|
Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
doomer
Joined: 01 Feb 2014 Posts: 18
|
Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2014 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I just wanted to say thanks to Fluffyhamster & Golsa for posting here. Especially fluffy for maintaining his valid criticisms over 20 pages; he clearly knows his stuff... obvious to anyone with a basic familiarity of 2nd language acquisition theory. I've read little; but enough to know that SLA theory is still just theory.
All pedagogy contains assumptions about how knowledge or abilities are best acquired. There definitely is "a CELTA way" with its own set of assumptions, like "minimizing TTT"... highly questionable for learners in an EFL environment, where the NES teacher is often the only interactive source of spoken authentic language & comprehensible input. But in a TESOL context where learners are immersed in a NES country, reducing TTT seems much more reasonable.
EFL learners are disadvantaged by the lack of immersion, but this can be partly offset by their monolingual L1 EFL context. And both EFL Ts & Ss need all the advantages they can get. Teachers knowing the students’ L1 can use it to address fossilization (eg Chinglish), grammar, vocabulary, concept checking, and obviously, develop interpreting skills. Yet “the CELTA way” is still mired in its TESOL L2-only historical roots, which limits teachers’ toolkits & their vision of what TEFL can be.
Another CELTA cherished assumption is TBL, "engaging students with tasks". Again, highly questionable for Asian EFL adults with full-time jobs & 48hr work weeks, who attend class after work or during company time. Hence, many adults want a more "convo/chat" style... to relax & socialize. Especially adults required to attend classes by employers. Office workers, managers, housewives... few want to perform artificial tasks, following instructions, listening to & answering ICQs, etc… an inefficient use of precious & limited EFL class time, imo.
I also find it too difficult for teachers in an alien EFL context to anticipate tasks & topics that will engage students; it's also too teacher-directed, and I prefer students generate their own content. And then to plan, design, & micromanage tasks into brief chunks of time? I find this disrupts class flow & interaction, and impedes deeper engagement.
Even tasks & role plays that replicate practical situations or functions (ordering food, etc) have questionable priority in an EFL context (unless students are emigrating). But in a TESOL context, sure, students may be more motivated & engaged for TBL & RPs.
I’m not implying CELTA is completely useless; I find some utility on the technique level (eliciting, guided discovery, CCQs, etc). But on a larger approach/method level, CELTA is outdated & inefficient for TEFL contexts. Yet Stephen Bax introduced the idea of ELT context in 2003.
I can’t give a more in-depth critique, since I never took or attempted the CELTA. The little I know is because I used to recommend the British Council; but every student kept giving me negative feedback about it, so I was motivated to do some research. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Sashadroogie

Joined: 17 Apr 2007 Posts: 11061 Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 6:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
doomer wrote: |
I've read little; but enough to know that SLA theory is still just theory.
|
In much the same way atomic theory or the theory of gravity is still just theory? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005 Posts: 3292 Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 7:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
It would be more accurate to say SLA theories plural. But I look forward to you laying out the core axioms common to all of them, and demonstrating how one and only one method naturally follows, Sash. And don't forget to include the more sociocultural than formal models, please.
Thanks for the vote of confidence, Doomer. I think anyone who has to somehow teach conversation and is serious about it will come to similar realizations. And I think they'll come in even in TESOL contexts (finding good conversation partners is never assured, and it's easy to "languish" in L1 enclaves and do little more than get by receptively in the L2). |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
spiral78

