How to apply the deep approach of foreign languages and cultures to teaching Vietnamese

Ti u ban 3: Đào t o ti ng Vi t nh
m t ngo i ng cho ng
i n
c ngoài

ÁP DỤNG HƯỚNG TIẾP CẬN CHUYÊN SÂU
VỀ NGOẠI NGỮ VÀ VĂN HÓA TRONG GIẢNG DẠY TIẾNG VIỆT
François Victor TOCHON, Isabelle C. Druc-Tochon
Trường Đại học Wisconsin - Madison, Hoa Kỳ
Tóm t t: Học tập chuyên sâu là một phương pháp

Abstract: Deep learning is sustainable and requires

bền vững và ñòi hỏi một phong cách giảng dạy khác

a different style of teaching. Some researchers have

biệt. Một số nhà nghiên cứu ñã tiến hành khảo sát việc

started working on the transfer from a deep conception

chuyển ñổi từ khái niệm chuyên sâu về học tập theo

of learning towards a Deep Approach to language

hướng tiếp cận chuyên sâu sang việc giảng dạy và học

teaching and learning (Tochon & Hanson, 2003;

tập ngôn ngữ (Tochon & Hanson, 2003; Tochon,
Ökten, Karaman & Druc, 2008; Tochon, 2014). Đào tạo
chuyên sâu ñòi hỏi phải duy trì việc tự học. Học tập có
tính chất quan trọng ñối với việc hiểu biết sâu sắc; hệ
thống học tập chuyên sâu cần trải rộng xuyên suốt các

lĩnh vực chuyên ngành; học tập chuyên sâu cung cấp
năng lượng và không vắt kiệt sức lực của giáo viên, nó

Tochon, Ökten, Karaman & Druc, 2008; Tochon, 2014).
Deep education requires self-sustainable learning.
Learning has to matter for deep understanding to
happen; the deep learning system must spread across
disciplinary domains; deep learning is energizing and
doesn’t burn out teachers, it doesn’t harm the

không gây hại cho môi trường; chất lượng của phương

environment; quality is linked to variety rather than

pháp này liên quan ñến sự ña dạng nhiều hơn là các

standardized forms of expression; deep teaching

hình thức biểu ñạt chuẩn; giảng dạy chuyên sâu tôn

honors the past and develops wisdom for the future.

vinh quá khứ và phát triển trí tuệ cho tương lai. Những

These elements are key to active participation, capacity

yếu tố này ñóng vai trò quan trọng trong việc ñạt ñược

building and accountability within learning communities.

sự tham gia chủ ñộng, nâng cao năng lực và trách

This article provides the storyline of an experience in

nhiệm giải trình trong các cộng ñồng học tập. Báo cáo

the creation of online resources within a Deep

này cung cấp kinh nghiệm trong việc xây dựng các

Approach to Turkish language and culture; it illustrates

nguồn lực trực tuyến theo hướng tiếp cận chuyên sâu

processes that could be used to create similar

ñối với ngôn ngữ và văn hóa Thổ Nhĩ Kỳ; các quá trình

resources for Vietnamese.

có thể ñược sử dụng trong việc tạo ra các nguồn lực
tương tự cho Việt Nam cũng sẽ ñược minh họa.

HOW TO APPLY THE DEEP APPROACH
OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES AND CULTURES
TO TEACHING VIETNAMESE
The challenge of creating a curriculum for a
Deep Approach to the language
What can depth in language teaching mean?
Within the current academic structures, when

asked what could be deeper in their teaching,
language instructors express various clues such as
extensive readings of short novels, work on video
tele-novellas, field trips and video correspondence,
but they do not have a solid framework that would
398

legitimate new forms of deep practices. When we
ask teachers what could be deeper, they recognize
that slicing contents through grammar topics and
exercises does not lead to a sense of deep learning
and situated proficiency, and the communicative
approach as well seems insufficient to stimulate
deep learning.
Teaching methods have been compelling in
making teachers believe that they could apply
certain methods to reach certain goals, and the


Chi n l
c ngo i ng trong xu th h i nh p

framework was supposed to be neutral. Specifying
goals for schools and for classroom learning
implies value choices. Evaluating results is all
about valuing certain tasks and devaluing others.
Many teachers have become ‘instrumentalists’ in
the sense that they never question the underlying
framework for the methods they enact. They just
have to apply the ‘right’ methods to reach the
‘right’ results, they are told. Nobody questions the

philosophy behind assessments. However,
restricting the motives of action to technical
rationality is unrooted thinking, which may have
problematic side-effects. Instruments, methods,
strategies do not suffice to reach higher humane
goals. Philosophy and theoretical wisdom must
guide reflective practice, and only then should we
start thinking about what instruments might be
appropriate.
Depth is not an absolute, it describes an
orientation that contrasts with existing practices in
the world language area. Often while visiting
language classes one can witness a series of short
slices of activities, for example sequenced on the
principle of Overview-Prime-Drill-Check (Knopp,
1980), which keeps students alert on the principle
that, if they are not constantly stimulated by
frequent and careful feedback loops, they will lose
the necessary focus. The whole system is based on
extrinsic motivation.
The motivation, needs, and learning reflections
of students must be part of the learning process.
This is a challenge for instructional designers
because most designer models try to predict every
learning step. Advanced learning—whether
individualized or group project–based—cannot be
really predicted by instructional materials; an open
pedagogy model must be proposed. This is the key
challenge that most instructional materials must
face: the best structured materials may imprison

learners’ autonomy and motivation. The
instructional materials must be planned so that
many pathways are open to diverging ways of
using the materials in real classroom situations.
We need to go from a performance orientation to

Tháng 11/2014

one emphasizing situated competencies. The
linguafolio logic is consistent with an open
learning approach, as is the use of film. Film can
be watched, reviewed, and reflected upon
individually or in a group, at a distance or on-site.
It can be accompanied by questions, or it can
support project-based learning. This approach
offers a valuable alternative to currently available
language materials, which often seem deprived of
creativity and do not make use of the potential for
individualized learning.
In the project described in this article, we
worked on a framework that facilitates the former
kind of deep learning and orientation; and tried
our best to materialize it into instructional
materials that would permit a totally new
approach to language teaching and learning. Right
from the start, it is important to distinguish the
approach from the instructional materials. A
teacher who cannot conceptualize a more
meaningful “deep” approach to language learning,
and who has not been trained in the Deep

Approach may not use the instructional materials
we propose in a way conducive to deep learning.
A teacher who can conceptualize such a more
meaningful “deep” approach to language learning,
approaches teaching from a deep philosophical
perspective focusing on the process rather than the
outcome, and who has been trained in the Deep
Approach may/will use the instructional materials we
propose in a way conducive to deep learning.

