|
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 |
gaijinalways
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Posts: 2279
|
 Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 2:31 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| With non NS, what I do that works quite well is to teach them the rule for a given concept - and whether the context is family life or work or play makes no difference at all - and when they follow the general rule, I begin making the mistakes myself (I call it playing the "stupid" teacher). If they can't catch the mistake, then I didn't teach something right. I go back to square one and make sure I've covered the missing bases. |
And how much time do you plan to use on teaching this same grammar all semester (or all year)? These students have studied grammar already for 6 years, but it doesn't mean that they have learned it. Since the courses I teach are not grammar courses per se, I doubt I would want to spend too much time 'teaching' grammar.
As to your method, at the places that I work, they prefer that we give examples of correct usage. Often I try giving the sentence back to the student with the correction or by asking about the part of the sentence that is wrong.
On a somewhat related note, I've heard about some teachers that use hand signals/gestures to indicate speech errors. I was wondering if anyone employs this method. Of course, you have to spend some time teaching the gestures to your students.
| Quote: |
| When (with countables) they get that "a/an" means "one of many" and "the" means "the one that..." their success rate generally climbs over 80%. Then we start marching through the list of rules and scratch out the ones that are covered by the general principles, leaving a much smaller list of exceptions |
And how long does this take? Also, might I ask what is your students' first language as this greatly affects the usage of articles. In Japanese, there are no articles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rusmeister
Joined: 15 Jun 2006
Posts: 867
Location: Russia
|
| Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gaijinalways wrote: |
| Quote: |
| With non NS, what I do that works quite well is to teach them the rule for a given concept - and whether the context is family life or work or play makes no difference at all - and when they follow the general rule, I begin making the mistakes myself (I call it playing the "stupid" teacher). If they can't catch the mistake, then I didn't teach something right. I go back to square one and make sure I've covered the missing bases. |
And how much time do you plan to use on teaching this same grammar all semester (or all year)? These students have studied grammar already for 6 years, but it doesn't mean that they have learned it. Since the courses I teach are not grammar courses per se, I doubt I would want to spend too much time 'teaching' grammar.
As to your method, at the places that I work, they prefer that we give examples of correct usage. Often I try giving the sentence back to the student with the correction or by asking about the part of the sentence that is wrong.
On a somewhat related note, I've heard about some teachers that use hand signals/gestures to indicate speech errors. I was wondering if anyone employs this method. Of course, you have to spend some time teaching the gestures to your students.
| Quote: |
| When (with countables) they get that "a/an" means "one of many" and "the" means "the one that..." their success rate generally climbs over 80%. Then we start marching through the list of rules and scratch out the ones that are covered by the general principles, leaving a much smaller list of exceptions |
And how long does this take? Also, might I ask what is your students' first language as this greatly affects the usage of articles. In Japanese, there are no articles. |
FTR, I use a grammar supplement regularly to complement the Headway course, so we do both theory (grammar) and practice (usage). As they go through levels they retread stuff, and obviously, we do more than just grammar. Examples of correct usage is just part of the whole process.
My mom uses a hand gesture method with a boy she adopted with spina bifida, so I'm not altogether unfamiliar with it. I use facial visuals with humor to pass my signals along, myself.
I'd say we hit 80% fairly regularly by the end of the second year.
My students? - Russians. No articles.
I wasn't meaning to be flippant or say that it's a breeze. I hope I didn't come across that way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheLongWayHome
Joined: 07 Jun 2006
Posts: 1016
Location: San Luis Piojosi
|
| Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gaijinalways wrote: |
| And how much time do you plan to use on teaching this same grammar all semester (or all year)? These students have studied grammar already for 6 years, but it doesn't mean that they have learned it. |
Yes, seems we're flogging a dead horse by 'teaching' grammar. I still can't see the point if they're not aware of the grammar of their L1. I've found looking at the grammar of their L1 has been a more productive use of time recently - once they get over assuming that they must already know it as it's their L1. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rusmeister
Joined: 15 Jun 2006
Posts: 867
Location: Russia
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 2:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TheLongWayHome wrote: |
| gaijinalways wrote: |
| And how much time do you plan to use on teaching this same grammar all semester (or all year)? These students have studied grammar already for 6 years, but it doesn't mean that they have learned it. |
Yes, seems we're flogging a dead horse by 'teaching' grammar. I still can't see the point if they're not aware of the grammar of their L1. I've found looking at the grammar of their L1 has been a more productive use of time recently - once they get over assuming that they must already know it as it's their L1. |
Yes, this is really valuable. I approach it by accepting their mistakes and literally depicting them ("I am loving you, beautiful woman!", etc...) and sometimes by back translation into Russian. Either way, they get the importance of the goof-up.