Joined: 05 Apr 2004 Posts: 11534 Location: On a Short Leash
|
Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 7:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
Another CELTA cherished assumption is TBL, "engaging students with tasks". Again, highly questionable for Asian EFL adults with full-time jobs & 48hr work weeks, who attend class after work or during company time. Hence, many adults want a more "convo/chat" style... to relax & socialize. Especially adults required to attend classes by employers. Office workers, managers, housewives... few want to perform artificial tasks, following instructions, listening to & answering ICQs, etc… an inefficient use of precious & limited EFL class time, imo. |
Yet another argument based mostly (possibly solely) on a poster's experiences in Asia. The CELTA does not purport to be 'the certificate for teachers in an Asian context.' And not having taken the CELTA also means that trying to analyze the course is obviously speaking from restricted knowledge.
Maybe fair to say the CELTA doesn't aim to teach teachers to be ideal conversation class leaders.  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
doomer
Joined: 01 Feb 2014 Posts: 18
|
Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sasha wrote: |
SLA is still theory... in much the same way atomic theory or the theory of gravity is still just theory? |
Far worse. SLA theory is still on the level of hypothesis ("educated guesses"). Read Theories of SLA. Note the last sentence of the intro paragraph: "Each of these theories can be thought of as shedding light on one part of the language learning process; however, no one overarching theory of second-language acquisition has yet been widely accepted by researchers."
Hence, various methods based on various hypotheses... which fall in & out of fashion & favor in decadal cycles.
CELTA IH recommends 2 methodology books (skimmable via slideshare):
- 'Learning Teaching', Jim Scrivener
- 'The Practice of English Language Teaching', Jeremy Harmer
In PELT, Harmer writes: "The teaching of English is in a constant state of flux, with new theories, practices, & materials erupting all over the world on an almost daily basis. We are constantly challenged by new research, provoked by the questioning of long-held beliefs..."
In LT, Scrivener: "It is not a book about the right way to teach. Indeed, there is no scientific basis yet for writing such a description of an ideal teaching methodology."
You're confusing pedagogy & TEFL with natural sciences like brain surgery & rocketry. Or applied sciences like basketweaving. It's far easier to effectively & repeatedly perform the latter 3 operations than it is to help the average adult student acquire EFL.
Perhaps you should read & think more critically. Your pro-CELTA positions are grounded only on hypothesis, and not supported by empirical evidence or results... say, at British Council learning centers, where the staff are all "qualified & experienced" CELTA teachers.
I should state it's probably in my better economic interests that everyone get a CELTA and teach in "the CELTA way". So if that ultimately happens, I wouldn't care, either. This is also why I don't bother to respond to every criticism of my opinions.
Last edited by doomer on Mon Mar 24, 2014 6:46 pm; edited 4 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Sashadroogie

Joined: 17 Apr 2007 Posts: 11061 Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pluralities of atomic theories exist too, Fluffy, though I would not be a suitable choice to outline them. Yet, no one denies the existence of atomic structure.
However, that is precisely what we are reading here, transposed to EFL methodology. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
spiral78