This article follows the four-year IRIS Title VI
research and development of new ways of
stimulating deep learning in a less-commonlytaught language and culture (Tochon, Ökten,
Karaman, & Druc, 2012). It describes the creation,
study, implementation and impacts, within the
project, of instructional materials that take a
“Deep Approach” to language acquisition. Ours is
an immersive, learner-centered, technology-rich,
and project-based approach designed for
institutions of higher education in the U.S. and
elsewhere that offer programs in language and
culture, cultural studies, and international studies.
399


Ti u ban 3: Đào t o ti ng Vi t nh
m t ngo i ng cho ng
i n
c ngoài

Overview of the Theory Behind The Deep
Approach
Deep understanding characterizes deep

learning (Akbar Hessami & Sillitoe, 1990). The
concept of a deep approach emerged from
phenomenographic studies in higher education, to
define a deeper way of reading texts for learning
(Ramsden, 1992). Atherton (2005) contrasted
deep and surface approaches in terms of
meaningfulness.
The
deep
approach
is
significantly related to an intention to understand
deeply. The focus is on what is signified and the
arguments proposed, with a linking process to
prior information and to everyday experience
(Morgan, 1993). Deep processing involves a
reconceptualization of reality through a linking
process with prior experience and a form of
identity-building discussion with the self that is
increased in a team (Bradford, 2001). In contrast,
surface learning is task-oriented and based on
extrinsic motivation. Deep learning defines a
situation in which the teacher is not the only source
of inspiration and knowledge (Rhem, 1995).
Researchers have started working on the
transfer from a deep conception of learning to a
deep approach to teaching. One such transfer has
been made under the label of sustainable
education (Warburton, 2003). Sustainable
development is transdisciplinary and requires a

reflective
approach
that
characterizes
transformative education in contrast to
transmissive education. Traditional transmissive
education is instrumental; its linear, informationfocused training is oriented to products and based
on facts and skills. In contrast, transformative
education is about concepts and capacity building;
it is intrinsically motivated and constructive, and
grounded in relevant knowledge for local
ownership. Being process-oriented, it involves
iterative and responsive world-view reframing
(Sterling, 2001). It promotes group work on reallife situations and real-world problems.
Existing online instructional resources for most
less-commonly taught languages, while providing
400

some interactive exercises and limited authentic
linguistic contexts, often lack coherence and the
kind of fully interactive approach that facilitates
mediation of learners’ language construction. This
was the attempt here. Among the technologies
used are streaming videos and multimedia,
PowerPoints, and the integration of current
technologies into instructional modules, such as
glogs, blogs, chats, forum, etc. The article is the
story of the integration of authentic Internet-based
materials into less-commonly taught language
courses, on the basis of experimentations

associated with a forum among instructors, Skype
conversations and interviews, and classroom
experiences. The online resources proposed to the
students were scaffolds to help them create their
own projects.
Heilman and Stout (2005) indicate possible
stages that can help language instructors get a
sense of structure and stimulate the creation of
educative projects among their students: (a)
Generate ideas together and outline a project –
what groups will be formed, what will be the role
of each one? Teachers should not accept projects’
duplication. (b) Groups need to visualize their
anticipated projects and prepare possible scenarios.
(c) Internet search, multimedia exploration and
strategic skimming of data; inquiry and summary
writing. For interviews: practice among peers
contact, warming up, interviewing and closing,
before the actual experience. (c) Refining projects
for the report phase; preparing and rehearsing
presentations. (e) Presenting the individual, peer
or group projects, which can be done using
various media; self- and peer-assessment as preps
for instructional assessment. (f) Post-active
reflection on the work done; students should
reflect on what they learned, the amount of use of
the target language, and the strategies that could
have improved their action.
In-depth projects should have a focus, a pivot
or a major inquiry question. The end concept

should be clarified through negotiation, with a
critical discussion on the possibilities and the best


Chi n l
c ngo i ng trong xu th h i nh p

Tháng 11/2014

strategies for the optimal result. It requires
listening skills and clear communication of the
perceptions related to the project, its contents, and
the way it will be publicized. The rationale for
action should be clear to everyone before starting.
Quality is the goal. Students are curriculumbuilders: they have choice, decision-making, and
voice. Projects lead to creation, action, and
experience: there is thus a transdisciplinary
principle. Project-based apprenticeship enhances
the quality of student learning compared to other
approaches; it affects positively problem solving
and decision-making capacities (Thomas, 2000).
Projects tend to reduce learners’ anxiety and
emulate positive attitudes toward the discipline.
Principles Adopted
Instructional Material

to

Create

"Deep"

Trying to create instructional materials based
on the principle that the student is the curriculum
builder and determines his or her own progression
(or Zone of Proximal Development) may sound
like a catch-22 situation. How can we anticipate
what cannot be anticipated? Then came the idea of
templates: providing templates to students, and list
of themes, with possible tasks that they could
gather into projects like a Lego game. Obviously
the analogy was much too structuralist, yet there
was an innovative concept here: that we could
inspire students through some organizational
patterns that they could quickly assimilate, which
would allow them to be relatively free in the
assembly mode, if the resources were multimodal,
authentic and varied enough, allowing a maximum
of flexibility.
It took quite a while for this concept to be
understood by teachers who were not accustomed
to such curricular freedom: the Deep Approach
was not a matter of applying the material provided
on PDF, multimedia, video films, internet links etc
from A to Z. We were providing food for thought,
such that students could quickly transcend the
material and create their own stuff. There could be
banks of modules to which students and teachers
would contribute. The idea was not to use them all.

The idea was to go very deeply into a few

modules that were chosen because of the right fit
with the student’s interest and intrinsic motivation.
Thus the apparent paradox is that we created
materials that serve as thresholds, examples or
models for students to go beyond and to be
inspired to do more or do something different, as
soon as they understood the principle. The
superstructural principle framing the curriculum
and the series of templates is that projects connect
disciplinary knowledge to interdisciplinary themes
through transdisciplinary action (Tochon, 2013).
This interconnectedness explains that what was
proposed was not a “textbook,” but a whole
hyper-textbook with a high level of connectivity
through links that are conceptual, strategic, and
interpersonal as well as transpersonal to reach
depth in action.
To sum up, the instructional material we
created for one specific less-commonly-taught
language, which was Turkish was based on
principles of relativity, connectivity, agency and
complex systems dynamics, such that it was not a
goal in itself but material to be transcended to
become effective in its ability to stimulate deep
learning. Getting rid of the model even, at some
point, was among the demands of its successful
accomplishment.
Therefore
guidance
is

paradoxically needed for instructors who might
think that we created this material for it to be
applied, as is. Any material has its limitations.
Instructors need guidance on how not to guide.
When the wise man designates the moon, only the
naïve contemplate the finger. The instructional
material in this analogy is the finger, it is pointed
toward something else: deep learning, which
requires autonomy for the learner. We are just at
the beginning of this adventure for language
learning. It is a revolution in the fields of Second
Language Acquisition and World Language
Education. What seems ‘natural’ now will easily
be seen - with a little open-minded reflection - to
be the contrary; whereas the Deep Approach
emerges easily from what students already know
and respond to.
401


Ti u ban 3: Đào t o ti ng Vi t nh
m t ngo i ng cho ng
i n
c ngoài

Deep Pedagogy: Teachers as Coaches and
Resource Persons
One of the major problems that language
instructors face who have been used to controlled
approaches is that they need to develop some
receptivity to bottom-up impulses coming from
their students. There should be time and space for
discussion, and a real curriculum negotiation.