An example - The standard Russian construction for "I have..." (U menya est') is rendered "At me there is...". In back (explanatory) translation this comes back to them as "In my general vicinity there happens to be..." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
11:59
Joined: 31 Aug 2006
Posts: 632
Location: Hong Kong: The 'Pearl of the Orient'
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Long Way Home, I think, like many others, you might be getting a tad confused about 'knowing' 'grammar'. The term 'grammar' can be, and is indeed, used in many different ways. There is descriptive grammar, there is prescriptive grammar, there is generative grammar, there is fluid construction grammar, and so on and so forth. As regards your reference to your students thinking they 'know' the grammar of their L1 because it is their L1 despite your assertion that they do not 'know' it, I think you have to make a distinction between declarative knowledge (knowing that) and procedural knowledge (knowing how). Your students (like any other native speakers of any other language) 'know' the grammar of their L1 intimately in the procedural (knowing how) sense, not in the declarative sense (knowing that). It is the same with riding a bike, at least as far as I am concerned. I know how to ride a bike (so I have procedural knowledge), but I cannot for the life of me explain the physics behind my balancing on and riding a bike (which would constitute declarative knowledge).
But it is the same for the vast majority of native-speaking teachers of EFL. Most aspects of the grammar of English would only be known in the procedural sense (especially when it comes to phonetics, phonology, and syntax). So in the three statements below, for example, native speakers know Mary and she can co-refer (refer to each other, that is, denote the same individual in the universe of discourse) or that she can refer to someone else not mentioned in that sentence, but perhaps who was previously referred to (i.e., can receive a 'deitic' interpretation):
1) Mary left town after she won a lot of money.
2) After Mary won a lot of money she left town.
3) After she won a lot of money Mary left town.
However, the same speakers will tell you that in the sentence below she can no longer refer to Mary:
4) She left town after Mary won a lot of money.
There are not all too many native speakers around (students or teachers) who can tell you why 'she' cannot refer to 'Mary' in the last example (not unless they have read Chomsky�s technical analyses of such sentences in his Government and Binding framework). They know how to interpret it, and they know how to formulate such a sentence, but they are wholly unaware of the underlying grammar which forbids (well below the level of conscious processing) co-reference between 'she' and 'Mary' in the final clause above. It has nothing to do with the number of words between the two elements, or the linear order of the elements, but rather stems from underlying phrase structure (which people can not see, hear, or otherwise experience).
As regards the discussion above on using 'translation' as a teaching method (though I suspect some actually mean 'interpretation'), I would say that this is wholly inappropriate, and for more than one reason. First, translation is an incredibly difficult task in and of itself, and professional translators with equal, native-speaker competence in two or more languages have to have years of formal study, and then often argue amongst themselves as to what is and isn't a 'good/valid/accurate' translation (if you doubt translation is taxing then just look at the lack of progress in MT, that is, machine translation). Translating between two languages is also extremely difficult for childhood bilinguals (they complain of getting tired very easily when switching between two languages a lot). So, conceptually, I think introducing what is already a difficult topic and skill in its own right as a way of teaching another difficult skill is arguably a seriously flawed teaching strategy.
Indeed, I think translation from one language to another should be avoided at all costs. Many linguists of many a different theoretical bent would argue that no two languages have exactly parallel lexical and/or grammatical systems (surely that is why, intuitively, we term them 'different' languages!) Even two closely-related languages such as English and German (what we might term present-day language cousins) differ markedly in many aspects of grammar and the lexicon. Thus I think the use of the L1 of the learner can often lead to confusion regarding the language being learnt and between the two systems. Language is something humans do and languages are learned through exposure to them and through using them (children learn what they live, not what they are told). If you have to have a translation to learn another language than how did you learn your L1? From what other pre-L1 language did your mother and other caregivers translate to help you learn your mother tongue? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arioch36
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 3589
|
| Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Quote:
I don't mind if they translate, as long as they are translating the concept and not just churning out hack translations from their L1. There is a huge difference.
Yes, if they are translating to get the gist or intended meaning of the original sentence or phrase, that is fine, but too often 'direct translations', what the yakudoku method somewhat employs, ends up with another language. |
Wonder if we could define "translating" more clearly.
