions R. R.

Jordan

ESP materials are usually text-based: the resulting exercises may not be very stimulating, nor satisfy the students need for spoken language practice. This article looks at some of the comments made on ESP classes. It then proposes the oral activity pyramid discussion, which involves the students in a problem-solving task based on small-group work. Finally, it looks at the language and interaction generated by the activity.

Introduction

In teaching ESP to students relatively advanced in the subject-matter, but not particularly advanced in their command of English, one is faced with making choices. What to teach, or practise, in a limited time, and how to do it? The students needs are the starting point. One such need is for practice in speaking in seminars and discussions. This article will first look at the problem that students have in seminars. It will then consider the nature of the speaking practice to be embarked upon. Next, it will describe in detail the problem-solving activity, pyramid discussion, that can help to solve some of the students spoken language difficulties. Finally, it will investigate the amount and type of language that can be produced by the activity.

Students problems in seminars

Kennedy and Bolitho (1984: 114) note that there is evidence to suggest that overseas students in particular do have problems in seminars or discussion. They refer to the investigation by Johns and Johns (1977: 99), by means of a questionnaire, of overseas students difficulties in seminars: (i) comprehension of spoken English (they speak too fast; they mumble; vocabulary is idiomatic); (ii) the pressing need to formulate a contribution quickly (I cant think what to say); (iii) shyness about the value of a contribution (I might say something wrong); (iv) inability to formulate an idea in English (I dont know how to say it in English); (v) awareness that a given function maybe realized in various ways (I dont know the best way to say it); and (vi) frustration about being unable to enter the discussion (some students speak too much). These difficulties point to a need for specific materials that will make a student more confident in a discussion, conclude Kennedy and Bolitho (p. 115).

46

ELT Journal Volume 44/1 January 1990 Oxford

University Press 1990

articles

welcome

My own experience with university students supports the finding of Johns and Johns and the conclusion of Kennedy and Bolitho. There is certainly a need to develop the students self-confidence in speaking English. How can this be done? Which materials can be used?
ESP material

Texts

As a starting point we must note that most ESP material is in text form, meant for reading and writing practice. Robinson (1980: 39) comments many of them (ESP textbooks) present the specialist material in a boring and/or traditional way, with either a minimum of exercises or a plethora of textbook-bound practice material. Hutchinson and Waters (1984: 111) have looked at this from a different point of view: For ESP to be properly communicative, the teacher must be able to participate fully in the classroom communication. Texts taken directly from the target situation frequently prevent the teacher from doing this, because they demand too high a level of specialist knowledge. Part of their answer is to design the materials in such a way that the learner is involved fully in both the content and the language topics and give topic-related problems that require the use of English to solve them, thus actively mobilizing content to generate language work. (p.112). This is echoed by McDonough (1984: 97): We are concerned again with problem-solving - with the negotiated settlement rather than the imposed solution. McDonoughs comment was made within the context of small-group work. This organizational aspect of language practice has an enthusiastic supporter in Ur (1981: 7): The first advantage of group work is of course the increased participation . . . Students who are shy of saying something in front of the whole class, or to the teacher, often find it much easier to express themselves in front of a small group of their peers . . . The motivation of participants also improves when they work in small groups. In addition, when a group is given a task to perform through verbal interaction, all speech becomes purposeful, and therefore more interesting (p. 12). Jordan (1978: 26-29) also found, in an experiment in group problem-solving in ESP, that motivation was high, with considerable language input from all the students. Littlewood (1981: 38) also supports problemsolving activities, in which learners must not only analyse information, but also argue, justify and persuade, in order to reach a common decision . . . In addition, the absence of a single correct answer offers learners scope to express their own individuality through the foreign language. This fact often produces a high degree of personal involvement among the participants. Littlewoods argue, justify and persuade exemplify three of David Wilkinss categories of communicative function - argument, rational enquiry and exposition, and suasion, respectively (1976: 46-53). These three categories are the ones containing the communicative functions most likely to be needed by students in seminars.
Suasion is the category of utterance designed to affect the behaviour of others (Wilkins, 1976: 46). Its most relevant component is inducement which includes, among other items: persuade, suggest, advise, recommend, advocate, propose. Pyramid discussions 47

Group work and problem-solving

Communicative functions

articles

welcome

Argument relates to the exchange of information

information,
49-52).

agreement,

disagreement,

and views and includes: concession (Wilkins, 1976:

Rational enquiry and exposition (Wilkins, 1976: 52-53) includes, among many others: assumptions, conclusions, conditions, consequences, exemplification, explaining reasons and purposes, illustration, justification, result. As Wilkins points out (p. 52) utterances in this category interact with and possibly overlap those in the categories of argument and suasion.