Joined: 05 Apr 2004 Posts: 11534 Location: On a Short Leash
|
Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 9:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Suggestion:
Fluffy and doomer are clearly well-placed to create a new certification course, for which there would be a very genuine clientele and for which there is obviously a real need. It could be titled along the lines of: What the CELTA Won't Teach You: How to Facilitate Really Excellent Conversation Classes for Asian EFL Students. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
LongShiKong
Joined: 28 May 2007 Posts: 1082 Location: China
|
Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
doomer wrote: |
Another CELTA cherished assumption is TBL, "engaging students with tasks". |
'Highly questionable for Asian EFL adults'? Where do you think it got started, if not in Asia? As for China, here's a 2009 study? Want more?
Quote: |
Again, highly questionable for Asian EFL adults with full-time jobs & 48hr work weeks, who attend class after work or during company time. Hence, many adults want a more "convo/chat" style... to relax & socialize. |
Could that be why Asians, unlike Europeans or Hispanic speakers in the Americas, never complain about excessive TTT from the likes of Hod's 'Elvis' or the CELTA-trained ones I'd mentioned? For a great many Asians, conversation with a foreigner consists of asking a set of memorized questions: name, place of origin, marital status, # of family members, and what the foreigner thinks about their country or food. That's it--no follow-up questions. Not surprisingly, some TEFLers consider it their mission in life to teach basic interpersonal (English) communication skills to such types. It seems you and Fluff may be of this sort:
Fluff wrote: |
I think anyone who has to somehow teach conversation and is serious about it will come to similar realizations. |
spiral78 wrote: |
Fluffy and doomer are clearly well-placed to create a new certification course,.... |
I can see it now: Free Elvis Costume for Early Registration.  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005 Posts: 3292 Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2014 1:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sasha wrote: |
Pluralities of atomic theories exist too, Fluffy, though I would not be a suitable choice to outline them. Yet, no one denies the existence of atomic structure.
However, that is precisely what we are reading here, transposed to EFL methodology. |
Awww, you missed a golden opportunity to shout that line that Jesse often does in Breaking Bad. (It usually starts something like "Yeah, science, .....!". I'll leave you to complete or find out the common ending ).
Don't forget to reply to Doomer too (even though he or she may not be inclined to reply, at least not right away). I doubt any of us are that qualified or can really be bothered to comment on SLA theories let alone atomic theories (I'm taking your word for the latter), but nobody is denying that languages exist and humans can develop ability in more than one. What is up for debate is precisely the LT methodology, which in many cases is (IMHO) an imposition that blocks and clouds more than it opens and illuminates (a bit like how static interference with analogue signals would make the telly hard to watch and become quite irritating).
While we're on the subject of theories, I would ask just how much "explanatory power" the average ELT lesson has. How much light does it shed, what does it help predict, and so on. If we are honest, and admit that teaching anything of worth is actually quite difficult, the answer is: probably not very much, especially given the limitations of the training. (I refer the curious reader back to John Haycraft's If- on page 12).
Spiral wrote: |
Maybe fair to say the CELTA doesn't aim to teach teachers to be ideal conversation class leaders.  |
What you've said there is VERY fair. (Think about it for a second. It has real implications for those contexts, which as I've said before aren't confined just to East Asia, where students expect to be developing genuine conversational competence, and the teacher actually feels obliged to try to meet those expectations rather than just play for and fill time with "whatever". And remember that purposeful conversation [not just brief or rather aimless chit-chat] can be about almost anything, and thus rich and worth exploring - though there are of course regularities in its overall structuring (but those regularities aren't really much observed or observed enough in "proper" classes, unless of course it's just the brief phatic pleasantries at the start as students arrive)).
Quote: |
Yet another argument based mostly (possibly solely) on a poster's experiences in Asia. |
No, no. Most of this thread relates to criticisms of cert training, received in the West (or administered almost regardless of local context). The fact that East Asia has helped some people put things into arguably better perspective is hardly an irrelevance. It must be great though if every aspect of your training has chimed perfectly with whatever places you've then taught in. But HEY, it would be more productive to ask why the teaching differs (though there are some schools that are pretty much CLT-style even in East Asia, so we can't always generalize): I have a feeling that the demand for more conversation-based methods is a reaction against "Confucian" schooling and societies (though there is still respect for and expectations of teachers e.g. asking students to suggest content or help design courses is risky, as they expect the teacher to know what's needed already). Yet it seems easier for some to simply impugn the intelligence and abilities of the students and indeed the teachers than to even entertain the thought that any alternative methods thus developed (but I'm not saying that every conversation school and its teachers can lay claim to anything so grand!) could be at all effective not only locally but beyond that ("They just can't hack CLT". Well, the teacher probably can, especially if they have a cert to prove it and have done CELTA-style lessons for several years beforehand, but the subsequent students and schools may have suggested~demanded otherwise to whatever degree, possibly to the teacher's eventual enrichment). To which charge I could respond: it is surely easier to teach students (Western ~) who are for whatever reasons more willing (liberally-minded?) to do as your original training has insisted, as little adaptation will then be necessary. My main point however would be that just because your students may generally seem more suited to what you claim is a superior method, do not imagine that every single one of them is always happy with the teaching and wouldn't prefer things to be done differently (given a genuine choice).
LongShiKong wrote: |
Fluff wrote: |
I think anyone who has to somehow teach conversation and is serious about it will come to similar realizations. |
|
Not sure what the bold is expressing, but somehow the 'somehow' emerged unscathed eh. A word worth pondering.
Quote: |
For a great many Asians, conversation with a foreigner consists of asking a set of memorized questions: name, place of origin, marital status, # of family members, and what the foreigner thinks about their country or food. That's it--no follow-up questions. Not surprisingly, some TEFLers consider it their mission in life to teach basic interpersonal (English) communication skills to such types. It seems you and Fluff may be of this sort |
I think you're talking about the somewhat eccentric and usually quite low-level "language practitioner" on the street or in the park, rather than the generally at least halfway-serious people who actually sign up and pay for language lessons. But assuming that a few "practitioners" do find their way into classes every few intakes or so, what do we actually do about it? Totally ignore them while tightly controlling the class's every squeak, just in case the eccentric gets a chance to interject something? Good way for everybody to develop an ulcer, I'd say. But then there are those pesky pushy talkative types, you cry. And don't even mention the wallflowers, urgh it is like pulling teeth with them. It all resembles the real world far too much, why oh why can't language teaching be a simplified highly-controlled and pleasant breeze that glosses over and paints out life's problems and imperfections?! Completely silent, totally obedient mannequins (dummies in everyday parlance), maybe that's the answer! Then we won't have to really engage with anybody at all!! We'll be free to do and say exactly as we please, and they'll dutifully comply and learn - or else! No worries, "job done", put feet back up etc.
LongShiKong wrote: |
doomer wrote: |
Another CELTA cherished assumption is TBL, "engaging students with tasks". |
'Highly questionable for Asian EFL adults'? Where do you think it got started, if not in Asia? As for China, here's a 2009 study? Want more? |
Prabhu's work IIRC was with schoolkids, and Lau's is with tertiary learners. Both different from and more "directable", malleable even (and potentially against their better judgement) than the learners that Doomer was describing: Again, highly questionable for Asian EFL adults with full-time jobs & 48hr work weeks, who attend class after work or during company time. Hence, many adults want a more "convo/chat" style... to relax & socialize. Especially adults required to attend classes by employers. Office workers, managers, housewives... few want to perform artificial tasks, following instructions, listening to & answering ICQs, etc… an inefficient use of precious & limited EFL class time, imo. Rather than immediately dismiss such student wishes out of hand with a "teacher knows best" attitude, why not try to work with them and see if there are any benefits to be had.
To you all: as much as we might like language teaching to be more scientific, it remains very much a human endeavour. And humans naturally differ from each other. All we can really do is add or provide access to as much information as possible, to help individual teachers make maximally-informed choices suited to local conditions.
.
Last edited by fluffyhamster on Mon Apr 07, 2014 12:02 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Sashadroogie

