zurnal24 Forumzurnal24.info
Forum / Free EssaysNEW

TESOL Master Course - Research Plan

English Writer 4 | -   Freelance Writer
Nov 28, 2017 | #1
Section 1: Theoretical background:

A. (Question 1-9) Unit 1: Teaching Methodology (CLT, Syllabus design, Guidelines for classroom instruction)

1. Give an overview of pre-20th-century language teaching approaches. Mention the role the phonetician Henry Sweet played in the development of the Direct Method. What is the Reading Approach? Which term should be used in language teaching: approach, method or technique?

2. Which are the nine 20th-century approaches to language teaching?

Choose 3 methods or approaches to language teaching that you want to discuss.

3. Discuss how the different language teaching approaches influence syllabus design. What is a structural syllabus?

4. How and why did Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) develop?

Explain the terms: communicative competence, productive, receptive, active skills, passive skills.

5. Give some suggestions for shaping a CLT curriculum. What does My language is me imply?

6. Grammar is important, and learners seem to focus best on grammar when it relates to their communicative needs and experiences. Do you agree?

7. Summarize some of the guidelines for the classroom instruction. You are going to teach irregular verb forms in English: Language presentation, lesson planning, rule presentations and explanations, tasks, class organization, correction and feedback. Write down the goals or objectives for this particular lesson.

8. Why should ESL teachers be concerned about keeping up with the results of classroom research and second-language acquisition research?

9. How much place do you presentation, explanation and discussion of rules or language use have in the SL classroom? What underlying view of language and language learning supports your view?

B. One topic from Unit III: Integrated approaches - choose 1 and summarize it. The 4 topics include:

- Literature as content for ESL/EFL (Marguerite Ann Snow): - Below are some suggested ideas when summarizing and discussing the main points:

+ Give suggestions for using literary texts to develop language. How can you integrate speaking, writing and grammar when you use a literary text? Explain the psychological, the spatio-temporal and the ideological points of view.

+ Observe an ESL or EFL class that uses literary texts. Describe the activities in the class that contribute to students awareness of the language in the text and the activities that develop students awareness of the cultural schemas in the text.

- Content-Based and Immersion Models for Second and Foreign Language Teaching(Sandra Lee McKay)

- Experiential and Negotiated Language Learning (Janet L. Eyring)

- Bilingual Approaches to Language learning (Mary McGroaty)

C. One topic from Unit IV: Focus on the learner (P359, Rebecca L. Oxford): choose 2 learning strategies & 2 learning styles, summarize the main points and discuss.

Section 2: Practical Work

- How to teach grammar:

+ Summarize from P.249 P.275 (Unit II E, How to teach Grammar and Vocabulary)

+ Mention your own point of view on how you teach grammar and which pedagogical method you prefer yourself. Explain why.

- Teaching lexical chunks: Summarize main points in chapter 7 and then focus on your discussion on how to teach lexical chunks.

Section 3: Classroom research

Unit V: Skills for teachers: Action research, teacher research and classroom research in language teaching:

- Define classroom research. What topics have been investigated and what is the teacher's role?
- What does classroom research mean to you?
- Why should teachers get involved?

Summary on Second Language Acquisition (SLA) Research + Discuss Ellis work (choose 1 of these):

- The Study on Second Language Acquisition
- Understanding Second Language Acquisition
- SLA Research and Language Teaching
- Analysing Learner Language

Then, write half a page regarding your research on one applied linguist, while mostly focus on his/her contribution to TESOL field.


TESOL Language MasterThe first language teaching approaches included aural-oral techniques to foster the learning of second languages for certain "higher" callings (religion, politics, etc.). This was in the Greek and Roman period. In the Renaissance, the formal study of Greek and Latin in particular was stressed for those receiving a formal education, via the use of (newly invented) textbooks concerning grammar. The Comenius approach, in the early- to mid-17th century, opposed this "grammatical" emphasis, relying instead upon practice, imitation, the use of images to impart the meaning of "foreign" words, and other more progressive teaching techniques. By the early 19th century, the pendulum swung back to a strict grammar-translation method giving way to the direct method by the end of that century. The direct method was a descendant of the many natural approaches, and employed the use of the second language only in the classroom, the use of "everyday" language (as opposed to a previous emphasis on the classics), the inductive learning of grammar, and the association of abstract ideas with images and other "tangibles" to make them real.

