Trainee name:María Villazán

Assignment word count (does not include the text):

For this assignment you will choose one of three authentic texts which we provide below and decide how
you would use it with the B2 level of teaching practice students to give them a receptive and productive
skills lesson of 60 minutes. Use the table provided to include specific information on the text and the
tasks.

TEXT AND TASKS

Your choice of the three texts

Text 1 □ TEXT 2 ✠ TEXT 3 □

No sense of smell Dining Apps Travel in your own country

Rationale for your choice of text

Specify why you have chosen this text for this group of students.
 Refer to Scrivener or other background
reading when explaining your rationale.
I have chosen the second article (‘Social Dining Apps That Set You Up To Eat With Strangers’) to practice
reading as a receptive skill and speaking as a productive skill. Technology -along with its advantages and
disadvantages- is always an engaging topic and most students, regardless of their age, gender or country of
birth, will have an opinion about it.
Harmer (How to Teach English, 99) affirms that ‘[...], good reading texts can introduce interesting topics,
stimulate discussions, excite imaginative responses and provide the springboard for well-rounded
fascinating lessons.’. I think this text has an appealing title, an interesting topic and it would generate great
opportunities for the students to express themselves.
They would be reading about apps that set strangers up to dine, a topic that would be familiar to a B2 level,
although some alterations would be needed in order to adapt the text by making minor changes marked in
bold in the text below. I used the Cambridge’s Text Inspector tool to check the difficulty of the text.

References:
Harmer, J. How to Teach English (2007). Pearson Education Limited.
https://languageresearch.cambridge.org/wordlists/text-inspector
Pre-reading activities
Detail your tasks and reasons for these tasks.
 Refer to Scrivener or other background reading when
explaining your rationale for these tasks.
In order to set the context and engage the students, I would give them some statements about technology
and they would have to discuss in pairs if they agree or disagree with them and why.
As the text revises the advantages and disadvantages of some apps, this lead-in introduces them to the
general topic (technology) and allows them to express their opinion. It also gives an opportunity for
latecomers to arrive.

Unknown vocabulary:
Apart from the modifications that were made to the text, there are words such as devices, startup and sign
up that could be unfamiliar to them. One of the pre-reading activities that Jim Scrivener (Learning Teaching,
268) suggest is to show them some key words and ask students to make predictions about the text. The key
words would include devices, start-up, sign up and other terms such as dinner, strangers, face-to-face.
If they don’t know the words, I would clarify it on the spot.
I would let them a couple minutes to think about it in pairs before getting the feedback from them. The
prediction would be written on the board to use them in the next stage.

Other words like isolated, overtaken or phrases such as to bridge the gap can be inferred from the context.

References:
Scrivener, J. Learning Teaching (2011). Macmillan.
Reading activity 1
Detail your first reading task
 Refer to Scrivener or other background reading when explaining your rationale
for this task.
At this stage, Harmer mentions how students can benefit from ‘intensive reading’ (Harmer, 264) but that it’s
not the way we would typically read an article or other small written pieces. Students should familiarise
themselves with the text before reading it for more detailed information. Therefore, the first reading task
would be to check the predictions they made with the text individually and then check with the predictions
written on the board.

References:
Harmer, J. How to Teach English (2007). Pearson Education Limited.
Reading activity 2
Detail your second reading task
 Refer to Scrivener or other background reading when explaining your
rationale for this task.
‘They (students) need to be able to scan the text for particular bits of information they are searching for [...].
Students also need to be able to skim a text - as if they were casting their eyes over its surface - to get a
general idea of what it is about.’ (Harmer, 101)
Taking Harmer’s words into account, the following task would seek both skan and skim for information in the
text.
I would display seven open-ended questions and ask students to read the text and to look for the answers.
The questions are in order of appearance and go from looking scanning to skimming. I would also have
prepared two questions extra in case there would be fast finishers.

References:
Harmer, J. How to Teach English (2007). Pearson Education Limited.
Post reading activities
Detail your follow on productive skills task(s)
Refer to Scrivener or other background reading when explaining your rationale for these task(s).
As Scrivener affirms (Learning Teaching, 211), it’s really difficult for a student to talk about something if the
subject is not interesting for them or if they are not provided with enough information to talk about it.
At this stage, the students have already read the article twice, for a general understanding and for a more
detailed comprehension. They have also talked about the effect of technologies in our society at the lead-in,
therefore I think the reaction should keep the same theme and focus on the apps the students read about.
For this task, I would display three questions on the board and make them discuss it in pairs before they
share their ideas. Personalising the topic it’s easier for students to express their opinions and is less likely to
have awkward silences.