Often language instructors are afraid of not
succeeding with such an open approach. They fear
that they might not be able to “do” their semester
curriculum. The problem emerges from the
perception that only controlled environments
could succeed. This wrong perception has created
a tradition of surface learning in K-12 and
collegiate teaching. In contrast, deep teachers
favor depth over coverage (Paul & Elder, 2009).
Course
Procedures

Description

And

Classroom

This section clarifies what the language
instructor and the deep learner do using the
instructional material we have created.
RATIONALE. The Deep Approach is based on
self-directed projects, which link together various
disciplinary contents within a self-actualizing,
empowering perspective and small group
achievement that target global issues and social
action (Tochon, 2009). Thus the disciplinary
Communication contents and Comparison tasks
are integrated into interdisciplinary Connections
within a broader transdisciplinary, Cultural and

Community framework. At the same time, the
Deep Approach supports the 5Cs standards of the
American Council for Teaching Foreign
Languages.
TOPICAL MODULES. Instructional modules
are proposed for various possible projects.
Students pick those of interest. They are not meant
to be ALL realized in the course of a semester.
Students must see how projects are created with a
balanced number of tasks in each task domains.
LIFE GOALS. Students are invited to discuss
their interests in life, and verify which topics
402

would best match their life goals. This is the
condition for intrinsic motivation to energize selfdirected learning. If none of the project topics are
a nice fit, students can adapt the structures of
existing projects or create their own; then they
articulate and list the tasks for each task domain
themselves.
SCHEDULE. The instructor may decide to
devote a number of in-class hours per week to
projects. Projects should be the main meal piece,
NOT the side dish (Markham, Larmer & Ravitz,
2003). In addition, part of the work can be done as
outside-of-class group tasks or individual
homework. Students choose a topic and map their
project.
ASSESSMENT. The online instructional
modules propose evaluation formats. The project

map can help create a rubric of student’s
anticipated achievement in all task domains. In the
rubric, the tasks can be associated with deadlines
and it then constitutes their instructional
agreement or contract. Students can collaborate in
creating project-related tasks for their tests and
examinations, which should focus on proficiency.
FLEXIBILITY. Since the Deep Approach
emphasizes the learning process over specific
outcomes, rubrics and instructional agreement can
be re-negotiated as the project evolves. This
means that the instruction needs to be flexible in
terms of deadlines and outcomes, as long as a
clear intrinsically motivated energy moves the
project ahead. With practice, the instructor will
learn how to conjugate various individual, peer
and group projects having different deadlines
within the institutionally required frame.
EXAMPLE. Groups may be organized
cooperatively. Imagine the ‘Me Project’ topic in
one intermediate class. Students have viewed an
example, and acquired basic vocabulary through
some readings related to the various tasks as prewriting organizers. Then students build a portfolio
on PowerPoint slides explaining who they are,
what were the important events in their life, what
they like, how they envision their future in


Chi n l
c ngo i ng trong xu th h i nh p

relation to the target country, culture and language.
They write it in the target language. The whole
group has been divided into smaller groups. The
teacher may devote the first 30 minutes to
feedback on writing, while students compare their
portfolios and explain each slide to each other (for
15 minutes in their group and for another 15
minutes in jigsaw, recomposed groups). Thus the
teacher provides writing help and support,
possibly with an advanced student volunteering
for credit to assist in the projects of intermediate
learners. She may notice some needs in terms of
language techniques, which can be reviewed on
streaming grammar videos in small groups.
Students can decide to review these points at
home on multimedia afterwards. Language focus
is project-related. During the next 20 minutes, half
of the class can focus on a film on the topic of
their project and discuss it, while the teacher
meets the other half of the class for a conversation
on the film they viewed during the previous lesson.
For that purpose, the students had to scaffold the
film conversation with their notes, using the film
vocabulary list and its summary in L2. For
optimal benefit, conversations with the teacher are
always scaffolded and optimally don’t happen
unprepared. Thus a lot of emphasis is on pre-oral
activities, and the multimedias’ pedagogical
materials (vocabulary, transcriptions, culture tips,
questions-answers, summaries) are prepared with

this rationale in mind. Culture is present in both
input and output as students must connect their
interests in their ‘Me Project’ with the target
culture. The other ‘Cs’ are equally present:
students communicate, compare their works and
writings, connect disciplines, and relate to
biographies from the L2 community. Advanced
students are proposed to be tutors in the
intermediate class. They will help with projects,
stimulate oral exchange, give some feedback on
writing, and help analyze grammar issues.
In the aforementioned example, what is
different from earlier conceptions of world
language education? What serves to define depth?
First, the approach makes it mandatory for the

Tháng 11/2014

teacher to change her role. The teacher does not
“teach”; rather, she is the world language expert
whom students can consult for all kinds of
concerns that can be formal, but also cultural,
historical, geographical, as well as grammatical.
The teacher must have thorough, experiential
knowledge of the culture (both c2 and C2: popular
culture and traditional ‘Culture’ including the arts,
architecture, geography, history, and other social
sciences, literature, music, religion, etc.). This
allows the teacher to suggest complements to
educative projects, guide the students in their

explorations and realizations, and provide
feedback on what they wrote, or reported. The
students are in charge of their own learning. They
are not spoon-fed by the teacher. However, the
teacher has a tremendous new job, which is to
provide feedback on the details of the projects as
they are realized. Through projects, learning
develops into a broad apprenticeship, as the
students connect the dots across disciplines, skills,
and resources. The curriculum is built by the
students from a huge pool of resources that are
visual, cultural, textual, and discursive, as well as
humane. Thus, it fills the need for
interdisciplinary connections (Capraro, Capraro &
Morgan, 2010). Moreover, the humane dimension
is always foregrounded. The project must have a
transdisciplinary scope: it targets shared
collaboration and experience for self-actualization
and social action. Then, the teacher helps the
students refine their work until it is excellent, no
matter which topic they have chosen. By the time
any evaluation of projects is done, they are as
good as can be.
The Deep Approach thus assimilates some
principles of inquiry-based teaching. Through
their inquiries, students meet a number of task
requirements to develop their projects. The
projects involve a balance of tasks specific to the
various language domains. Thus, deep pedagogy
uses the best aspects of previous trends, and it

adds one key dimension, which is the
transdisciplinary, overarching philosophy, and it
places the students as curriculum builders. They
403