Henry Sweet, an applied linguist in Britain, argued, however, that while the direct method was innovative, the absence of a strong methodology in the direct method rendered it less effective than it could otherwise be, although in other respects Sweet was aligned with the "natural method" advocates. The reading approach arose in the early 20th century, and focused upon the silent reading (and, ideally, comprehension) of written texts. The terms method, approach, and technique are not interchangeable, but rather are used in a hierarchical fashion to denote specific things. An approach is a set of assumptions about the nature of language - how it is taught and learned. A method is a way of doing something - a plan for teaching language according to a set approach. A technique is a tool, a skill - a way to implement the method.

The 20th-century saw quite a few changes to these approaches. The nine commonly understood approaches to language teaching of the 20th century are grammar translation, the direct method, the reading method, audiolingualism, oral-situational, cognitive, affective-humanistic, comprehension-based, and communicative. The direct method might be thought of as a type of immersion method. No use of the student's native language is allowed, for one thing as this is thought to simulate the way in which a child learns his or her first language. While this approach makes intuitive sense (in that when one is forced to learn something, one will do so), the reality is that the classroom is an extremely limited venue in which to implement this particular method. The grammar translation method, on the other hand, uses the students' native language almost exclusively, and teaches the second language via vocabulary lists, endless drills to translate sentences, teaching the rules of grammar, and so forth. This approach, as it is devoid of a natural context in which to practice the second language, is quite limited. Finally, the communicative approach is rather the mirror image of the grammar translation method. It sees language as a tool allowing people to communicate, and that this should be the goal of second language instruction. Thus, teachers simulate "real world" situations (e.g. ordering a meal) in their classrooms, and high levels of practice are encouraged so that students can gain proficiency.

The syllabus is one primary tool instructors use to facilitate student learning by guiding their own actions. Because the syllabus is a plan mapping out the content which will be taught, in the order (and sometimes fashion) in which it will be taught, the chosen language teaching approach has a great impact upon the type of syllabus design chosen for a particular class. For example, when a teacher chooses the grammar translation method, a structural syllabus will be used to chart the course, as this type of syllabus stresses the form of language (as opposed to the content), as well as the teaching of grammatical structures as the basis of language instruction. Such structural syllabi have been criticized as they tend to present the learning of language as a linear, rule-oriented process, although more recent versions of same (e.g. the task-supported structural syllabus) allow for a structured approach that accommodates a more CLT-oriented instruction. A "multistrand" syllabus, on the other hand, will make use of a variety of approaches in one "master plan" (Crookes), whereas a CLT syllabus may be vaguer on the specific content for the lesson plan for any given day, but will clearly chart a course through the semester that integrates both content and form (meaning and structure) into every lesson.

Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) really took off in the 1970s, among instructors who were dissatisfied with the more traditional approaches such as grammar translation - specifically, they felt those approaches did not teach students how to communicate in their second language. The idea was to give students a more authentic experience of language, so that they could actually communicate effectively in same (as opposed to, for example, simply being able to recite the grammatical rules). CLT defines communicative competence according to four categories: linguistic competence (understanding the grammar, syntax, and other rules of the language), sociolinguistic competence (knowing when and how to use particular utterances of the language), discourse competence (understanding the larger context in which particular utterances are made), and strategic competence (knowing how to correct mistakes in communication when they occur). Productive skills refer to those skills which enable a language user to create an utterance in an effort to communicate something; receptive skills, on the other hand, are those skills that enable the language user to understand the utterance of another. Passive listening refers to the learner simply listening to another person read in the second language; active listening skills refer to those activities in which the learner is required to take part in the communication.

Perhaps the sentence "My language is me" sums up CLT best. "My language is me" refers to the final stage of the CLT approach to second language acquisition, and means that the learner is shaping a new identity in this second language. This is when the learner is able to fully engage in his or her new language, and able to effectively communicate in said language whether or not such communications are strictly "correct." This represents a shift from more traditional approaches to language in which correct grammar, native pronunciation, and so forth were key components of assuming a second language had been effectively learned. To shape a CLT curriculum, an instructor should first take into account the previous experiences of the learners so as to make the second language relevant to them (e.g. one would approach instruction differently based upon whether the students were in high school or adult immigrants to a new country). The instructor then needs to create a series of meaningful "real-world" simulations and actual staged situations in which the learner becomes engaged in the need to use the new language, incorporating instruction in the rules of the new language in a context-driven fashion (meaning, for example, once a student had asked if her male friend wanted an apple, the instructor might make mention of the use of the male pronoun in the utterance, to call attention to the use of gendered pronouns in the new language).

