Job Discussion Forums

[gaijinalways]

Sometimes I wonder if it is possible to focus on both . I often try to have students improve both at the same time. Of course, a bigger issue for me is communicative ability, can students really communicate and are they able to successfully accomplish what they are trying to do .

[Gordon]

I am a big believer in making activities as authentic as possible, whether it be a text or listening activity. Even though students might be well below the level of the activity (especially in Japan), I then adapt the practice to their level. So while the text might be too high for them, the practice activity is not.
I also try to make my class as student-centred and communicative as I can. I don`t need the practice, they do.

[dmb]

Delayed feedback? In a fluency activity take notes of any errors-grammatical, lexical, phonological or whatever then after the activity is finished focus on the accuracy.

[tedkarma]

I agree with DMB.

One issue is that the literature on error correction is not so good. It might actually be more effective to stay fluency focused.

[gaijinalways]

Well, I plan to rate them on both on a oral quiz using pair practice. I think the goal is to get both skills as high as possible. Of course as Gordan related authenticity is high on my list, that being a acid test of real communicative ability.

As to error correction, if they are major ones, I may review them is some recycling/review exercise in a later class. Error correction is often most important when the errors affect comprehension and the meaning is not easily negotiated by the two speakers.

[denise]

[dmb]

[denise]

I told them what I would be doing, and why. It really seemed to work. They didn't pay any attention to me as I was taking notes, and during the recap, they all took notes on the correct forms. Of course, these are mature, motivated adults that I am talking about! I imagine that with proper training, as you mentioned, it would work with other age groups.

d

[Sherri]

My students are always asking me the about fluency vs accuracy. I look at speaking in similar ways to writing. Both represent student output and both depend on audience and purpose. I work on speaking tasks in layers just like I would for process writing for formal pieces like a presentation. But if they are just speaking to communicate, then (like email or texting) I would care only about errors that interfered with communication.

I like using the suggested method of having students get stuck into a topic or task and take notes for feedback afterward. When I first started doing that I found that there were too many things for me to look for, so I started narrowing the feedback field depending on the aim of my lesson. So it my purpose was based on comprehension and content, that is what I focused my feedback on. If I wanted to focus on grammar, then I would look for specific grammar errors (like the use of the past tense when narrating a story).

I also like recording students talking about a task in small groups, then transcribing portions (or have students transcribe) and examine for error patterns. This is very popular with my adult students and is always rated highly in my evaluations.

As a teacher I have to remember that in the end, there are some errors that simply take time like the "s" for third person or articles (Japanese students). It is a matter of noticing (for students), repetition and lots of practice.

[gaijinalways]

Six years of practice is not enough time ?! Of course, the major problem in Japan is the kind of practice they do in their compulsory lower years. This still continues in many of the Japanese led English classes; i.e. translation, grammar exercises, and classes conducted almost all in Japanese . No wonder most students usually don't have a good knowledge base for learning/using useful and practical English after they enter university!