Ti u ban 3: Đào t o ti ng Vi t nh
m t ngo i ng cho ng
i n
c ngoài

are in charge of their own distinct curriculum. In
this respect, the Deep Approach is ahead of its
time and can be considered the next mainstream in
terms of teaching methodologies.
Deep philosophy must NOT be reduced to any
particular, exclusive way of thinking. Additionally,
different definitions of depth can be valid as long
as the humane dimension is present, and they
involve respect for other ways of knowing. The
transdisciplinary aim is the icing on the cake of
methods; it changes their appearances and
meanings and gives a sense of completeness that
goes far beyond utilitarianism and social
reconstructionism.
Shallow teaching places the learner in front of
pre-formatted curricula with extrinsic demands for
a specific series of minimal achievements. Fear of
failing stimulates extrinsic motivation to get good
marks. In contrast, deep learning requires
contextualized, holistic experiences in which the
identity narrative can expand with new life
meanings. The Deep Approach has, for its purpose,

to stimulate deep learning. Among the many
conceptions of learning, deep learning emphasizes
quality, relevance, and purposefulness rather than
rote learning. Learning a new language is
understood
as
a
process
of
cultural
accommodation and abstraction, which is tied to a
variety of subtle meanings and situational
elements that need to be related to perceive the
whole. Such meaningful, intrinsically motivated
and active learning supports deep reinterpretations of reality as being partly shaped by
cultural complexities.
Research Methods
Research Questions in this Study
How was the creation of instructional material
organized and managed process-wise?
The next section responds to this design
research question on the basis of the log that we
kept of our activities. Francois V. Tochon was
Principal Investigator for the project, as applied
linguisti and pedagogist, along with Celile Ökten
404

and Cendel Karaman, Turkish language specialists,
with Isabelle Druc as Project Director who
gathered the logs from which excerpts are

storylined below. Although the language
developed in this project was Turkish, it is
exemplary of processes that could be used to
create similar online resources for Vietnamese.
An Analytic Storyline of the Application
of Deep Approach Principles
in Instructional Resources
of a Less-Commonly-Taught Language
Excerpts from Team Diaries
In 2009, PI Tochon created the templates for
the modules from a model he had used for French
previously. The other members of the research
team agreed to use the templates, which were
improved throughout the project. It was decided
that all contributors to module contents would be
co-authors under Tochon's supervision, whose
name would appear last for his conceptual and
formal contribution and feedback. Thus all the
modules that were created as resources are signed
by specific authors. The first semester of the
project (Spring 2009) PI Tochon focused on
organizing the project conceptually and in terms
of module creation guidelines, template, format,
logo, checklists, list of possible themes for which
we would need films, video footage and
interviews,
and
scheduling.
Beside
conceptualizing the Deep Approach and setting a

first draft of guidelines for the project, PI Tochon
was also responsible for logistics and relationships
with the different universities participating in the
project as pilot sites; as well as the very important
task of obtaining the necessary Institutional
Review Board (IRB) approvals from every
institution for the project. He also was in charge of
informing the faculty and members of the
advisory board about the project and the videos.
Throughout the development of the project, PI
Tochon kept a close watch on how things were
evolving, managed the budget and demands from
the various Institutional Review Boards (IRB) in
the sites of experimentation, met regularly with


Chi n l
c ngo i ng trong xu th h i nh p

the Project Assistants (PAs), gave advice and
directions on how to improve the modules and
website, and provided conceptual support, training
videos, podcasts and texts. The PIs were assisted
by a few gifted UW graduate students as PAs who
helped create modules, develop the website,
prepare the multimedia annotator files, and create
story grammar videos (see below). In addition to
module creation or revision, each assistant took on
a specific task, adding their creativity, motivation
and energy to the project. Two faculty members
(Tochon and Druc) were involved at 40% and two

Project Assistants were involved at 50% of their
time for three years for the creation,
implementation and revision of the materials, plus
one year with PI Tochon and Director Druc with
only one PA at 40%. Karaman and Ökten, the
language specialists, were involved full time for
two months each year and one month the last year.
Crafting the Instructional Modules
PI Tochon had proposed a module structure,
which incorporated the Standards for Foreign
Language Learning in the 21st Century, known as
the five Cs (communication, culture, connections,
comparisons, communities). He also integrated
into the rubrics some elements compatible with
the Common European Framework of Reference
for Languages. Tochon used an earlier structural
concept he had developed for French. Tasks maps
translated initially as ORWriT (Oral Exchange,
Reading, Writing, Language Techniques) were
adapted to fit U.S. current practices, yielding the
IAPI task domains (Interpret, Analyze, Present,
Interact), which integrate writing, reading, and
oral skills into project activities using authentic
audio-video materials. For each module, 2 or 3
educative projects were proposed around a center
theme- for example, Food and Cuisine- depending
upon the module level and complexity of the texts
and video excerpts available. For each project a
series of tasks was chosen that would help link the
different language modalities and culture aspects

of the approach to reach a deeper understanding
and proficiency of Turkish language and culture.

Tháng 11/2014

The original media material was collected during
three different trips to Turkey (see below: Videos
and interviews).
The Intermediate and Advanced curricula
created were designed for two 3-credit, 15-week
college courses but are flexible in their utilization.
Thus the educative projects were proposed
tentatively, approximating possible choices for the
potential students willing to become proficient in
the target language. Compared to current language
pedagogy, this seemed like a paradox, but since
the Deep Approach is student-based, and the
students are curriculum builders, the modules
should then be considered food for thought, as
inspiration for the students to create their own
projects. They are to be understood as a threshold
to self-directed learning, rather than ordered
practices that should be followed like a textbook
(here, a hypertextbook). In a similar way, it would
seem somewhat paradoxical to propose a grammar
curriculum when the DA treats grammar such that
it should be integrated and developed as the needs
arise from actions within projects. But we knew
academic institutions would appreciate having a
panorama of grammar points along all

intermediate and advanced modules, which were
developed in the form of grammar storytelling
videos. The idea was to suggest one possible
curriculum that students and instructors could reshape, reorganize and augment at will. Thus, co-PI
Ökten proposed a set of grammar points that
would be distributed and reviewed in the modules,
12 for the intermediate and 12 for the advanced
levels. While creating the modules, each module
developer would choose 1 to 3 grammar points
that would be highlighted, in accordance with the
texts and video transcriptions chosen for the
different projects in the module.
Tochon and Karaman had previously met with
representatives of the Ministry of Tourism and
Culture, and they had received digital copies of
some 250 films that the program could use
without royalties for educative purposes. They
also were reviewed during Summer 2009, to select
405


