Job Discussion Forums

[moonraven]

shmooj: I believe I do understand. I also believe that you should consider a couple of things:

1. Research on learning theory is a very big, very mixed kettle of fish. Especially when you consider that the bulk of learning experimentation has been conducted on animals--not people. And as every bit of research begins with a hypothesis, researchers will go that extra mile not to have their data hit the trash bin and instead, confirm or at least support their hypostheses. I spent some time running rats myself and found that, more often than not, elements that had not been considered in the hypothesis or methodology had more weight than those that had been.

2. References are almost never neutral--and they almost always imply a POV. With your background I am sure that you have seen the very same references used (or abused) to support opposing POVs. So what's the point in asking a poster on this forum to type up some links to references that may or may not be relevant here?

Balance in regard to reflections on what really happens in classrooms doesn't come from night to morning. I thought--and received plenty of feedback from students and other teachers to swell my head--that I was a very good teacher 35 years ago! (I was innovative, I used a lot of research results and conducted my own, both in and out of the classroom, I used primary sources instead of textbooks, I evaluated students on gains that they made in the learning process, and I empowered individual impetus and critical thinking.) I still use a lot of the orientation I used then--but I don't emphasize innovation and research application, because at least in my case what counts with the students is that I treat them like human beings and empower them to do their individual and collective best.

[shmooj]

[Deconstructor]

Holy cow! I go away for two days, come back only to discover I�ve been shot and pissed on and my teaching qualifications taken away. And all because I ruffled a few feathers. Over L1 of all things? I do understand though. I think this has become a bit personal. It shouldn't have. At times my language can be difficult to take. No offence was intended. This is not to say that I will refrain from saying what I think, just that I understand your strong emotions, Shmooj. Before I respond to you specifically�

[teacheringreece]

A few points:

I think we basically have to be pragmatic about the whole thing. We want to maximize student talking time, and they don't talk when we're giving instructions. So if using the L1 to give complex instructions can save two or three minutes of task time, I think that's a good thing. I know some people say this means the students miss out on useful classroom language, but, unless they're planning to be English teachers too, I can't see how they would ever need the kind of language we mainly use in the classroom. When was the last time you had a conversation like this in the supermarket? "OK, who can tell me where the washing powder is? Jack? Come on, it doesn't matter if you're wrong." Time can also be saved by translating words where appropriate, as has been discussed.

I believe there's also a lot to be said for rapport. I think students who like their teacher are likely to learn more than ones that don't. Yet students often like to be talked to in their own language. I teach proficiency level students in Greece at the moment, and as soon as we get out of the classroom they talk to me in Greek. And their faces light up when they speak! There under a lot of stress, trying very hard, and it's a real relief for them sometimes to be able to speak to you in their language (in their country, after all).

Finally, as far this whole thing about removing the crutch of the L1, well it will always be there. People don't learn a second language to replace their first. Proficient L2 users often code-switch mid conversation, or mid sentence even; they also like to refer to phrases, proverbs etc. in their L1 (e.g. In my language, we say...). Many (most?) of our students will never live in an English speaking country, but will use English from time to time in the context of their own country and society - they'll often have to combine their L1 and L2 (e.g. in translating information to foreign guests). These kinds of things are all part of the experience and enjoyment of knowing a second language. I think that if we presume that because our students were allowed to use their L1 in the classroom that they're going to have such trouble with English out in the "real world", then we're underestimating them as people, and overestimating our own significance.

Finally, regarding research, there of course isn't and I doubt that there ever will be conclusive research about whether or not the L1 should be used in the classroom, just because it would have to be so incredibly wide-scale to really be reliable. I think it's unfortunate, then, that teachers have it drummed into them so much that using the L1 is wrong. This happens a lot in EFL - the fundamentals of the communicative approach are based on 19th century assumptions about language learning, not scientific knowledge.

It seems more than a little co-incidental that a belief that using only the L2 is best is very convenient for the profession we worked in. Where would we be if everyone thought that non native speakers could do just as good a job as us? And where would the publishers be if people believed that perhaps the Headway approach was wrong, and that it would be better if textbooks where designed with a specific L1 in mind, so that students didn't waste their time practising grammatical structures that translate word for word into their L1, or pronouncing sounds that they have in their L1...

[moonraven]

The statement about learners not learning a second language to replace their first one is not always true. I am a writer as well as a teacher--and I write primarily in my second language, Spanish, and all of my recent theater production has been done in my second language. I also design and teach courses in my second language.

[teacheringreece]

The fact that you have written that message in English proves that you haven't learn Spanish to replace your first language!

[moonraven]

No, it does NOT mean that I haven't "learn" (sic) to replace English with Spanish! (Geez, I wonder if they teach logic anymore....)

I could've written my post in Spanish--or in French, Italian or Portugese. If I had written it in Portugese, for example, would I have communicated with the majority of folks on this forum? No--because they are English speakers, and this is a site about teaching the English language. It would not have meant, either, that Portugese is my primary language.

English was my primary language of usage. Now the only times I write or speak in English are those when I am communicating with English speakers on an informal basis. The rest of the time I use Spanish--in both informal and formal situations. That is to say, Spanish is my primary language of usage.