To finish, I would also do a delayed correction in order to focus students on correct usage and upgrade their
level.

If there is time, I would like to do a small debate. The theme would be ‘Does technology help us getting
together? Or does it break us apart?’. The class would be divided in four teams. I would tell the which side
they are defending. After a couple minutes to think some arguments, they will choose who would be making
the statement, the rebuttal and the summary. After each team has finished, the other two teams would
decide the winner.

References:
Scrivener, J. Learning Teaching (2011). Macmillan.

750-1000 words

Exercises:
1. Say if you agree or disagree with these statements and discuss them
in pairs:
● Technology makes life easier for everyone.
● Negative effects of technology are nothing compared with the advantages it offers.
● We shouldn’t put too much faith into technology.
● Technology helps people get together.

2. Predict what the article might be about.

Key words:

● dinner
● sign up
● strangers
● devices
● start-up
● face-to-face

3. Read the article quickly and check your predictions with the text.
4. Read the article again and answer these questions:
● Does the author think food is a good way to bring people together?
● Which apps is the article talking about?
● Which app sets people up to drink?
● What is the main difference between EatWith and HomeDine?
● What makes LeftoverSwap so unique?
● Which app has been more successful than the others?
● Why does the author think this app is more successful?
● Extra:
○ Does the author think these kinds of apps can be successful in the future?
○ Does the author think this kind of technology can help people getting together?

5. Answer these questions in pairs with your opinion:

● Do these apps make meeting people easier?
● Will these apps help people getting together?
● Which are the possible positive effects of these apps? And the negative ones?

DEBATE: Does technology help us getting together? Or does it break us apart?

Adapted version of the original text:
Would you break bread with strangers? Some apps are hoping that you will.

The relationship between food and social interaction is not exactly a new concept -- from dinner
parties, to a common fear of eating out alone, to memories of sharing a kitchen with other
family members, there is something to be said for food's ability to bring people together. But
with our increasing dependence on and obsession with technology (and specifically, various
devices), the things that have traditionally brought us together are at risk of losing influence
over our daily interactions.

But while many technological advancements have received critics for making us more isolated
and less social, there are apps that have tried to bridge the gap between technology and
interpersonal relationships -- many of which have chosen to do this through food.

Apps such as Grouper, Grubwithus, LeftoverSwap, EatWith, and HomeDine all use technology
to encourage strangers to eat (or in the case of Grouper, drink) together. Grubwithus offers
organized dinner parties at restaurants in various cities, where individuals or groups of friends
can sign up to eat with others that share similar interests (essentially Meetups over meals).
Grouper, which has a more blind-datey atmosphere, sets up two groups of friends (three of
each) to have drinks together. EatWith, an Israeli-based startup, focuses a bit more on travelers
in foreign countries -- individuals can sign up for brunch, lunch, and dinner parties with local
families when away from home. HomeDine has a similar platform, but is less travel-focused
than EatWith; HomeDine pairs individuals who like attending dinner parties with home cooks
who enjoy throwing them. LeftoverSwap is perhaps the most unique platform out there -- this
particular app is hoping that strangers are interested in eating each other's leftover food.