Ti u ban 3: Đào t o ti ng Vi t nh
m t ngo i ng cho ng
i n
c ngoài

themes that could lead to possible educative
projects, at the intermediate and advanced levels.
Film excerpts were chosen for that purpose. The
team also worked on the first modules and
PowerPoints (PPT). The crafting of the first
modules using PI Tochon’s original framework
was not an easy task. It took Tochon, Ökten and

Karaman much energy and required multiple team
consultations, trials and errors. One principle that
was applied in creating the modules was that
code-switching could help the learner develop
their self-directed or team-directed projects with
the resources we provided, that had to be userfriendly. We were proposing a post-communicative
approach. Communication was integrated as one of
the standards, yet the connection between the first
and second language would support self-sufficient
learning. Therefore we could propose English
abstracts, and transcriptions or translations. No
two modules would be similar, based on the
principle that the similarity of structure present in
most textbook chapters has a boring effect on
learners. Variety and creativity had to be
encouraged. Each module would suggest slightly
different learning strategies.
The project lasted 4 years: two years to create
the instructional materials and two years to
evaluate its implementation, train teachers and
improve the materials. During the four years of
the project, work and tasks evolved in response to
internal and external feedback, and technical or
work constraints and needs. During Fall 2009 and
Spring 2010 semesters, many adjustments to the
modules’ organization and look were made. Due
to the amount of activities and educative projects
proposed in each module, the initial modules were
much too large, with too many pages. It was
decided to create two separate PDFs, one focusing

on the cultural component and development of the
different skills (Oral Exchange, Reading, Writing,
Focus on Language); the other, smaller one, with
linguistic component developed in the Focus on
Language. These PDFs are accompanied by videos
and PowerPoints. The focus on language PDF is the
text version of the multimedia annotator, a
406

computer program created for another language
project years before.
The multimedia annotator is a tool that allows
the study of a video clip in more depth, with
annotations about culture, vocabulary, grammar,
and a transcription of the audio. It was initially
developed by the Language Institute of the
University
of
Wisconsin-Madison.
The
multimedia annotator (MMLA) allowed us to
annotate small video excerpts, giving information
on context, vocabulary, grammar, etc. The first
version used had many bugs and provided the
feeling of an ‘old’ application -internet wise. The
new annotator, now called DIMA (Digital
Interface and Multimedia Annotator), revamped
the look of the program, brought new functions to
it. In particular there is a slow-down button and
the possibility to see the transcription of the video

excerpt subtitled underneath the clip window; and
a full screen function compatible with the features
of current computers. PA Alagöz entered content,
checking workability, and in constant contact with
Demirbilek, the computer programmer in this
debugging and upgrading phase of the new
software.
By January 2010, 10 modules had been created.
Although these modules would be later revised,
this initial work allowed further module creation
to go faster. The groundbreaking work had been
done, which involved not only creating the
templates for the modules, but learning to work
with the MMLA program, creating the website,
and organizing the work to allow smooth progress.
We had deadlines to meet, one of which was
September 2010, to have all the material ready for
Turkish instructors to start testing the approach: a
total of 24 modules.
Decisions were made regarding the nature of
the contents. The goal was to offer a broad and
balanced view of local society. The choices were
non-partisan, in the sense that different trends and
positions were present in the interviews, films and
texts selected; and we wanted to make sure that
this complexity would be represented, rather than


Chi n l
c ngo i ng trong xu th h i nh p

providing a simplified view of the multiplicity of
cultures and language varieties within the country.
The principle was that our students need to deal
with this variety and complexity when they study
abroad or visit the country; and for this reason we
video-interviewed people of all ages, professions
and provenances in the different geographical
regions, and made these videos available to
students using the Deep Approach.
During 2010, PI Tochon re-visited the Deep
Approach theory and presented new formats. He
directed the efforts of the team with presentations
on the theory, guiding, advising, and reviewing
the final project output. Tochon reviewed and
supervised the modules at different stages of their
creation and Druc kept editing the modules to
homogenize the finished products and prepare
them for the website. Finally, where necessary,
copyright permissions to use some written
material were asked for and obtained. The
permissions were posted on the Deep Approach
website.
Another addition to each module proposed by
Tochon is a video clip presenting in a lively
narrative, the grammar points developed in each
“Focus on Language” section of the modules.
Grammar story-telling, as Tochon named it (see
below) provides an opportunity for learners to
hear what native speakers think about certain
ways of using the language and its cultural

pragmatics. The recording and editing of the
story-telling grammar videos were a fun but timeconsuming task that lasted two years. This aspect
of the project suggests a need for more research. It
was difficult to explain to native instructors
accustomed to teaching grammar that the
proposed practice was very different and how
these situated meanings would affect the form or
vice-versa: for this reason, we wanted stories with
language meanings in context.
As we kept in close contact with the instructors,
and thanks to the implementation of the forum on
the website where feedback can be posted, we saw
the need to add four transitional modules as an

Tháng 11/2014

initial threshold to the Deep Approach for
Intermediate learners. In September 2010, as part
of our material evaluation phase, language
instructors started to use the material and this
prompted us to create a few modules to introduce
the students to the Deep Approach and the
material offered, especially at the start of the third
semester of one study. In addition, the differences
between learners was realized to be important
after a summer during which some students had
forgotten everything they had learned during the
first year, others had spent the summer in Turkey
and arrived with a higher proficiency level, and
heritage learners had joined the group as

newcomers with their unique needs. Thus we
realized we needed a few appealing, simplified
and short modules to help students grasp the
potential of the Deep Approach as well as provide
a smooth transition at the start of the semester.
These modules are pre-intermediate ones,
allowing for an easier transition between
conventional teaching and the online material. The
vocabulary is simpler and there are fewer
activities and projects offered, allowing the
students to get accustomed to the flexibility of the
deep, non-conventional program.
The correction process of the modules lasted
until May 2012, with continued revision and reuploads onto the website. Our Princeton
University collaborator Erika Gilson had been
hired 20% for Spring 2011 at UW to help with the
project, reviewing the consistency of the modules
and PowerPoints. By May 2012, 4 preintermediate, 12 intermediate, 12 advanced and
one Azeri modules had been created. In addition,
57 grammar videos were edited; and PowerPoints,
movies and interviews accompany each module.
A new multimedia annotator, the DIMA, is now in
place and fully operational. Brochures, Prezi
presentations, communications, and workshops
help disseminate the approach. Implementation
into classes is evaluated and interest in the Deep
Approach keeps rising.
407