There is translating one word. Then there is translating a concept or instruction of teaching that you want the student to understand but that based on feedback, you realize the student doesn't really understand. Then (In China at least) there are teachers that pick put key sentences, and spent countless minutes translating and having students repeat
Certainly in my classes I strongly discourage the use of electronic dictionaires until I have confidence that it will be used for one word and then turned off, instread of the usual; look up one word, then make the entire conversation into a Chinese conversation. I think this practice may be what 11:59 was referring to (he was a litle over my head  ). If so, and re wasstating his objections, I concur. For the average uni student I feel this cause more problems then it is worth, and leads to mistaken understanding about English. For a Chinese MA student professionally studying English (I have several such friends) it is neccessary they can act on this higher level, but for lower students, it muddies the water.
Finally there is the Chinese translating class   (based on the Russian system?) "Translating" in China is a hated class that the worst-speaking Chinese teacher always teaches
Weekly homework is for them to come to class with ten words written down that they can use when talking to each other. But I don't want them to stop communicating just to translate. I want them to ride that bike. At this point I feel that the average uni student (who is actually interested in improving) as enough basic grammar knowledge that the main problem is being rusty riding the bike, not a problem of not knowing how to ride the bike. And once they get comfortable riding the bike, then teach them some new trick, wheelies etc (some more intense grammar) Then they get into the grammar aspect a little more.
Hey, sorry if what I just wrote isn't written too well. I am enjoying thinking about what I am writing. I changed my writing class a lot this semester. But right now I am literally dead tired after moving in with the in-laws this weekend |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gaijinalways
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Posts: 2279
|
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 10:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, the use of electronic dictionaries are a terror here as well.
| Quote: |
| As regards the discussion above on using 'translation' as a teaching method (though I suspect some actually mean 'interpretation'), translations they use. |
Actually, we are talking about both as my students 'try' to use dictionaries to support their oral and written attempts. I don't always let them do it, but with some large classes I take the easy way out for when students are writing guided essays and doing readings, hoping that they will limit the usage of a dictionary after they find that their reading/writing is often considerably slowed down by constantly referring to the dictionary for the 'best' phrasing/meaning.
| Quote: |
| Thus I think the use of the L1 of the learner can often lead to confusion regarding the language being learnt and between the two systems. Language is something humans do and languages are learned through exposure to them and through using them (children learn what they live, not what they are told). If you have to have a translation to learn another language than how did you learn your L1? From what other pre-L1 language did your mother and other caregivers translate to help you learn your mother tongue? |
Of course, but my students are not learning their first language, and being human, will continue to attempt to compare L1s and L2s. When we realize and are fully aware of the differences is usually when we stop translating/interpreting. But that may never come for many of us, especially for all the languages we'd like to speak and fully understand.
People that are very skilled at learning languages don't realize that this is a gift. Just as there are people who think that rollerblading is easy and no one should need lessons to learn how to do it, there are people who think that anyone given the time will be become fully fluent in a language.
I think it really depends on
1) the learner's L1
2) the other language being studied
3) time constraints
4) the age of the learner
5) the learner's innate language acquisition ability
6) motivational factors
7) the real needs for the language
 amount of exposure to the language on a comprehensible level
(these factors are not listed in any particular order of importance). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
arioch36
Joined: 21 Jan 2003
Posts: 3589
|
| Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 7:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| People that are very skilled at learning languages don't realize that this is a gift. Just as there are people who think that rollerblading is easy and no one should need lessons to learn how to do it, there are people who think that anyone given the time will be become fully fluent in a language. |
Thanx for pointing that out. 100% true! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gaijinalways
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Posts: 2279
|
| Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm almost kind of wondering, what percentage of the population is truly bilingual or multilingual? I mean, I have met many people who speak passable English, but I don't know if I would want to depend on them for negotiating the purchase of a house or my freedom from a jail.
Any ideas what percentage we're talking?
In Japan for example, the percentage of 'excellent' English speakers is actually very low, maybe 2-4% of the population (if that high). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rusmeister
Joined: 15 Jun 2006
Posts: 867
Location: Russia
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 4:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
True that few really master English.
However, it is remarkable that a significant portion of the population (at least in Russia and Europe) is communicably functional - able to hold conversations - in English - that figure here in Russia probably stands somewhere over 5 percent, and is surely higher in western Europe.
