Job Discussion Forums

[Bayden]

[klaus]

not only do i have the answers, i have a complete syllabus. don't give me your juvenile "acting snotty" and "making excuses" nonsense.

if i knew you personally, thought that you you were interested, knew that you were in fact serious about teaching and were in it for at least the medium term, AND were in the vicinity, i think i would seriously consider training you in the approach for nothing and providing the appropriate support and materials.

i'll add also the the beauty of this approach is not only that it works - and if you were to follow this route you would gradually develop an understanding of why it works and would also see that it is the obvious way to approach the problem - but is also that you don't need to be able to understand what at first might seem somewhat abstruse but learn with the students as you progress through the material in a sytematic fashion. ie you could start doing it this afternoon and could continue doing it until the end of the academic year with the same class (of any level) everyday and still have material to spare.

however the trouble for most people on this board and in the game generally where this is concerned - and i'm not being derisive - is that they are really not that seriously interested in language or teaching. that's ok - there's no law that says you should be and it's no reflection on a persons character if theyre not...but it's probably more than just speculation that most 'english teachers' are young people doing this as a short term thing or older people and retirees who really are quite happy plodding in and out of the classroom trotting out the same old guff.

take yourself - you want me to give you "one solid idea". you just want a quick fix so there's one less 'lesson plan" you have to sweat over.

cop this: "lesson plans" and "activities" in the CELTA TESOL industry mould for the most part are a lot of useless garbage concocted by people who have no understanding of linguistic structure and for the most part do not even any experience of language learning themselves.

are you really that committed to the job that you would be willing to commit yourself to what would for you would essentially be a course in structural linguistics that would allow you and your students to systematically develop a solid and practical understanding of the structure of english? (in your case "practical" would entail being an effective teacher of English; where the students are concerned "practical" would entail dramatic and quantifiably improvements in their English writing, reading, speaking and listening.)

i doubt it, but if you are and we happen to cross paths i'd be more than happy to help.

in the meantime if i ever see a question about a specific pedagogical problem that i can help with and that does not involve too much structural understanding i will be happy to proffer my ideas ... though in most cases you really have to build the chapel before you start thinking about how you're going to fill in the minor details on the fresco you plan to put on the ceiling.

thanks back.

[vikdk]

wowwwwwwwwww have I conjoured up beelzeklaus - the anti christ of Krashenanity - but look

[Shan-Shan]

Just a suggestion to us all:

Instead of claiming to hold the secret to TESL, it would be more productive to share detailed teaching approaches instead of dashing others' against the brokens desks and chairs at the back of the classroom.

From my own few years experience, I've learned to implement very different approaches in the classroom depending on the size, age, ability and needs of the students.

One approach is never enough. Claiming that task-based or activity based lessons are a bunch of malarky reveals just how inexperienced one is at teaching. One group of students may fair very well under a grammar description, linguistic activity approach while others progress more quickly through more intuitive learning of grammar in a more imaginative classroom setting. Others may have a third, fourth or fifth way of best mastering a second language.

Learning a second language is not a course in describing a language's lingustics, though the former, in my opinion, does need to be explicitly taught, though not exclusively, depending on the language experience and level of the students. For example, my current students have been studying English for over ten years. We meet for 90 minutes a week. I want to give them opportunities to use what they know in a different setting each week where all types of speaking tasks will be undertaken, and a variety of vocabulary and grammar will, because of the activity's requirements, necessarily be used. A serious focus on form -- something they already have in their other English classes -- would deprive them of the few minutes a week given to actually communicate with each other while adopting different roles in a variety of real-world settings.

There are no Emperors of TESL. The discipline is young, and every decade praises some new approach. From my time as a student in the language classroom, I can say that too much focus on pure mechanics and little attention paid to the point of learning a language -- for communicating -- resulted in my utter disinterest in learning a second language.

As for the "reporting on a text pasted to the role" lesson, I've used it as well in the past. However, I try to turn it into something more communicative, and less robotic. One group of students act as "the source" of the news story (the students who read the article). Another student/group of students are "reporters" who ask specific questions, such as "when did the story happen" and "where did it occur" or "who was involved". They practice asking questions to which the source, after each question, has to run up to the article and practice scanning (or is it skimming?) for the answer. This is reading with a purpose, and makes the task more meaningful.

Reporters than can put the story together, and retell it to the source. The source can then verify how accurate/inaccurate the reporters' version is.

Another expanding exercise would be to have the reporters retell the article to another group, the "TV news group". This third body listens to the reporters' or reporter's account of the story, after having acquired the information from the source, and then prepare a reenactment of the story for the entire class to watch.

By doing this extension activity, the third group has to change the language of the story, particularily from third to first person (i.e. they become the characters of the story/news story themselves). The reporters, and especially the source, can be asked how correct the reenactment of the story was after the "TV News Group" presents their version of the story.

In essence, we have a more complex "Chinese Whisper" game here!

[vikdk]

thanks shan-shan
Now I can see how this memorisation/recital exercise

[Steppenwolf]

[Sinobear]

R: Your first grammar lesson:


Exclamation marks should be used to express surprise, anger, disbelief or other strong emotion. They should be used sparingly or they lose their effect, and are seldom appropriate in academic writing. However, it can be a useful tool in imaginative writing.

Use exclamation marks to:

express strong emotion or to draw attention to a situation e.g. Man overboard! Fire! He�s drowning! What a mess!
signify a command e.g. Get out! Attention! Close the door!
Do not use exclamation marks:

if the emotion can be expressed using appropriate words instead e.g. It is amazing that Roy Hattersley�s mother�s first husband died on the day his mother and father were married not Roy Hattersley�s mother�s first husband died on the day his mother and father were married!

Cheers! (And!!! Learn! To use exclamtion! MArks!!!!! Properly!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOt tO menTion you"rE strAnge use of the ShiFt key. F7 will heLp yoU to use the "Spell CheCk" in Word. TRy it! SO Collo!!!!!!

[vikdk]

[Outsida]

[klaus]

yes outsida

one typo certainly provides monumental justification as to your apparent assertions with regard to my competence or otherwise with english

what's your point?

this "variety of approaches" stuff is a lot of rubbish trotted out by people who are absolute bumpkins in the potato field of "esl". that's the difference between me and all you. i have actually been through all this. you haven't.

by the way i'm not anthony/ ludwig - i've never worked in hk though i do remember him as someone who provided a lot of ridiculous entertainment here, was doing something with computational linguistics and was a supporter of that other major linguistic nincompoop chomsky to boot

i stand by all my assertions and have solid evidence from myself and others that there is merit in what i claim. i am not the only one doing things my way now and i guess if any of you really do give a stuff you will try to find out more about what i'm doing. it certainly isn't my job to convince you but i do feel obliged to at least let you know that there is a solution to your problems and i am trying to work out a way to make this accessible to those who want to put in the effort.

[klaus]

re "Krashenanity"

not sure of the spelling there - think a better rendition would be "Krass-inanity"

[poopsicola]

Re Klaus:

Oh, go on! Unless it is accepted that you speak with the authority of the Pope, civility is almost beyond you.

[2 over lee]

Nice to see you disturbed individuals 'en communicasi'

[sheeba]