The need

Seemingly, then, what is needed is an activity that is purposeful, allows students to interact in groups, provides a task which motivates, and helps to develop self-confidence while providing fluency practice in the spoken language. The spoken language should practise at least some of the communicative functions listed above. One such activity that meets all these requirements and that I have used over the years with groups of ESP (economics) students is a pyramid discussion. Generally speaking, this is not available in ESP books and has to be devised by teachers themselves. A pyramid discussion is a problem-solving activity that involves students making choices from a list of items within a given theme or subject. At first, the choices are made by the students individually, then in pairs, then fours; finally, the whole class can take part in a discussion of the choices. The English that is used will normally practise the language of Wilkins three categories of communicative function. The activity is called pyramid because it starts with one person and gradually expands until all students are involved. One way in which the pyramid discussion can be started is to provide each student with a list of numbered items on a subject - either duplicated/ photocopied, or written on the blackboard or overhead projector transparency - or even dictated to the students. This can be illustrated by taking a theme from ESP, for example, from economics. The following (from Jordan and Nixson, 1986: 20; see also Jordan, 1984) is shown to the students:
Select the three most important requirements from the list below that you think will help a developing country to improve its economic development.

Pyramid discussion

Procedure

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
48

a good standard of education in schools for all (or most) children adult literacy a low birth rate good health for the working population a small percentage of the population employed in agriculture modernization of agricultural techniques higher productivity per worker (in agriculture and industry) a large amount of foreign aid a high rate of import substitution a high propensity to save 11 an effective tax system

R. R. Jordan

articles

welcome

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Steps

greater equality of distribution of income the growth of financial institutions a high rate of investment in industry government direction or control of investment and production an increase in exports and export earnings diversification of exports, especially exports of manufactured goods an abundance of natural resources more efficient allocation of scarce resources political stability

The steps of the activity are as follows: 1 Ask the students individually to select three items from the list: they can put a mark against the numbers or write down the numbers. The order of the three choices is not important. 2 After the three choices have been made, the teacher asks each student, in turn, to call out the numbers of his/her choices. These are then noted on the blackboard for everyone to see. Students should then be paired, as far as possible, so that they have at least one choice in common. To avoid too much movement or disruption in the classroom, pairs should be made of students sitting fairly close to each other. In pairs, the students should try to persuade each other to make changes in their choices so that at the end of a certain time limit (perhaps five minutes) they both agree on three choices. If necessary they can compromise on new choices or trade off choices. 3 The same procedure is now followed as before. Each pairs three choices are put on the blackboard. Pairs are then placed together who have at least one choice the same. Again they must discuss and eventually agree on the same three choices (with a suitable, short time limit). 4 Although groups of four could be put together, it is probably best to stop at this point and discuss/comment with the whole class (otherwise it may get tedious). 5 If one pair finishes discussion and agrees upon choices before others, it can prepare arguments, to defend its choices - as a preparation for joining other pairs.

Context

A short list of appropriate language forms relating to suasion, argument, and rational enquiry and exposition can be given to the students before the activity begins and their use can be exemplified. This is optional, depending on the students language level, but, in any case, such a list is useful for reference. Most pyramid discussions can be contained within a 45-50-minute session. There is sufficient time to explain the procedure at the beginning, to exemplify the communicative functions, and to conclude the discussion at the end by noting on the blackboard the three overall most popular choices. If there is time, an added dimension can be provided by the teacher listing his/her own three choices, and justifying them and comparing them with the students choices. This can encourage the students to cross-examine the teacher and to disagree with his/her choices.
Pyramid discussions 49

articles

welcome

A useful follow-up session involves writing. In my particular situation, I take my students for a two-hour session. The pyramid discussion occupies the first fifty minutes, as described above. After a ten-minute break, the discussion is utilized to form the basis for essay-writing. My students need practice in essay-writing, so suitable follow-up topics for the economic development pyramid discussion, to last for about forty-five minutes, are: What are the main problems associated with economic development? or: Discuss what a developing country needs in order to achieve economic development. How can it obtain these requirements? It may be of interest to note that in the piece of research described below, the numbered choices of the twelve students in the class (from twenty choices listed in the example) were as follows:
pairs (1) (2) groups of four whole class