CLT also resonates with this statement: "Grammar is important, and learners seem to focus best on grammar when it relates to their communicative needs and experiences," with which I completely agree. Except in rare cases involving the desire, on the part of a learner, to know the grammar of a new language purely for the sake of appreciating the structure (e.g. students of Latin who find meaning in understanding its classical rules), learners want to be able to use their new language in order to effectively communicate based upon their needs. If I am a migrant worker in a new nation with a new language, I need to understand (at bare minimum) enough of the new language in order to be able to find and retain work positions. If I am planning to spend six months traveling through a new country in order to understand particular cultural dynamics, I will need both a broader, and more in-depth, understanding of the new language in order to communicate effectively enough to serve my purposes. One of the main advantages to the CLT approach is that it incorporates both form-based and meaning-based instruction geared so that communication in the new language - effective communication that serves the purpose of the learner - is the primary goal (Savignon, 2002). Thus, an understanding of grammar is organically woven into the knowledge of the new language, and is made both more relevant, and more understandable, as a result.

One of the most important guidelines for classroom instruction in a second language is the use of the new language in the classroom (by both the teacher and the students). According to CLT, effective communication in the new language is key to a true embrace of the language. Another important guideline is not just using the new language, but using it in meaningful ways so as to simulate "real world" situations. A third critical guideline is for the instructor to incorporate instruction in grammar, syntax, and other rules as communication evolves, so that form and meaning have a chance to develop congruently. Teaching irregular verb forms in English is in many senses about memorization, as there are no rules to follow, nor are there ways to intuit which word to use (e.g. began as the past tense of begin, cost as the past tense of cost, etc.). Thus, the teaching of irregular verb forms in English, specifically regarding the past tense of such verbs, would be an on-going "lesson" woven throughout the course. Every day, a goal could be to learn and practice five new verb forms, with the objectives being able to both verbalize and write the forms correctly. Every week, the goal could be to, in a group, write and perform a skit that correctly incorporates at least 10 of these verb forms.

As one can see, based upon a review of even just the 20th century approaches to language learning, our understanding of the related pedagogy continues to evolve. It was not that long ago, after all, that CLT was developed - just about 40 years ago. While CLT seems to be the most effective approach currently in use in language-acquisition classrooms, the reality is that this is what we know now. Our understanding of language and linguistics continues to grow and develop, in part aided by an increasingly sophisticated understanding of the brain and how we learn. If one does not keep up on the research in this field, one risks sticking with an approach, method, and techniques that is not supported any longer by the newest developments. After all, it is certainly the case that many instructors still do not use the target language nearly enough in the classroom, and this is most likely because they are still rooted in outmoded pedagogical information. It is never wise to "rest on one's laurels" and assume one knows everything in one's field, again, particularly in fields that are continually evolving as our knowledge base broadens and deepens.

At this point, current research suggests that the presentation of rules pertaining to language use does indeed have a place in the second-language classroom, but the extent of this place (so to speak) varies according to the context of the particular lesson. For example, when students are learning prepositions (a scary word to many students even when it refers to their native language), the lesson might involve the instructor playing a game of charades in front of the class, being as comical and engaging as possible, and all scenarios acted out would involve the use of at least one preposition, such as "under the apple tree." After the students had gotten the hang of a few prepositions, the instructor could ask them to identify the part of speech that had been focused upon, and could then discuss the use of prepositions in the new language. Thus, a discussion would follow an explanation, but the presentation would be interactive as opposed to didactic.

In other words, except in rare cases, the explanation about, and discussion of, rules should not occupy center stage, especially for new learners, as such a presentation can be off-putting and stressful to second-language learners. Rather, instructors can introduce specific rules pertaining to grammar, syntax, and so forth through the use of engaging, lively lessons that require the students to communicate about a particular thing, and then introduce them to the foundational rule underneath the lesson. The CLT view of language learning supports my views in this matter.

