Job Discussion Forums

[Brian Caulfield]

I have noticed something about the students I have taught in Korea and China for the last ten years . Some of my students who have been abroad to study English in foreign countries don't do any better than the students who have never left , on grammar based tests . I have also heard from many Chinese teachers that the students today don't have as good a grasp of grammar as the students in the past . I think it is because the books used in the high schools are fluency based .
Personally I think it takes time to master a language and fluency should come first then after they know about 10,000 words we should concentrate on accuracy by teaching more writing .
Any one else notice how accuracy is decreasing in their students language skills ?

[friedrich nietzsche]

The average student in China has niether fluency nor accuracy. In fact, they need niether. All they have to do is fill in some blanks on an exam. Many of those who teach them are also largely ignorant of anything beyond the realms of the textbook or the strtictures of the exam rubric. Have they finally gotten around to introducing oral exams at middle-school level yet? I wonder who they will get to conduct those exams.
The more I teach English, the less I think that teachers and materials matter. I am convinced that the majority of learning takes place in the students' head, and that language learning is more about intrinsic motivation and effort. While the teacher and materials can aid and quicken this process, I doubt that anything can be achieved without the basic desire to learn. I think that this desire is very difficult to sustain if students have ridiculous hours, learning is exam-centered and Chinese is the language of instruction. Fluency and accuracy is more likely if the students take personal responsibility for their learning, which is both rare and culturally discouraged. My best students have always been the ones who have learned on their own. One of my best friends in China never graduated from high-school, but she rose to B1 level by herself. I do not delude myself into thinking that the 3 hours per week spent in my classroom was the main factor in her progress. Rather, it was the hours of reading, watching DVDs, noticing, struggling and learning independently.
Textbooks change like the weather- one day its PPP, the next day its TBL. The students are likely to encounter a wide variety of textbooks, from the sources dubious and otherwise. At best, they are a source of input that the teacher must try to cut into learning-shaped chunks. Whether these chunks are digested and assimilated by the students is largely up to them.
I think that the answers to your question, a highly relevant question, lie more in people's attitudes and practices towards language learning and learning in general.

[Brian Caulfield]

I agree with FN but having dealt with Chinese here , Taiwan , Korea and in Canada and comparing them with the other students I have taught , I find their skills not bad . What I am trying to find out is whether the fluency being taught by us or being learned in English speaking countries has any effect on their ability to pass the grammar based test that I am constantly being told is the all important part of their studies .
I am here to help my students succeed in the system they are in . I am not here to buck the system.
I am the first to agree that school is the worst place to learn a language . Learning a language in a classroom is the same as trying to learn how to swim without any water . Maybe even worse because in the language classroom you are surrounded by people making misstakes . With any learning agenda one must get out of the comfort zone and do some work on your own to succeed.
Thanks for your imput

[Don McChesney]

I tend to look at IELTS for teaching English usage.
Reading Writing Listening Speaking, and in speaking, they look at Fluency and coherence, Lexical Resource, Grammatical range and accuracy, and Pronunciation.
IELTS does not test for grammar, except within the context of answers.
If communication in English is to be judged, it depends on information transmission both ways, and for this, fluency and lexical content are more important than correct grammar.
I believe that if the Chinese student spent much less time on learning grammar rules, and more time talking and listening, they would do better in every way. The WORD programme will check their spelling and grammar, but not fluency or pronunciation or logical argument.

[fluffyhamster]

(Edit: Brian's and subsequent replies to FN hadn't appeared before I began typing up mine...I'd just like to add a bit so that my post addresses more of what "had" appeared beforehand! I'll put the extra stuff in italics).

I don't believe in the dichotomy between fluency and accuracy - I mean, how can this construct of a student who's supposedly learned 10,000 words have remained unaware of the importance of e.g. determiners? Appropriate language (I don't mean polite but functional given the context) would seem a term that covers both necessary aspects of halfway dcent speech (but there are interesting things to add to this e.g. the study of 'vague language', fillers etc).