(3) (4) (5)

(6)

6, 8, 15 15, 17, 20 1, 19,20 1, 6, 20 6, 15, 16 7, 9, 16

6, 15, 17 1, 19, 20 7, 15, 16 6, 15, 20

Action research

In order to examine in some detail the language produced in a pyramid discussion, a group of twelve postgraduate students of economics were tape-recorded while they were discussing the twenty items listed above in the example. The students, whose spoken English was generally postintermediate, were: five Italians, two Portuguese, and one from each of the following countries: Cyprus, Greece, Malaysia, Sudan, and Switzerland. Five pairs were recorded (for approximately 5 minutes) - there was a malfunction with the sixth cassette recorder - and then the three groups of four (also 5 minutes); the class discussion at the end was not recorded. A statistical analysis of the total ten minutes of discussion is as follows:
1 First five minutes
Pairs no. of words spoken Pair 1 554 63 of suasion of argument 4 13 12 18 Pair 2 794 80 2 14 20 21 Pair 3 686 53 2 14 14 8 Pair 4 660 93 6 10 Pair 5 495 75 1 7 10 3 Total 3,189 364 15 58 65 58

no. of utterances no. of instances no. of instances

no. of instances of rational enquiry and exposition no, of questions used

9 8

R. R. Jordan

articles

welcome

2 Second five minutes

Groups of four no. of words spoken Group I 860 96 of suasion of argument 12 13 Group II 806 64 3 8 20 22 Group Ill 452 70 3 5 14 9 Total 2,118 230 18 26 55 49

no. of utterances no. of instances no. of instances

no. of instances of rational enquiry and exposition no. of questions used

21 18

3 Grand total: ten minutes

no. of words spoken no. of utterances no. of instances no. of instances no. of instances no. of questions of suasion of argument of rational used enquiry

(1 and 2 above combined)

5,307 594 33 84 and exposition 120 107

Commentary

Many things may be inferred from the tables above. However, it should be borne in mind that not all the students were at exactly the same language level. Nor were their personalities the same: some were extrovert and talkative, others were shy and reticent. The main finding to emerge from the recordings, however, was quite clear: a large amount of animated language was produced, in only a few minutes, by all the students. Questions were selected for separate analysis above as there was interest in seeing their frequency of use within pairs and small groups. In fact, they accounted for 18 per cent of the total utterances. Many of the questions consisted of using a statement pattern with a rising intonation at the end (e.g. You agree with 17?). The largest category was rational enquiry and exposition which accounted for 20 per cent of the total utterances. The typical pattern of a dialogue was as follows: a large number of statements giving choices with reasons; statements in agreement or disagreement; some questioning for clarification and seeking other views; pauses while thinking of ideas or language to use; another student takes over the dialogue; some interruption; some incomplete utterances; very little speaking simultaneously within a pair or group - they did actually listen to each other.

Language used Typical examples

The sequence below follows the typical pattern indicated above. The examples illustrate Littlewood and Wilkins communicative functions of suasion, argument, and rational enquiry and exposition referred to earlier.
Pyramid discussions 51

articles

welcome

I Suasion 1 statements proposing the selection of three items from the list: a. personal I prefer/choose/propose x because . . . I think x is better . . . b. impersonal It seems to me . . . It is important/better to have . . . II Argument

2 statements of agreement:
I/We (can) agree with you/number 17. I think you are right . . .

3 statements of partial/qualified

agreement:

Yes, but I think if you . . . Yes, I agree with you, but I believe that . . .

4 statements of disagreement:
I/We disagree with you . . . (No), I cant/dont agree at all with number 8. III Rational enquiry and exposition

5 statements of necessary conditions governing choices: If you/we want to solve this problem, (then) . . .
If we keep up productivity . . .

6 explanation:
I think this is a consequence of this (number 6). Another reason . . . is that in a developing country about 70 per cent or 80 per cent of the popularion is employed in agriculture.

7 questions seeking agreement:

You agree with political stability? Do you agree with me?

8 questions seeking opinions:

What (do you think) about number 16/education? What is your choice?

9 questions seeking information:

Do you know why? Where do you find the resources for the change? What are the conditions? How can we develop the trade? Is it true that we always have . . . ? 10 questions seeking clarification: You mean in the long run? What do you mean with government direction? Do you mean that this one is. . . ? IV Modality

There were many instances of modality, often in conjunction with one of the categories above.
11 statements of doubt/uncertainty: perhaps I prefer . . .