Joined: 17 Apr 2007 Posts: 11061 Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2014 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry, Fluffy. Just got to the end of this, but now have forgotten the beginning. I'll try again soon. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005 Posts: 3292 Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2014 9:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, Breaking Bad can be a bit tl:dw for some.  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Sashadroogie

Joined: 17 Apr 2007 Posts: 11061 Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 4:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nah, Fluffy. Breaking Bad is compelling... |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005 Posts: 3292 Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
For ELT-compelling, I guess you slam in those "classroom clip" DVDs while Jeremy "The Meth-od Head's Head" Harmer launders the filthy proceeds through his umpteenth carwash? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Sashadroogie

Joined: 17 Apr 2007 Posts: 11061 Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fluffy, I think you'd better call Saul... |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
LongShiKong
Joined: 28 May 2007 Posts: 1082 Location: China
|
Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
fluffyhamster wrote: |
...as much as we might like language teaching to be more scientific, it remains very much a human endeavour. And humans naturally differ from each other. All we can really do is add or provide access to as much information as possible. |
Given what I'd consider FH's unsubstantiated criticism and dismissal of accepted ELT methods; his failure to outline in detail an alternative approach (weblink, anyone?) or describe what STUDENTS DO in his classes; his insistence that pre-service teachers go through far more intensive language awareness training without any supportive evidence-based research; and the above comment, I challenge anyone to watch this video and tell me it's not him! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling. Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|