Job Discussion Forums

[coledavis]

Ah, I think I see now what people are getting at. Yes, 'teaching grammar' should not be a case of long boringly comprehensive rule lists (although some text books do this). I try to settle for a succinct summary, often at the beginning of a lesson, set at the appropriate level, and then get on with practising it, moving to open conversation on a topic. Loadsa rules suck!

[fluffyhamster]

Oh, I didn't get any transcripts on my cert either, Cole (rather, they were in the wider range of books I was beginning to read before the cert had even finished, IIRC), and I think you're right about it being part of the brainwashing - it would hardly be in UCLES's interests to undermine relentless, skewy, ultimately unnatural discourse patterns if those are more convenient for teaching (or rather, "teaching") their way.

When I bang on about grammar (Sasha and Nick) I am not proposing ultra-technical but rather thorough. (I've posted quite a few times regarding e.g. COBUILD publications, and corpora generally: http://forums.eslcafe.com/teacher/viewtopic.php?p=42038#42038 , http://forums.eslcafe.com/teacher/viewtopic.php?p=41753#41753 ; lexicogrammars keep the form-function metalanguage to a minimum and concentrate on "strings" basically, but their empirical bottom-up rather than top-down basis ensures that a good range of exemplars is being uncovered, and the grammar and lexis therefore covered in sufficient and equal measure).*

I would still expect a good course to somehow find a way to (obviously as painlessly as possible!) teach the rudiments of grammar though, because even apparently non-technical lexicogrammars didn't suddenly spring from nowhere!

But Nick I also do feel that your apparently tougher grammar course and the expectations it had/sudden demands it made of you (or indeed anyone in what's been generations devoid of much grammar instruction throughout their schooling - and that would include me, by the way! - though with all the prescriptivism around in native-speaker non-linguistic/non-FLT circles perhaps this lack of "grammar" for the natives has been a good thing) were a bit unreasonable...but still, I guess you learnt something, painful though the tutor's methods (or rather lack of any apparent considerate range of them) might have been, ha ha!!

That being said, delivering grammar in the form of elementary non-native student-level examples and vocabulary might not be the best way to grapple (as a native speaker) with the potential complexities (e.g. countability and articles/determiners practically from the start of NN learning) of English grammar - I mean, it would be too much of WYSIWYG and by extension WTDSIWYDG/WYDGIWTDS (T=they, the NN students; D=don't, and didn't!).

*There's a quite old but still very interesting paper by Sinclair & Renouf (which I'm very glad to see is now available online! http://www.wordtrends.org/publ/Lexical_Syllabus.pdf ) on the matter of lexical syllabuses versus IIRC in their words 'degenerate' (i.e. non-lexical) syllabuses, that makes a lot of points far better than I ever could (it's almost like a condensed version of Lewis's The Lexical Approach), but one thing I will say is that I find it interesting that despite all the apparently anti-grammar rhetoric out there, the same people spouting it certainly don't mind availing themselves of rather thin "structural", slot n fill/randomly lexicalized (oops, that phrase again) frameworks when it suits them - which is usually (especially when observers are prowling), even in those so-called conversation classes shamelessly advertised. (And whilst some students in such classes could no doubt do with some "remedial" stuff, is more of the same really going to help them that much? That is, there often isn't ultimately so vast a difference between grammar-translation in public schools in e.g. Japan, and conversation school lessons there, despite the fact that the latter has a supposedly informed native speaker running it (more like, sitting in (on) it, often not really teaching, just hearing the students out, and not too bothered by all that)). But hey, I still quite often fall back on "non-lexical" stuff myself, so I shouldn't point the finger too much. But I do at least try to linguistically supplement and fill out (with a better range of exemplars and exponents) the often rather thin textbooks.

[fluffyhamster]

Came across a series of interviews online just now that includes several quite famous ELT authors (i.e. famous in the context of ELT!). It can certainly be interesting sometimes (and perhaps useful for newbs at least) to see how ELT luminaries (i.e. not just anybodies like us on Dave's LOL) not only entered the profession, but were clearly successful in it (as judged by their books), and what their opinions are on certain issues. Anyway, first up is Raymond Murphy!
http://www.cambridge.org.br/site/articles/interviews.php?id=27624

Then there are some papers by Jack C Richards available:
http://www.professorjackrichards.com/pdfs/30-years-of-TEFL.pdf
http://www.professorjackrichards.com/pdfs/communicative-language-teaching-today-v2.pdf
etc.

[coledavis]

Fluffy: the brainwashing bit was a joke.

[fluffyhamster]

Oh, OK. I didn't quite appreciate that was intended as no more than a joke because surrounding the 'brainwashing' in that particular paragraph there were other words like 'shibboleths' and 'bolshie'.

[nickpellatt]

Chancellor - thanks for the link, but I have seen that book in a store and found it didnt really do it for me. In all honesty, I can find any rule, form or function of any grammatical item online. I dont worry about any area of grammar that I dont know explicitly, I can always find the answer when I need to.

What I tend to need more, is some instruction that tells me how to teach that grammar point, how to build the form, function and rule(s) into a structured lesson that allows the students to use it in context. Fluffy has unfortunately been pestered by me in the past with grammar queries!

In my EFL work I tend to work in environment that demand more oral tasks, and in my summer work in the UK, I am also responsible for preparing my own material. What I would love to have, is a teaching portfolio of lessons that I can deliver quickly and easily that cover and address a number of grammar points. The kind of things that are both useful and very interactive. I dont need to know grammar, but I need to know how to teach it. I think there is a big difference between the two, and I think CELTA/Trinity etc tend to spend more time showing how to teach grammar, rather than actually teaching grammar. I recently completed my OU degree, and the final module was 'English Grammar in Context' which was great, but the knowledge it gave me isnt something I can really turn into something for class.