But would you actually do any of these things? While food is clearly something with the power to
bring people together, the people in question are not usually complete strangers. Though
Grouper has enjoyed a significant amount of popularity, many of the other apps have not faced a
similar reception. The success of Grouper compared to other social dining apps is most likely
based on two factors: the dating-esque platform and the fact that you have two friends to go
through the embarrassment with you. Does this suggest that people are only willing to eat
with strangers if there is a possibility of a relationship out of it? Or if you are not thrown to the
wolves on your own?
Maybe. But either way, it does suggest that most people are not quite extroverted enough to be
willing to share a dinner with complete strangers. However, the development of such apps are
important in understanding the relationship between technology, social interaction, and dining.
Though some of the existing apps may have been too ambitious in their understanding of this
relationship, the success of Grouper definitely suggests that there is a market for similar apps.
And for food-lovers like me who (call me old-fashioned) prefer face-to-face interaction over
communicating via robot, it gives us hope that we can live in harmony with technology, instead
of being overtaken by it.
 Social Dining Apps That Set You Up To Eat With Strangers
Would you break bread with strangers?
Some apps are betting (and hoping) that
you will.
The relationship between food and social
interaction is not exactly a novel concept
— from dinner parties, to a widespread
fear of eating out alone, to memories of
sharing a kitchen with other family
members, there is something to be said
for food’s ability to bring people together.
But with our increasing dependence on
and obsession with technology (and
specifically, various devices), the things
that have traditionally brought us together
are at risk of wielding less influence over
our daily interactions.
But while many technological
advancements have received flak for
making us more isolated and less social,
there are apps that have tried to bridge
the gap between technology and
interpersonal relationships — many of
which have chosen to do this through
food.
Apps such as Grouper, Grubwithus,
LeftoverSwap, EatWith, and HomeDine
all use technology to encourage strangers
to eat (or in the case of Grouper, drink)
together. Grubwithus offers organized
dinner parties at restaurants in various
cities, where individuals or groups of
friends can sign up to eat with others that
share similar interests (essentially
Meetups over meals). Grouper, which has
a more blind-datey atmosphere, sets up
two groups of friends (three of each) to
have drinks together. EatWith, an Israeli-
based startup, focuses a bit more on
travelers in foreign countries —
individuals can sign up for brunch, lunch,
and dinner parties with local families
when away from home.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/18/dining-app_n_3942874.html
HomeDine has a similar platform, but is
less travel-focused than EatWith;
HomeDine pairs individuals who like
attending dinner parties with home cooks
who enjoy throwing them. LeftoverSwap
is perhaps the most unique platform out
there — this particular app is hoping that
strangers are interested in eating each
other’s leftover food.
But would you actually do any of these
things? While food is clearly something
with the power to bring people together,
the people in question are not usually
complete strangers. Though
HYPERLINK
"http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/
12/grouper-cities_n_1875654.html" \t
"_hplink" Grouper has enjoyed a
significant amount of popularity, many of
the HYPERLINK
"http://lennshu.tumblr.com/post/5403649
7578/why-isnt-grubwithus-more-popular"
\t "_hplink" other apps have not faced a
similar HYPERLINK
"http://www.whistleout.com/CellPhones/
News/leftoverswap-an-app-thats-as-
gross-as-it-sounds" \t "_hplink" reception.
The success of Grouper compared to
other social dining apps is most likely
based on two factors: the dating-esque
platform and the fact that you have two
friends to endure the awkwardness with
you. Does this suggest that people are
only willing to eat with strangers if there is
a possibility of a relationship out of it? Or
if you are not thrown to the wolves on your
own?
Maybe. But either way, it does suggest
that most people are not quite extroverted
enough to be willing to share a dinner with
complete strangers. However, the
emergence of such apps are important in
understanding the relationship between
technology, social interaction, and dining.
Though some of the existing apps may
have been overambitious in their
understanding of this relationship, the
HYPERLINK
"http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/
13/michael-waxman-grouper-dating-
startup_n_1590518.html" \t "_hplink"
success of Grouper definitely suggests
that there is a market for similar apps. And
IH Madrid CELTA Skills Assignment 2018

Successful candidates can show evidence of:

– Choosing an appropriate text for the level and interests of the group
– Correctly using terminology that relates to language skills and subskills.
– Relating task design to language skills practice.
– Finding, selecting and referencing information from one or more sources, including background
reading and using written language that is clear, accurate and appropriate to the task.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Q. Is the order of our activities important?

A. Yes. Follow the Receptive Skills Procedure.

Q. Is it enough to state that I would start by pre-teaching essential vocabulary?

A. No. You need to detail which words and how you would pre-teach them.

Q. Do we need to provide examples of all of the activities and material along with the answers?
A. Yes. We need a copy of any activities and the answers. We will evaluate the activities to see if they work.

Q. Is there a word count for this assignment?

A. 750 -1000 words

Q. Do I need to state the word count?

A. Yes. Ask your tutor if you don’t know how to do this quickly in Word.

Q. Do I need to submit the essay as a Word document?

A. No. You can use Mac Pages, LibreOffice or any other word processer, but please save it as a Word doc or PDF so we
can open it on a PC.

Q. Is it OK to quote people like Harmer and Scrivener directly? See the Plagiarism Policy in your portfolio.
A. It’s fine to make a point and say ‘as Harmer says……’ which demonstrates your understanding of Harmer’s words. But we don’t
want you to copy entire paragraphs out of reference books. We want to see how your understanding of the theory relates to your own
task design. This is why it is better for you to paraphrase and keep the underlying theory relevant to your tasks. This is not an
academic paper - keep it practical!

Q. Is it ok to focus on a language area (e.g. gerunds/infinitives, the passive, vocabulary used to express x?

A. No, not if all your tasks are based around language; this is a skills assignment.

Q. I have chosen my text. Can I adapt it to make it easier?

A. You can grade the text by making minor changes but if you alter it radically, it may no longer read like an authentic text.