Ti u ban 3: Đào t o ti ng Vi t nh
m t ngo i ng cho ng
i n
c ngoài

With the help of a programmer, PI Tochon
created an online forum on the website to allow
greater participation of the instructors and students
and feedback on the instructional material, sharing
suggestions related to use. There have been 56
users in the forum in 2012, although participation
was slow at the beginning.
Grammar story-telling
The production of grammar story-telling videos
is an original idea of Tochon to present grammar
in a new and engaging way, focusing on
crosscultural pragmatics. It would allow students
to study and review, at any time, the grammar
points presented in each module. In addition, this
review would be from a fresh perspective, the
perspective of native speakers reflecting on their
language in context.
At first it seemed a challenge to propose a list
of grammar topics, since according to the Deep
Approach, grammar points were to be chosen by
students’ self-determination as the need was
perceived. However, we knew that language
coordinators and language departments might not
feel comfortable if a list of grammar topics
matching the recommendations of the American
Association of Turkish Teacher (AATT) was not
proposed. Thus we took a pragmatic decision. We
wanted to make sure all needed topics could be

represented within the choices of educative
projects suggested. In addition, we wanted to
provide flexibility and freedom to the instructor to
be able to advise students who needed grammar
help for their projects by being able to consult
specific videos with the targeted information.
Another challenge was to reframe grammar
explanations- that shape syntactic meaningsthrough storytelling and lived anecdotes from
Turkish life and culture. We must admit that the
products in this area are still tentative. They will
certainly be helpful to both learners and instructor,
yet suggests a direction of work rather than being
exemplary of what grammar storytelling should or
could be. To be exemplary, conceptualising one
video would have required so many hours with a
408

backing team of applied linguists and researchers
that we would not have been able simply to
propose the whole series of videos. Researchers
who have worked on concept-based grammars
have met similar difficulty.
Due to the multiple references often needed to
highlight a grammar point, and to limit the clip to
5 to 8 minutes, several small videos were
produced, each aiming at a particular grammatical
aspect, with examples and cultural uses. In all, 28
grammar story-telling videos for the intermediate
level and 29 for the advance level modules were
created. To improve the writing skills of

Intermediate and Advanced level learners, they
explored functional grammar approaches, and
made comparisons between Turkish and English,
consulting more than 15 Turkish grammar
reference books.
Let us reiterate that the Deep Approach is
student-based and self-directed, and therefore the
grammar points were suggestions and supports for
personal use and teamwork. The idea was to
create complementary material that would
accompany students' work on projects.
Videos and Interviews: From Collecting to
Editing
PI Tochon had conceptualized the Deep
Approach for teacher training. The goal was to
gather a significant number of resources to create
and
design-research
Personal
Learning
Environments, versatile enough to allow students
or teams of students to create their own projects.
The emphasis on authentic video and audio
materials as learning instruments upon which the
educational projects were to be built motivated a
series of trips to Turkey to collect data.
The first two months of the Deep Approach
project (January-February 2009) were dedicated to
obtaining a preliminary round of media materials
and preparing them for selection for instructional

purposes by the different team members. In
Turkey, co-PI Ökten initiated contact with TV
stations to obtain media material. Co-PI Druc
went to Istanbul in January to select and bring


Chi n l
c ngo i ng trong xu th h i nh p

back programs of educational value for the project.
It was thus possible to obtain as a start TV
programs ranging from news and ads, to health,
cuisine and cultural programs. Druc also
conducted interviews and filmed raw footage of
street scenes, people, and daily activities (23 video
interviews and clips). Being in Istanbul also
permitted Druc to contact directly other stations
and present the project there, notably Açık Radyo
and Flash TV, obtaining programs from these
stations as well. We also used Mehtap TV
programs, especially on traditional Turkish arts.
Back in Madison, Druc proceeded to convert
the TV media material given to her as mpeg files
into editable format for Final Cut Pro editing.
David Marcou, from the WCER technical
department helped in this tedious machine
intensive process. Once editable, the movies could
be trimmed, selecting excerpts illustrating
particular themes as developed in the modules.
Due to the constraints of the educational modules,
only 10 to 12 minute clips were taken. Excerpts

from the movies chosen needed to be properly
acknowledged, with permission to use duly
credited. Druc also prepared a preview DVD
folder to show the other team members, the
review board and interested scholars what kind of
material was available so far. The DVDs were
distributed to all project members for material
selection to be incorporated into the educational
thematic units.
This initial data collection trip allowed us to
refine our approach, focusing on obtaining
complementary raw educational material, and
traveling to other parts of Turkey to achieve a
diversified and balanced view of the language,
culture and traditions of the country. Tochon and
Druc contacted universities and professionals in
Turkey, promoting the DATTL project and
arranging meetings and contacts for obtaining
media material. We scheduled the trip to cover the
center, south, eastern and northern regions of
Turkey to gather as wide and diverse language and
video materials as possible.

Tháng 11/2014

Conceptually, the choice was thus not to give a
monolithic view of the target language that would
only present the Istanbul society. We asked people
of various ages, professions, social classes,
regions, and interests about their lives. The video

interviews were the basis of life-oriented projects.
Back in Madison, Druc actively edited the
interviews made in Turkey and the movies given
by the Ministry of Tourism and Culture, to have
them ready for screening by the team working on
module creation in July and August.
In addition to the interviews, Tochon recorded
streaming videos on the theory of the Deep
Approach presenting (1) the conceptual
framework that gives it sense; (2) the principles
underlying deep teacher planning; (3) how to
organize deep projects; and (4) the role of
grammar. These videos were then edited and later
posted on the DATTL website as an introduction
to the approach and to help instructors. Tochon
and Druc went again to Turkey to gather
complementary video and audio materials, as well
as to collect material representing situations and
professions not yet in the media corpus. Twentyfive additional interviews and raw footages was
thus acquired during this trip, this time targeting
the western part of Turkey and Aegean coast.
Political choices had to be made over the topics
developed in the modules and the videos. We used
the transdisciplinary principle that they should be
useful for change and social justice but we did not
want to represent one aspect or vision of Turkey
only: while there were voices to increase the
Kemalist (secular) or the religious perspective in
our modules, our perspective was to provide –if
this is at all possible– a balanced view of the

diversity of perceptions, views, and rationales
expressed by a variety of different people in
Turkey.
After each trip, and upon finishing the editing
of the interviews, co-PI Druc would also send emails of thanks to all contributors and participants
in the project in Turkey, including the respective
mp4-formated interviews on DVD. We felt that
this was an important part of the work, building
409


