Millest me räägime, kui räägime aktiivõppest keeletunnis?
What do we mean by active learning in language lessons? An ICAP-based analysis of Estonian as a second language lessons

Summary/Abstract: !is article examines the application of active learning in teaching Estonian as a second language, focusing on the use of the ICAP framework (Interactive, Constructive, Active, Passive) to analyse and plan language instruction. !e motivation stems from consistently low national exam results, with only about half of students reaching the target B1 pro"ciency level. !e concept of active learning, although frequently recommended in curricula and pedagogical guidelines, is noted for its de"nitional vagueness. !e ICAP model, developed by Chi and Wylie (2014), o(ers a structured approach to assessing students’ cognitive engagement through observable behaviours and categorizing learning activities accordingly. Empirical analysis involved six video-recorded third-grade Estonian as a second language lessons, where learning activities were classi"ed according to the ICAP categories. Findings indicate that most classroom time was spent with students passively engaged. Typically, one student was actively or constructively engaged at any given moment, while the rest of the class remained passively engaged, resulting in 67% of the lesson time being categorized as passive engagement at the class level. Truly interactive engagement, which fosters the deepest learning, was rare. Activities requiring active engagement, such as answering text-based questions and "lling in gaps, predominated, while constructive and interactive activities were less frequent. A considerable portion of time was also spent on answering teacher questions, most of which required simple retrieval of information rather than independent generation of responses. It is suggested in the article that ICAP framework is e(ective for analysing and a good tool for planning language instruction. However, lesson planning requires careful consideration of task design to ensure higher levels of cognitive engagement. Furthermore, discrepancies may arise between the intended and actual cognitive engagement of students, emphasizing the need for teachers to observe students’ real behaviours and outputs. !e ICAP model helps in adjusting instructional strategies to guide students gradually towards deeper engagement through sca(olding techniques. Although deep learning is associated with constructive and interactive activities, the article also stresses the importance of passive and active engagement in language learning, particularly for processing linguistic input and noticing patterns necessary for vocabulary acquisition and rule internalization. However, to foster language pro"ciency development, especially communicative competence, greater emphasis must be placed on encouraging constructive and interactive use of the language. !e article concludes that in Estonian as a second language education, increasing the share of constructive and interactive activities is essential for achieving deeper learning and more robust language development. Teachers must tailor tasks not only to students’ current pro"ciency levels but also to stretch their abilities without overwhelming them, thereby creating an optimal learning environment.

• Details
• Contents