Eyring is one of the leading proponents of experiential and negotiated language learning (along with Stoller) (Celce-Murcia). This approach to language acquisition stresses the importance of completing projects in the context of learning the language. The idea is that by actually doing something - something real - that requires communication in the new language, learners will more effectively learn the new language, as well as place it in a meaningful context. Eyring lists several types of projects that are conducive to such learning situations. First, collection projects are good at teaching such things as names of fruit, or types of rocks. Second, informational projects are effective at helping learners collect verbal information, often in person from native speakers (ideally), such as through interviews, or else written information, such as via texts written by native speakers. Third, orientation projects help learners see the new language truly in the context in which it is used (for example, they learn how to travel in a new city). Fourth, social welfare projects help learners focus upon helping someone else while using the new language; for example, they might work in a team of native speakers to help make repairs to the home of an elderly person, also a native speaker, and in so doing not only gain a better grasp of the language, but also situate the language in a meaningful, altruistic context.

As the project progresses, students can be evaluated in several ways. They can discuss the progress in class (in the new language, of course); they can write daily (or weekly, depending upon the particular project) updates about their progress; they can create formal presentations to give to the class upon completion of the project; and they can even create new projects to follow up on previous ones, thus indicating a more sophisticated understanding of not only the new language, but of possible meaningful uses of the new language.

Learning strategies in the context of second language acquisition are the tools and techniques that students use to learn a new language, as opposed to the strategies that instructors use to teach a new language. One example of a learning strategy is the use of paraphrasing, which can come into play either in speaking or in writing. When a student uses this strategy, s/he might listen to a native speaker say something in the new language, but instead of parroting it back to the speaker, s/he will word it differently to effectively say the same thing. This sort of "self-push" to communicate by paraphrasing enables the student to more deeply understand what has been heard, as well as to bolster the use of synonyms in the new language. This is a cognitive strategy. Another learning strategy comes into effect more in writing, and involves the planning of a given text. This is a metacognitive strategy. For example, if given the assignment to write an essay in the new language, planning the essay - using an outline, notes, and so forth - and completing the plan in the new language can be an excellent way for a student to organize thoughts (and words), thus making the task more manageable.

A student's learning style, on the other hand, refers to the general approach s/he has to learning a second language. Such approaches have to do with personality, sensory preferences, and other aspects of the students. For example, more outgoing students (extroverted) might prefer instructional strategies (both their own, and those of the instructor) that ask them to learn the rules of the language (grammar, syntax, and so forth) in a more sociable, group-oriented fashion, while more inward-turning students (introverted) might well prefer small, one-on-one situations in which to practice the new language.

I believe that the teaching of grammar is best done in the context of a CLT approach to language instruction. I believe that language is an organic thing, and must therefore be approached accordingly, in a holistic fashion. What I mean by this is that instruction in a new language must integrate both the form and the meaning in written and oral communications in such a fashion that neither aspect is lost. However, how would this happen in practice? There are a plethora of possibilities; the key is to incorporate, in every single lesson, both meaning-based and form-based instruction. For example, the instructor of a third-year high school class can ask students to engage in a role-play regarding whether or not they can borrow the car for that coming evening. The class can be divided into groups of three, comprising the mother, the father, and the son or daughter. Each group can have some freedom as to how they wish to structure the conversation, but the ground rules would include the use of particular forms, such as "future-oriented" words (e.g. "I will be driving Jennifer to the restaurant"), or a certain number of adverbs in sentences (e.g. "You always tell me no when I want to borrow the car!"). Each group will act out its scenario, and after each presentation, the class will identify the verb forms that pertain to the future tense, the adverbs used in the presentation, and the other utterances referring to the ground rules.

I also believe in the teaching of grammar via the CLT approach because so much of grammar learning (regardless of whether it pertains to one's native language, or a second language) is stressful for students, and stress inhibits true learning. This is not to say that one should never teach grammar explicitly, but rather that grammar should not be the first thing students learn about a new language, nor should it even introduce a new concept. Rather, the teacher should set up situations in which students are motivated to use the new language, taking risks and learning as they make mistakes (and increasingly self-correct). The teacher is there to listen, to guide, to facilitate, but not to wield a proverbial red pen and inform the student of every mistake he or she makes. Once the student has gained sufficient proficiency in a given aspect (e.g. learning to introduce herself to others), then the teacher can explain one or more rules of the language as they pertain to the lesson. By that time, the student will have gained confidence in her ability to introduce herself in the new language, and so the "grammar lesson" won't have the same stress factor it might otherwise have had.