Ti u ban 3: Đào t o ti ng Vi t nh
m t ngo i ng cho ng
i n
c ngoài

trust, out of respect and in the spirit of the Deep
Approach. The collection of media material
during the three trips to Turkey allowed us to
obtain a diversified vision of Turkish language
and culture, including street interviews, raw
footage of traditional crafts and daily activities,
still images, TV programs, documentaries and
films of great cultural and educational value.
These constitute the core of the media material
used to produce the DATTL modules, and a large
data bank that each module developer could
exploit to suit his or her needs. Throughout the
module creation and review processes, co-PI Druc
would trim and edit movies and interviews, upon
request, to fit a particular educational project.
Movies or interviews not directly used in a
module could also be presented as additional

material for further viewing.
The video recording and editing of the
interviews done by PI Tochon and co-PI Druc all
around Turkey with people from all regions,
milieus, ages, professions and social classes
provide unique opportunities for Turkish
instructors to present the variety of Turkishes,
showing that the language is not an abstraction
and there are many models, not only the language
of Istanbul. The videos were captured in high
definition, format 16 by 9, that can be used with
the huge screens of smart boards, which will again
revolutionize Turkish language teaching in U.S.
colleges and abroad. On the technical side, the
videos (films and interviews) were edited with
Final Cut Pro, saved as mov and mp4 files. The
first round of videos was produced in small format,
useful for laptops, ipods and individual use.
Instructors, however, wanted to be able to enlarge
the window and get a full screen version. Thus,
we asked Marcou, a video specialist, to convert
the files again, this time to a larger format;
enabling us to now offer both versions (small and
large) on the website. It was also decided to have
a time track under the videos, while the length of
the videos (in minutes) is given on the website. At
some point, some users reported problems
viewing the videos. After checking the WCER
410

server and the website, we could not find any bug.
However, the size of the videos may cause a slow
streaming if the server used is not powerful
enough. We recommend that viewers have
patience and use a powerful streaming server. We
plan to open mirror sites in the future.
Diffusion of the Deep Approach
The team, always open to suggestions, was
seeking ways to improve the modules, the website,
and public outreach. It was thus proposed to start a
newsletter and improve online visibility. PI
Tochon recorded video presentations about the
Deep Approach and its use to help teachers with
the method, and we created PowerPoints, Prezi
presentations and brochures to give a tour of all
the possibilities of the Deep Approach in general
and for Turkish Teaching and Learning as
developed on the website.
Diffusion of the Deep Approach to Turkish
project included external review by an advisory
board, testing the approach in pilot classes at
different study sites, assessing its impact, and
presenting the DA idea at teacher trainings,
meetings and conventions, both on the national
and international scenes. Early on, the DATTL
project was presented to various scholars, teachers,
and media stations to initiate awareness, contact
and collaboration in Turkey and in United States;
and to further interest and evaluation of the
educational needs the project proposed to address.

A corollary to testing the new material was
Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, a long
and time-consuming task. The participating sites
were UW-Madison, the University of Chicago,
Pennsylvania State University, and Indiana
University-Bloomington. Other sites used the
approach and its materials but were not part of the
assessment and design research.
To ensure that quality standards are associated
with the Deep Approach, PI Tochon created a
specific teacher training program, which he
offered on different campuses at no cost to
participant colleges (except for his lodging).
Teacher training sessions were planned at UW-


Chi n l
c ngo i ng trong xu th h i nh p

Madison, Boston, Chicago and Columbia, at Penn
with the participation of PI Tochon and
collaborator Gilson and at Indiana-Bloomington to
which Turkish instructors from other campuses
were invited. On the international scene, the
contacts we had with the Ministry of Tourism and
Culture of Turkey are exemplary of a profound
and significant collaboration between Turkey and
the U.S. It is often difficult to obtain original
footage and films from other countries due to
many restrictions such as copyright. Here we had
been authorized to use a most abundant material

(around 2 TB of digitalized films, 200+ films) and
re-edit the films for educational purpose. Also, we
had contacted Turkish writers and composers
directly, presenting the project to them and asking
permission to use some of their writings or music
in our modules. Their reply has been very positive.
In 2012 the Turkish Flagship Program was
started at Indiana-Bloomington, which will be a
major seat for the Deep Approach to Turkish, as the
Flagship PI, Professor Kemal Silay, collaborates
with IRIS Tochon to ensure deep learning
experiences in future generations of highly proficient
Turkish students. Flagship PI Silay joined our team
in June of 2012 at the Colloquium on the Deep
Approach we organized at Suleyman Demirel
University in Isparta. In 2013, two colloquia have
been organized, one at Wisconsin and one at the
new office of Wisconsin in Shanghai, with the
partnership of SHISU and Jiao Tong University,
as the momentum of the Deep Approach is
spreading to other languages. Another Conference
on Deep Language Learning is organized on
October 11-12 of 2014 in Brisbane, Australia.
Evaluation of the Deep Approach consisted in
students passing two different evaluations with
more than 70 multiple choice questions. These
evaluations assess deep learning (ASSIST test)
and intercultural learning skills and strategies
(Culture test). In addition, we collected oral
proficiency scores and course evaluations. At

UW-Madison, PI Tochon has given a one-

Tháng 11/2014

semester TA training course on the principles of
the Deep Approach, which counted 17 instructors
and two auditors in 12 different languages
including Turkish. Note: The presentations on
how to use the instructional modules are different
from the teaching of the Deep Approach theory.
Indeed, the modules can be used in a traditional
way, while the Deep Approach is the philosophy
behind the appropriate use of the modules.
Discussion
Several points should be stressed regarding the
use of the online modules at the different
institutions where the method has been tested.
These points help understand some of the tests'
results. The information summarized below under
points 1 to 3 was collected directly or indirectly
by co-PI Druc, who gave many of the evaluation
tests to the students and discussed the use of the
Deep Approach with several language instructors.
Point 1. Hybrid Use of the Approach
The instructors often reported not using the
Deep Approach to its full extent, picking some
projects here and there, as fitting their already
planned classes. This pick-and-choose way of
using the modules did not allow a full immersion
into the Deep Approach methodology. It must be

stated that, when approaching the teachers to
evaluate the impacts of the methodology, and in
accordance with the Deep Approach idea, we
highlighted the free-will and liberty options to
choose which modules and projects to work with,
without constraint of modules' order but based on
the interest of the students. However, curriculum,
institutional requirements for assessment and time
constraints often did not allow using the method
consistently and all of the teachers adapted to the
situation by mixing the different methods that
were available. While the statistical results of the
experimental
design
indicated
significant
differences between the Deep Approach group and
the control group, the Deep Approach
methodology needs to be better understood and
used for the evaluation results to appropriately
show significance in the learning process.
411