[teacheringreece]

"No, it does NOT mean that I haven't "learn" (sic) to replace English with Spanish! (Geez, I wonder if they teach logic anymore....) "

Making a pedantic comment about a typing error - how constructive and intelligent!

I'll repeat my point, and let's hope you are sufficiently logical to understand it this time. What I said was that students "don't learn a second language to replace their first." Replace means "take the place of". In other words, students are always going to both possess and use their L1, no matter how proficient they become with their L2. They might use it with other speakers of that L1 or they might use it in combination with the L2 (research indicates that L2 users have a single merged language system, rather than two separate language systems) - perhaps during translation. The point is that to describe the L1 as a crutch ignores the fact that it's always there, and is perfectly natural - it's more like a leg, and attempting to ignore or remove it potentially disables students.

[moonraven]

Ever heard of proofreading your stuff? Providing well-written posts increases one's credibility with many readers of this site, and reduces the likelihood of receiving "pedantic" rebuffs. (Theoretically, the folks contributing to this forum have mastered English.)

No one was suggesting amputation anywhere on this thread--much less this poster.

It is NOT uncommmon to learn a second language to replace one's first language. Immigrants have done it forever--in many cases because they have had no other option. And several quite well-known writers come immediately to mind: Joseph Conrad and Samuel Beckett are prime examples.

[teacheringreece]

Well I'm not exactly concerned about how credible I appear to other members of the forum if my credibility is dependent on proofreading my posts to avoid errors so small that they couldn't possible affect the meaning of my message.

Regarding the vaguely constructive part of your reply, I again state: people rarely learn an L2 to REPLACE an L1. Immigrants of course are forced to try to learn the language of their new country. This does not mean that they forget their L1, or indeed stop using it. I am married to a daughter of an immigrant couple, and at home her family speak the language of their country of origin, not of their host country.

I'm sorry if my metaphor about amputation also wasn't clear enough for you. The point was that by ruling out using the L1 in class, we are depriving students of the use of a potentially vital tool in language learning, and furthermore a tool that they might well end up using in real life situations along with the L2 they have acquired. Please refer to my original post for examples of this. (Please feel to proofread it too, and let me know about any of the interesting errors you find.)

[moonraven]

Sorry, it really is not my job to proofread the posts of snide posters on this forum.

Sure, there are immigrants who live with family members in the host country and maintain their first language in the home. Mexicans in the US are a good example.

There are others who simply don't have that as an option (I had a friend who went to the US just before WWII began--she was Jewish, from Hungary, spoke her first language, plus German and French. English replaced her first language, as she had contact with very few Hungarians.)

And still there are others, like this poster, who CHOOSE to change cultures and change primary languages. The reasons for that may be artistic or political--among others.

At no point on this thread did I advocate prohibiting L1 in the classroom. You might consider reading MY posts in regard to this issue, before giving me a blast of beep--as clearly you have not done so.

[teacheringreece]

"Sorry, it really is not my job to proofread the posts of snide posters on this forum."

Oh pity! And you did such a good job with my post above!

Anyway, I understand your point about the immigrants (I haven't said anything to the contrary), and I have in fact read your previous posts. I also did not say that you advocated banning the use of L1 in the classroom. But perhaps if you looked at my points in relation to the topic of this thread, you'd see what I'm trying to say. The L1 is useful in the classroom because it is potentially an aid to learning and/or teaching the L2. It is also valid and realistic to use the L1 in the classroom because, aside from (I'm pretty sure) a small minority of immigrants, people do not lose their L1 when they learn a second language (from what you say, you a very good example of this). They generally carry on using both, perhaps separately, perhaps at the same time, and there is nothing wrong in letting students do this in the classroom. Some even suggest developing classroom activities that would allow students to code-switch, translate etc. as this is what they will need to do outside the classroom.

[moonraven]

One thing needs to be very clear--not all language learning contexts are the same.

Many L2 learners are doing their learning in their home culture--where opportunities outside the classroom for L2 usage are limited. Their time using L2 needs to be used to the maximum (without putting roadblocks or denigrating their L1) if they are going to be effective learners.

Folks who are learning L2 in a "new" culture have considerably more access to practicing the second language, translating, figuring things out as they walk around in the new culture.

To slap a template on language learning, without looking at the context in which it is taking place, simply doesn't work.

[Guy Courchesne]

Bingo. Well said

[teacheringreece]

I'm not disagreeing (nor have I disagreed) with any of this. Nor am I attempting (or have I attempted) to slap a template on anything. If you read my original post again, you'll see that I suggested ways in which using the L1 in classroom can in fact increase student speaking time in the L2. In terms of activities involving transaltion etc., I am talking in the context of a student learning a foreign language in his/her own country, not immigrant groups.

I'll repeat my points one final time for you.

The L1 can be used effectively in the classroom to aid learning/teaching of the L2. Furthermore, most students will never live in a country that speaks the L2 they are learning, and it is very likely, therefore, that they will only ever use the L2 in a real-life situation, in their own country. Possible scenarios include dealing with foreign visitors who do not understand the language of the country, but with whom the student can converse in the L2. The student might need to be able to translate signs, information, act as an interpretor in a group of people and so on. Certain activities could be developed to practise such interactions in a classroom setting, and would be appropriate for students who are likely to be involved in such interactions.