52

R. R. Jordan

articles

welcome

Im not really convinced . . . I am full of doubt about number 20. I dont know, I think that. . . Maybe its the only possible compromise but . . . Its not exactly that I dont agree but . . . Language errors Examples of main types

The purpose of the activity is to help students to develop self-confidence in the use of language and to give the opportunity for as much spoken practice as possible. Consequently, there is no attempt at correction during the discussion, and help is only given if it is asked for. However, once the data has been collected (in my case on tape and then transcribed), its analysis can be used, if desired, for follow-up language work. The main types of error can be noted and practice can be given later to the use of correct forms (shown below in parentheses). a. omission of subject:
(It) is very important.

b. omission of auxilliary:
Where (do) you come from?

c. omission of article:
It is (an) important target . . .

d. omission of final s:
he mean(s) the public sector . . . two thing(s) for export . . .

e. incorrect preposition:
we dispense of (with) number 16. . . because at (in) developing countries . . .

f. irregular past participle not known:

Ive gived (given) up number 16 . . . . . . choosed (chosen) by me . .

g. singular/plural confusion:
India have (has) success . . . There are (is) a condition of. . There is (are) a lot of points here . . .

h. vocabulary confusion:
So when I tell (say) high rate of. . . ... then your productivity raise (rises/will rise/will be raised) My choose (choice) is number 1.

There was a sprinkling of such errors throughout the discussion, but in only one or two discernible cases was there any difficulty in understanding: general mutual intelligibility was not affected.
Conclusion

The general advantages of the pyramid discussion appear to be: 1 It is stimulating, involves the students, and gives the language practice a real purpose. 2 Even the weakest students can contribute something in a pair. As one of the purposes is to develop self-confidence in the use of language, and to help fluency, total accuracy can be ignored.
Pyramid discussions 53

articles

welcome

3 All students are practising listening and speaking all the time; in other words, maximum practice is being obtained, with a wide variety of language being generated. It should be noted that the activity works best with students whose level of English is post-intermediate to advanced, and whose mother tongues are different. It also works best with at least twelve items from which to make choices. In choosing items for ESP lists, one can often obtain advice from subject-specialists or from suitable specialist texts, if not from the students themselves. As a stimulating activity, a pyramid discussion has much to be said in its favour, particularly as it satisfies many of the students needs for purposeful spoken language practice. It is suitable not only for ESP classes but also for general English classes, as long as appropriate topics are selected. It can also be used in teacher-training for awareness raising as a prelude to a study of a particular part of the syllabus. Received May 1988

Note

McDonough,

J. 1984. ESP in Perspective

London:

Acknowledgement is gratefully made to Monique Spaan for assistance with the tape transcription.
References Hutchinson, T. and A. Waters, 1984. How communicative is ESP? ELT Journal 38/2: 108-113. Johns, C. M. and T. F. Johns, 1977. Seminar Dis-

Collins.
Robinson, P. 1980. ESP (English for Specific Purposes) Oxford: Pergamon Press. Ur, P. 1981. Discussions that Work Cambridge: Cam-

bridge University Press.

Wilkins, D. A. 1976. Notional Syllabuses

London:

Oxford University Press.

The author

cussion Strategies in A. P. Cowie & J. B. Heaton (eds.), English for Academic Purposes Reading: BAAL/SELMOUS Jordan, R. R., 1978. Motivation in ESP Modern in ESP: A Case Study of Methods and Materials for Economics in The ESP Classroom Exeter Linguistic Studies, 7. Jordan, R. R., and F. I. Nixson, 1986. Language for Economics London: Collins. Kennedy, C. and R. Bolitho, 1984. English for Specific Purposes London: Macmillan. Littlewood, W. 1981. Communicative Language Teaching Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
English Teacher 6/4: 26-29. Jordan, R. R., 1984. Motivation

R. R. Jordan is Tutor in English to Overseas Students in the Department of Education, University of Manchester, a post he has held since 1972. Prior to that he was British Council English Language Officer in Nepal and Sierra Leone. He has also taught in Finland and Denmark, and taken part in teachertraining courses in several European countries and China. He has an M.A. in Economics (Cambridge), PGCE: EFL (London), and Dip.App.Ling. (Edinburgh). He has published a number of books, mostly with Collins ELT in their Study Skills Series, the most recent of which is Language for Economics (Collins, 1986).

R. R. Jordan

articles

welcome