Having said this, I believe that while grammar might be something best "managed" by the instructor so as to reduce stress, ideally by weaving it into lessons that are engaging, interesting, and meaningful, it is also something that instructors need to embrace as interesting, useful, and meaningful in its own right, if only because then students will follow that lead and perhaps reduce their own stress around adopting excellent grammatical skills in their new language. After all, part of effective communication is using the appropriate, grammatically-correct versions of various utterances; and if students cannot grasp basic grammatical concepts, then they are inhibited in their ability to communicate effectively. Thus, instructors need to give equal weight, both in terms of their own affect as well as their actual instruction, in an effort to encourage students to take ownership of their own learning process, not only in terms of learning how to speak in such a fashion as to be understood, but also to be as correct as possible in terms of the grammar of the new language.

One particularly effective way to teach a second language is by employing the use of lexical chunks. A lexical chunk is one or more words that tend to group together in practical use. Some lexical chunks are referred to as "collocations" (i.e. two content words which are commonly used together, such as "strangely silent"), while others are not collocations because they contain both a content word and a grammatical function word (e.g. "by the way"). There are a couple of very important principles in terms of teaching lexical chunks. The first is that proficiency in a language relies heavily upon the use of such chunks; knowing a language is not simply a matter of having grammar on one side and words on the other and combining them appropriately, but also a matter of being able to use lexical chunks much like Legos, inserting them into the proper "slots" in communication. The second principle is that some lexical chunks work in a given language, and others do not; and it is often these "misused" chunks - most of which are entirely correct, by the way - that mark non-native writers and speakers as such. For example, in English, we would not say we have a "generous interest" when we wanted to convey that we were very interested in a particular subject, even though technically, this would be correct. In fact, it is quite often the case that lexical chunks are not grammatically correct (e.g. "I am all thumbs").

Thus, the key in teaching lexical chunks is to help students know which ones are common to their new language, and which are not, and to help them through this sometimes confusing process of deliberately using what are often incorrect phrases in an effort to communicate more effectively. Ways to help students learn these things are giving them texts so they can identify the lexical chunks (and discuss what they think about them, also in the new language), categorizing types of lexical chunks (e.g. making lists of lexical chunks that use the word "way" in them), and practicing common lexical chunks in role plays so that they become more familiar.

Almost any given topic related to second language acquisition can be researched in the classroom by instructors using action research techniques. For example, interactions between teachers and students, vocabulary instruction, and the use of new technologies in teaching second languages are all topics that have been studied in the classroom, by second language instructors, for the purposes of furthering pedagogical knowledge about second language acquisition and instruction. Such "classroom research," as it is commonly called, takes place all the time among reflective teachers, and, at the most basic and informal level, refers to the use of data to improve instructional practice. This can be as simple as noticing that a given lesson on verb tense was understood by only one third of the class, and, as a result, using a different approach the next time. However, classroom research in the formal sense involves not just trying different things on a daily basis, but rather systematically researching the effects of our various approaches, techniques, strategies, and so forth upon student learning (Kochis). The key term here is "systematic;" for the results of a particular action research project to be meaningful to other instructors, they need to be verifiable and repeatable. For a project to be verifiable requires that the instructor kept records on given instructional methods, lessons, and whatever else is relevant to the specific research question(s) s/he is investigating; for the project to be repeatable, it must include the specifics in terms of how lessons were taught, what items, if any, are required to implement the lessons, and so forth.