On the skills/inclination part, I agree, but that doesn't mean that people can't become fluent over time with hard work and practice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gaijinalways
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Posts: 2279
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 11:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| On the skills/inclination part, I agree, but that doesn't mean that people can't become fluent over time with hard work and practice. |
But how much practice are we talking here? And how much hard work? How many hours a day is a likely estimate?
Many of my Japanese students don't review, so I'm really wondering if my goals are too lofty, though for my lower level students I usually don't worry about it too much.
It's more like I assume that their levels probably won't go far without some time abroad, and even then they need to work their linguistic 'muscles' to take full advantage of any study/home stay abroad that they do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rusmeister
Joined: 15 Jun 2006
Posts: 867
Location: Russia
|
| Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 1:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gaijinalways wrote: |
| Quote: |
| On the skills/inclination part, I agree, but that doesn't mean that people can't become fluent over time with hard work and practice. |
But how much practice are we talking here? And how much hard work? How many hours a day is a likely estimate?
Many of my Japanese students don't review, so I'm really wondering if my goals are too lofty, though for my lower level students I usually don't worry about it too much.
It's more like I assume that their levels probably won't go far without some time abroad, and even then they need to work their linguistic 'muscles' to take full advantage of any study/home stay abroad that they do. |
| Quote: |
| Many of my Japanese students don't review |
This one is big, so yes, your goals for such people would be lofty.
The question is, how motivated are they? There's only so much you can do personally in that department. When you have adult students, yes you may have a regular supply of people who say they want to learn English, but they want to learn it like they want to win the lottery - if it falls in their lap. Very often, they get serious when they are about to take a trip abroad, and then they want to learn it all yesterday.
They have to have a desire and determination that will go the distance, so for me, psychologically preparing newbies is the biggest part of my orientations with would-be students.
The most important thing in the "how much" question is "How much can they do regularly, preferably on a daily basis? 10 minutes a day is far more effective than one hour a week - there's a series of Language learning workbooks for dilettantes called "(Insert your language) in 10 Minutes a Day". Cheesy, heavy emphasis on L1 with gradual replacement, with the equivalent of probably a fair first-quarter course, but it's effective for people who want to learn a little of communication basics. It's how I got my start in European languages. Point is, if they do it consistently with an attitude focusing on their successes rather than failures, with a never-give-up attitude, and a real determination to succeed, then they can. It's a question of when, and the factors include a knack for language learning or a lack thereof - which can be compensated for by said determination, and chances to put their theoretical knowledge into practice by interacting with native speakers, etc.... If a person is attending courses at least 3-5 hours a week and putting in 10-15 minutes a day, and finds ways to use what they know, then 4-6 years for more-or-less fluency (not perfection, not native) is entirely possible for an average Joe.
How I learned Russian - I have the knack (sorry), and did the above for 3 years, and found native speakers - volunteered to live with them on campus - eventually married one  ; then for 2 more I went back and forth to Russia and spent serious time there while continuing a summer-only program. It was only towards the end of that time that I began to be able to follow TV and radio news more or less comfortably. The real key is that I was extremely motivated.
I think one great way to give a little motivation to your students is to praise their successes, and downplay the failures - finding the humor in them and teaching them to laugh at them with you can really change attitudes, and that's where the battle is really fought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gaijinalways
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Posts: 2279
|
| Posted: Wed May 21, 2008 7:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Glad to hear your success story. We as teachers emphasize again and again the idea that motivation is key, and in Japan we have a shortage of motivated students. How to motivate the unwilling is a subject for another day .
Interesting to hear the 10 minutes a day idea. Some of my more motivated adult students (translation, not Japanese uni students usually) do review every day, and it shows in their language improvements.
| Quote: |
| When you have adult students, yes you may have a regular supply of people who say they want to learn English, but they want to learn it like they want to win the lottery - if it falls in their lap. Very often, they get serious when they are about to take a trip abroad, and then they want to learn it all yesterday. |
Yes, it sounds usual in Japan, though quite a few businesspeople don't study because they want to. Their company has decided that they have good enough skills to be promoted, but they need to meet a language requirement for a posting in an international department.
I
| Quote: |
| think one great way to give a little motivation to your students is to praise their successes, and downplay the failures - finding the humor in them and teaching them to laugh at them with you can really change attitudes, and that's where the battle is really fought. |
Help, in Japan we're losing the battle! It's the teachers' attitudes that need changing! Well, some of us need changing . |
|
| 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
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