Having the knowledge is not much use without the skills to turn said knowledge into a good class. I think this is what courses for teacher training tend to do.

Last year I applied for a post at a UK college, and the pre-interview task was to prepare a 45 minute lesson plan to teach any aspect of present perfect using some adverbial linkers. Its very easy to google those terms, or look them up in a reference book, but its a real skill (that I dont yet possess totally) to turn that knowledge into a lesson plan.

I think courses open the door to that kind of critical thinking, and make trainees look at how to make language points effective in a classroom, but its experience that develops those skills. For that reason, I would like to see courses offer more in terms of how to teach grammar, and less teaching of grammar itself.

BTW - I didnt complete the pre-interview task for that job mentioned above. In honesty...I didnt know how to plan that lesson!

[fluffyhamster]

That portfolio you want Nick is IMHO what training courses should('ve) be(en) helping you/everyone to really build (why leave most of that work to later, when you're actually "teaching" and will therefore be too busy to do things quite enough justice), and I still think there is more functional and meaningful meat in good modern descriptive grammars (COBUILD, the CGEL) than you (and some trainers) seem to realize. But the main reason to keep plugging away at the grammar is that it can help answer those questions that students have when they understand the meaning fine but want a formal label for the item in question. (Yes, I know it sometimes shouldn't matter, but look at it this way: once you've assigned a label, you've got in effect a convenient shorthand, which can help organize further and possibly related aspects of the language).

[Dedicated]

Has anybody noticed we seem to have lost Scruffysa, the OP? (S)he doesn't seem to be joining in the discussion.

[nickpellatt]

[fluffyhamster]

Personally, I'd rather just assume that Mark is getting on with reading some of the books mentioned earlier (and Coledavis's suggestion of Harmer, Parrot, and then later Lewis, is a great trio to be getting on with). I mean, I don't know quite what you guys would expect Mark to be contributing just yet... And as Nick has said, this hasn't been a bad thread (and threads often go their own way, with OPs and others coming or rather going once they've asked their initial questions or had their apparent say).

[spiral78]

I agree that the progression of a thread is an organic thing, and they can quickly grow into things that the OP never intended. There's nothing bad about that!

[scruffysa]

I'm still here, reading what everyone is posting....however, the thread has long since evolved into a something far removed from what I originally asked about....

I found the recommendations of books to be very useful, and have started to compile a list of books that will be useful...so thanks to those who recommended them...that does include you cole

I do find it rather surprising that there seems to be a lack of recommendation of TEFL courses on here though. I would have thought that everyone would have a viewpoint on several of the more popular courses out there....

To be honest, I was defensive over what a couple of people posted early on in the thread.
To be told that I'm trying to take advantage of people, from the fact that I will be living outside of the main cities, is really offensive. Also, for someone to post something negative about my reply, in terms of grammar and spelling, to that offensive suggestion, just seems to be a post saying 'Ha Ha, look at what you have written you idiot..'

Maybe these posters did not want to convey these messages, however they should also know by now that without the ability of seeing the face of the 'speaker' or hearing their voice, this can lead to messages being taken out of context....surely everyone has had an argument on IM over what someone has written being totally different to what they mean...?

Anyway, that's enough of that. I have decide that I shall take the InternationalTESOL Plus online course, it includes sections on Young Learners and Business English, and seems to be quite comprehensive...does anyone have a view on other TEFL courses out there?

I believe, a lot, that to learn a language you must experience a language in its native setting. When I started to learn Spanish, many moons ago in school, it wasn't until I actually went to Spain, on an exchange trip, that my Spanish really improved. Just being around people who spoke Spanish, and having to use it daily, made me realise that usage of a language is much more important than just learning the rules and regulations of a language.
These rules and regulations, are, of course, important, but most of them can be picked up through practice of a language...after hearing a cerain phrase used many times over, most people will realise 'oh, this is how you say 'insert phrase here' in English' without , necessarily, knowing the rules behind it....

This is not to say I won't teach grammar to people, just to say, I feel that grammar learning should be a natural progression alongside learning how to communicate what you want to say to someone through simple usage of phrases...ie the more complex the sentence you are trying to say will lead to the inevitable learning of grammar associated to it....

However, you all know that I'm a total noob, I freely admit it, and these are just ideas that I have gleaned from learning Spanish...I'm hoping that a few books, a comprehensive course and some experience later I will have a better idea on how to be a good teacher of English...

Remember, I plan to give private courses, with no guarantees...not profess to be a qualified teacher, or indeed teach in a school....well, certainly not without a lot of experience first....

Special thanks to FH for being a true help on here...

Mark

[Chancellor]

[coledavis]

Well, as you ask about courses, I'll say the usual:
Employers don't rate online courses. Unless you're doing it strictly for your own information or enjoyment, you're spending a sum of money unnecessarily. Sure, you may have to spend more money - maybe twice as much or more - on a classroom-based course, but at least the money isn't wasted if you apply at some point for jobs where employers do care about the training. Also this should have a bearing on how well you teach; I had a conversation with a colleague from a training (as opposed to TEFL background) who commented, "I could get a book on the subject, but I still wouldn't fancy landing a plane without training".

As for which courses: for better or for worse, employers who specify ask for CELTA most often. Some also cite Trinity. Also, although for many jobs, it won't matter after you've progressed in your career, there are some employers such as International House who won't countenance any other courses. And if later on, you get picky about where you want to go and want to use your experience to get to a school offering the best deal, then you'll be kicking yourself for not having got a decent qualification.

Remember: it's a four week course. Local teachers often have four or five years training to do the job and you want to make a decent job of it without even practising in a classroom! Although I've recommended what I believe to be excellent books, I consider reading to be a useful adjunct to a good course.

[scruffysa]