The beauty of action research in the classroom is that the setting is natural; students are not learning in laboratories, in isolated situations which may or may not have relevance in the "real world" of the academic setting. Teachers are in the perfect position to truly observe what students are doing in reaction to their various instructional approaches, as they know their students, and can best interpret their responses (as well as have access to quantifiable data, such as test scores). However, this is also what can make classroom research challenging, in that biases can easily creep in; teachers therefore need to be aware of this possibility, and take measures to counter it (e.g. by ensuring that all measures of learning are objective as much as possible, or asking a colleague to observe a set number of lessons to seek confirmation from an outside source). Thus, the teacher's role is first to observe a particular phenomenon (e.g. "teaching prepositions using charades") and then to determine a way to research this phenomenon using verifiable, repeatable methods. Another important aspect of classroom research is the fact that results can be implemented almost immediately (as opposed to having to wait for the publication of a given study in a peer-reviewed journal, waiting for other researchers to repeat the study to see if they obtained the same results, and other delay-causing situations). If an instructor is testing a new idea regarding vocabulary learning and it completely confuses almost all of the students in her first three classes, there is no reason why she should compel the rest of her students to endure the same lesson; instead, she can incorporate what she's learned and move forward from there.

Rod Ellis is one of the strongest advocates of teachers conducting action research projects. He has made many contributions to the TESOL field, but perhaps his most influential one has been his emphasis upon research-supported instruction. Teaching is a profession that can sometimes be a "fly by the seat of your pants" endeavor; attention to research can go by the wayside quickly once an instructor is confronted by real live students, many of whom are not taking the class by choice, and many of whom have very real stress issues around learning a second language. However, given that the pedagogy around SLA is far from uniform - meaning that linguists, theorists, educators, and other scholars still differ about what comprises the best practices concerning second-language instruction and learning - it is imperative that the most current research in the field is used to drive practice.

Another critical contribution Ellis has made to the field has been the interpretation and explanation of various theories concerning second language acquisition and instruction. For example, his explication of "interlanguage" as the interplay between the learner's first language and his/her second language is brilliant in its simplicity, clarity, and resonance (Ellis). In addition, his refinement of task-based language learning has been quite informative and also represents a valuable contribution to the field of SLA research.

In any case, Ellis' book SLA Research and Language Teaching is a guide, of sorts, for instructors of second languages to use to inform their own classroom research projects. Ellis details four primary roles that SLA researchers have: the development of relevant theories pertaining to second language instruction; conducting their own action research projects, in their own classrooms; publicizing the results of said research so that other instructors can benefit from it; and helping other instructors to perform action research projects of their own. While Ellis does discuss the conducting of action research projects by other relevant professionals besides teachers (such as syllabus designers), the reality is that in this book, he focuses upon the unique contributions that instructors can make to the field by virtue of their combination of expertise and access. Ellis also discusses the ways in which teachers can apply what has been learned about second-language acquisition via action research projects, which is important as upon occasion, the results of such projects can feel outside the reach of instructors other than the one who completes the study in the first place (that is, they can feel quite individualistic, as opposed to repeatable, which should be one of the standards of conducting action research).

Every chapter introduces a different issue relevant to SLA research, including various options in teaching grammar, the structural syllabus (including an updated approach to same), ways that teachers in particular can perform as researchers in their classrooms, and the formation and use of various communication-related tasks (including grammar-related tasks). Ellis also includes a chapter on ways to implement the findings of research projects in the classroom, and some of the challenges contained therein. Thus, the book serves as not only a guide to assist teachers in their own research, but also as an introduction to the field in general as it is seen from the perspective of empirical research (as made relevant for practicing teachers).

For all of these reasons, more second-language instructors should get involved with classroom research. They are the ones on the front lines, so to speak - they have direct access to students, they are the ones who understand the pedagogy (and the theory behind it), and they are therefore ideally situated to obtain "real-time" information about the effects of various approaches to second language instruction.


Celce-Murcia, M. (2001). Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Heinle & Heinle, Publishers.

Crookes, G. (2003). A practicum in TESOL: professional development through teaching practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Ellis, R. (2003). Second language acquisition. New York: Oxford University Press. SLA research and language teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.

Galloway, A. (1993). Communicative language teaching: An introduction and sample activities.

Kochis, B. (n.d.) Classroom research: An introduction. In Assessment in and of collaborative learning.

Richards, J.C., & Rogers, T.S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Savignon, S.J. (Ed.). (2002). Interpreting communicative language teaching: Contexts and concerns in teacher education. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Forum / Free Essays / TESOL Master Course - Research Plan

Need Help? ➰
Top Academic Freelance Writers!
Top Academic Research Services!

- (coupon: GW10)
- (coupon: Best7)
Verify a freelance writer profile:
Check for a suspicious Twitter profile:
SIGN UP for an zurnal24 account!