Brian, you say you aren't there to buck the system, but confining yourself to just teaching questionable/limited/"correct"/"expected" English for questionable exam items would seem a bit short-sighted in the long term (and it can backfire even in the short-term too...I can easily imagine long discussions among teaching staff about which answer is the correct one/not a wrong one/the best etc etc). I'm sure that a compromize can be reached where you teach students what is most frequent and useful in speech, as opposed to in exams...there shouldn't be too much of a comfort zone always even in the classroom.

As for being 'surrounded by mistakes', I agree (in the sense that many implementations of a "communicative approach" are anything but, if they expect the students to always be the ones coming up with the language in so-called fluency activities...sometimes they just need to be TAUGHT something! Not having a go at you LOL), but it can be motivating and fun to speak to fellow learners, and it is practice of a sorts (if the students can maintain English-only discipline) for communicating with students/learners/speakers who have a differing L1.

Roger, the sort of grammar mistake you are pointing out seems a bit trivial (again, I find it hard to believe that absolutely everybody goes about memorizing vocabulary with little regard for the grammar...well, at least, the collocations and general shape/word order of the surrounding phrase(s))...I'm not saying it should be allowed to pass if it in a constant feature of their speech, but one could argue that by using any form of 'have' the student is demonstrating at least some awareness of English grammar. Such students might not make much progress with less trivial i.e. more advanced language, but constantly bringing them back to 'have' isn't going to get them developing that much either (not saying you don't get on with other things LOL).

I agree about the undesirability of always translating from in production or back and forth in reception, and still can't quite believe it actually occurs as much as all that. Maybe I've been out of China too long and am forgetting what it was like, or Japan is even worse for the habits of its average English learners...

I like that 'learning-shaped chunks', but the fact is that all approaches were or (to the faithful adherants of nowadays less popular approaches, "still") are actually ways to shape or cut the input they have selected into learning shaped chunks...whether they succeed or not (in being cognitively appealing to a learner - which will help increase motivation where it is lacking) depends, I think, on how well the input and its pedagogical organization incorporates and in turn reflects natural discourse.

[Roger]

I too liked FN's concise little opinion on the subject - totally my thoughts too!

I would like to add that language, whatever language you are talking about, is only the transmission belt of your brain's work, i.e. thoughts; the language you use ought to mirror the thoughts that occur in your mind.
It is imperative for a language learner to acquire adequate thought organising skills, and that is not happening in Chinese classrooms where the thoughts are always expressed first in the local vernacular, then dressed up in "English".
Every single lesson they get up to university level is an exercise in translation; if your mind is busy using two different modes of thinking it must become sluggish. This slows down your communications speed!

I also fully agree in saying they acquire neither fluency nor accuracy but merely an English vocabulary that intends to meet statistical goals such as a vocabulary of 4000, 6000 or 8000 - plus a rudimentary knowledge of grammar rules. I have never seen students conmnjugate English verbs - which we all did when studying Latin or French, for example, in order to train ourselves to use verb forms that agreed with their subjects. If your Chinese student says "he have a car", his classmates will not find this anomalous; they seem to think it is optional for them to use the correct form of 'have'!

[andrew_gz]

Roger wrote, "If your Chinese student says "he have a car", his classmates will not find this anomalous; they seem to think it is optional for them to use the correct form of 'have'!"

Really?
I teach extra-curricular English and my little darlings would be all over that.
I encourage them to correct their classmates.
Perhaps you might like to try it.

[Brian Caulfield]

I like the Devillier's study at Harvard where the compare L1 aquisition to L2 . They found similar errors in aquisition in the two groups . What they noticed was that L1 parents never correct grammar but somehow the kids learned the grammar . Mistakes must be made .
I agree that things need to be improved here but my primary objective is for my students to succeed in the China system . They promote speaking here but little listening . So I teach pronunciation as much as possible . I am teaching culture classes but do all my testing orally . I don't mark them on pronunciation but correct problems .