Ti u ban 3: Đào t o ti ng Vi t nh
m t ngo i ng cho ng
i n
c ngoài

Point 2. A Transition Time: Continuity and
Change
The modules started to be available in October
2010 with regular additions, improvements,

corrections and frequent up-dates of the whole
website in general and its different webpages.
Over a 4-semester period, between Fall 2010 and
Spring 2012, we received feedback from instructors
and students, which we addressed to better suit the
users' needs for language teaching and learning.
This period was a transition time and instructors
were yet not fully aware of the potential of the
methodology or able to transition from their habitual
or expected teaching behavior to a new teaching
style. However, the more the Deep Approach
methodology is used, the easier to apply and more
rewarding it gets, according to the instructors.
Point 3. The Students' Impact
Some advanced students reported not wanting
change or anything new they might need to worry
about, and some of them in a couple of groups
rejected being used as guinea pigs for a new
learning methodology. However, with some
prompting by the teacher and the full liberty to
switch to their preferred way of learning, they
agreed to try a few modules later in the semester.
Ultimately they were happily surprised and liked
the approach. Evidently, the teacher needs to
explain thoroughly to the student what freedom is
theirs in adapting educative projects to their needs
and how to use it.
To Conclude
The effervescence around the new approach
and the materials that have been created show the

degree of interest that it arises. The Deep
Approach theory, published in a 480-page book
titled "Help Them Learn a Language Deply Francois Victor Tochon's Deep Approach to
World Languages and Cultures," became a bestseller in June of 2014, as it ranked in the first 100
Education books sold on Amazon. Colleagues
who have collaborated in the creation of
instructional materials in various LCTL languages
confided that our team had realized more in 2
412

years than they would have in 7. Throughout the
project, there have been several levels of
implementation, corrections, formatting, editing,
and evaluation of the coherence of the modules, to
reach a product of high quality constantly
improved in response to internal and external
reviews. The website1 now boasts 29 modules in
pdf form with accompanying PPTs, video material,
grammar points, the new multimedia annotator
DIMA and Focus on Language pdf. The many
tabs and links offer easy access to theory and
presentation videos, the modules, projects’ index,
DIMA, site map, grammar points, the forum and
multiple subpages. The learners can explore the
material on their own, from a class setting or from
home, freely. The structure is entirely flexible,
allowing students to choose which module, theme,
project, videos or aspect of the approach he or she
wants to work on, without need to follow a
sequential order. The DIMA and grammar storytelling videos can be re-viewed at will to pinpoint

a particular technical point, while many links and
ideas are given for further studies.
To Sum Up
Mastery in modern languages is deeply needed
for a world that communicates (Tochon, 2009).
However foreign languages education is a field
with many contradictions (Tochon, 2011).
Methodologies proposed for modern language
acquisition often clash because of the lack of an
encompassing framework compatible within
educational institutions. Such a framework
towards deep learning was proposed in this article.
This meta-approach gathers the best practices
developed so far. The deep approach probably
represents the next main stream of language
teaching methods (Tochon, 2010: 203):
“In the deep approach, the teacher creates the
conditions for deep learning. Deep teaching aims
to depth in understand and reflective, selfsufficient practice.

1




Chi n l
c ngo i ng trong xu th h i nh p

Assisted self-directed learning is a major part
of the activities.
Classroom tasks are focusing on educative

projects that can be negotiated and organized
individually, among peers, in small cooperative or
collaborative groups,
• The deep approach responds to a need for
social action and acknowledges that every person
is unique and deserves the right to be recognized
in his or her unique characteristics, skills,
aspirations, and realizations.
Primacy of writing for language learning:
connecting situations to authored communication
and recording.”
These principles can be applied to other lesscommonly-taught languages such as Vietnamese.
It requires thorough teacher training, and creating
the appropriate resources. We believe that the
storyline of this endeavor, as presented in this
article, may help researchers and curriculum
designers finding new ways to open the door to
self-directed learners.
For many instructors, organizing deep
classroom activities is a paradigmatic shift.
Contact with colleagues within the Deep
Approach is crucial to resolve issues that may pop
up. The Deep Approach requires new ways of
understanding language learning as a life project.
The roles of the learner and the teacher are
different. One way to stimulate deep learning is to
free students from surface, linear curricula and to
allow them to organize their own projects with an
abundance of resources. With the Deep Approach,
Second Language Acquisition (SLA) has found its

higher goal.
REFERENCES
1. Akbar Hessami, M., & Sillitoe, J. (Eds.). (1990)
Deep vs. surface teaching and learning in engineering
and applied sciences. Victoria University of
Technology, Footscray.
2. Capraro, R.M., Capraro, M.M., & Morgan, J.
(2010). A companion to interdisciplinary STEM
project-based learning. Boston, MA: Sense Publishers.
3. Heilman, J., & Stout, M. (2005). Putting projects
into practice. In K. Bradford-Watts, C. Ikeguchi, & M.
Swanson (Eds.), JALT 2004 Conference Proceedings
(p. 587-591). Tokyo: JALT. Retrieved from: />
Tháng 11/2014

4. Knopp, C. (1982). Overview, Prime, Drill, Check:
An Approach to Guiding Student-Teachers in Lesson
Planning. Foreign Language Annals, 15(2), 91-94.
5. Markham, T., Larmer, J., & Ravitz, J. (2003).
Project based learning handbook: a guide to
standards-focused project based learning for Middle
and High School teachers (2d Rev Spl ed.). Novato,
CA: Buck Institute for Education.
6. Morgan, A. (1993). Improving your students’
learning. London: Kogan Page.
7. Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2009). Critical Thinking,
Concepts and Tools (6th ed.). Dillon Beach, CA:
Foundation for Critical Thinking.
8. Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher
education. New York: Routledge.

9. Rhem, J. (1995). Deep/surface approaches to
learning: An introduction. The National Teaching &
Learning Forum, 5(1), 1–4.
10. Sterling, S. (2001). Sustainable education: Revisioning learning and change (Schumacher Briefing
No.6). Totnes, UK: Green Books for the Schumacher
Society.
11. Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on
project-based learning. San Rafael, CA: Autodesk
Foundation.
12. Tochon, F. V. (2009). The Key To Global
Understanding: World Languages Education. Why
Schools Need to Adapt. Review of Educational
Research. 79(2), 650-682. 2010 AERA Award of Best
Review of Research published in 2009.
13. Tochon, F. V. (2010). Deep Education. Journal
for Educators, Teachers and Trainers (JETT), 1, 1-12.
14. Tochon, F. V. (2011). Reflecting on the paradoxes
of foreign language teacher education: A critical
system analysis. Porta Linguarum, 15, 7–24.
15. Tochon, F. V. (2014). Help Them Learn a Language
Deeply. The Deep Approach to Languages and
Cultures. Blue Mounds, WI: Deep University Press.
16. Tochon, F. V., & Hanson, D. (2003). The deep
approach: World language teaching for community
building. Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.
17. Tochon, F. V., Argit-Ökten, C., Karaman, A. C.,
Druc, I.C. (2008). A Deep Approach to Turkish
Teaching and Learning. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Education, International Research
Studies, CFDA 84.017A-3.

18. Tochon, F. V., Ökten, C.E., Karaman, A.C., &
Druc, I.C. (2012). The Deep Approach to Turkish
Teaching and Learning. Final Research Report to the
U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC, and
Blue Mounds, WI: IRIS/U.S. Department of Education
Deep University Press.
19. Warburton, K. (2003). Deep learning and
education for sustainability. International Journal of
Sustainability in Higher Education, 4(1), 44–56.
413