| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
LongShiKong
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 1082
Location: China
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 6:17 am Post subject: UK/EU vs US Methodology - Different? |
 |
|
I've never taught in Japan. I posted this on the China (job-related) forum but I'd like to hear from those of you in Japan:
| Quote: |
Is it just my N.A bias or does the UK/EU still favour the older drill-based or audio-lingual methods? Seems we North Americans are more likely to use communicative methods such as CLL which I'd observed being used in a Canadian primary French class last fall.
Everyone with a TEFL knows Berlitz (France) started drilling language in the 19th century (and still does?) but it seems the more contemporary Pimsleur (France) method does pretty much the same with its listen-and-repeat audio courses. Compare Longman's Side by Side with it's pattern drill substitutions to the UK-published but American-authored Interchange series with more contextualized language presentation and the distinction is clear.
I recently resigned from teaching at a Longman School in China (Pearson-Longman is London-based). It seems their most popular coursebooks in Asia focus on rote memorization (drilling) yet claim to adopt the 'communicative approach' (US). With limited dialogues, I found it difficult to do any meaningful practice without adding language. In fact, Longman's Superkids author herself asked of her Yahoo UsersGroup if even more, (not less) drilling of the minimal language in her books could resolve the problem her students had in responding in the same way to every question.
Although I've taught for a decade, intensive drilling is rather new to me. Last week I was in Shanghai for training at UK/Japan-based Shane. Over a dozen drilling methods were introduced. Having spent years teaching at N.A.-owned franchises here in China and in Canade where the focus was on comprehension and communication, the thought of drilling language in such a systematic way from flashcards concerns me. I don't want to be a drill sergeant nor one of those parents who push their child toward me instructing them what to say.
It seems drilling is more common in Japan. Interestingly, Shane head office staff told me that Shane teachers who come here from Japan feel kids here have better English than their Japanese coutnerparts.
Over the past few decades, rote memorization in N.A. public education has all but been eliminated from the curriculum. I'm sure it's the reason why my 100 hr TESL in Vancouver 10 yrs ago hardly touched on drilling. However, education academics are starting to see inherent value in rote memorization methods thanks to recent neural research.
Given what I perceive as N.A's reluctance to use drilling which contrasts sharply with Asia's tradition-bound total reliance on it, I'd like to get a sense of where the EU/UK is and how you feel about drilling? Also what's behind the recent sell-out of Japan Shane? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
seklarwia
Joined: 20 Jan 2009
Posts: 1546
Location: Monkey onsen, Nagano
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 7:10 am Post subject: Re: UK/EU vs US Methodology - Different? |
|
|
| LongShiKong wrote: |
| Over the past few decades, rote memorization in N.A. public education has all but been eliminated from the curriculum. I'm sure it's the reason why my 100 hr TESL in Vancouver 10 yrs ago hardly touched on drilling. However, education academics are starting to see inherent value in rote memorization methods thanks to recent neural research. |
And drilling isn't part of how kids study in English language classes in the UK either.
I doubt how students in public schools learn English has any influence on how ESL/EFL English is taught. After all, native kids normally start school able to speak English already.
I took an introduction to TEFL course at uni in the UK and later a UK-based 120hr TEFL. Neither encouraged drilling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongShiKong
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 1082
Location: China
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I doubt how students in public schools learn English has any influence on how ESL/EFL English is taught. |
By public education, I meant regular schools in N.A. There's very little rote memorization required for things like names and dates in history or multiplication tables in math and there's good reason for that. The focus, at least in the west has been on higher level cognitive abilities needed in the workplace, not for test-taking skills required to enter post-secondary in Asia and the EU.
The point I'm trying to make is that such pedagogical shift in public education has affected how language is taught. The communicative method is American whereas Grammar Translation, Audio Lingual and previous methods were European in origin.
According to Bloom's taxonomy, from highest to lowest cognitive skills:
1. creativity
2. evaluating
3. analyzing
4. applying
5. understanding
6. remembering |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seklarwia
Joined: 20 Jan 2009
Posts: 1546
Location: Monkey onsen, Nagano
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 2:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongShiKong wrote: |
| The point I'm trying to make is that such pedagogical shift in public education has affected how language is taught. The communicative method is American whereas Grammar Translation, Audio Lingual and previous methods were European in origin. |
And my point is you don't know about how languages are taught in the UK. I am from the UK and have learnt a number of languages (four to be precise) as well as English in a "regular" school; I've never been made to do any grammar translation, rote-memorisation or drilling. And yes, whilst we are marked on language accuracy in tests, the main purpose of our language tests is to prove our communicative and comprehension abilities.
And by the way, there are many countries in the EU and they don't all teach in the same ways. For example, I took translation theory and practice at uni in both the UK and Spain. In the UK, the focus is on communicative ability and understanding things such as cultural specific and natural language use. But in Spain, they cared little for these kinds of points and you could pass the practical test with really unnatural sounding English as long as you didn't make more than 5 grammar or spelling mistakes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
G Cthulhu
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
Posts: 1373
Location: Way, way off course.
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongShiKong wrote: |
| The communicative method is American |
Ahhh.... no. It's European. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongShiKong
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 1082
Location: China
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thanks for clearing that up. Actually, it's seems a toss up between Britain and the EU. I'd been told in my TEFL course it was Chomsky but he didn't develop the approach, just the theory. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
reddevil79
Joined: 19 Jul 2004
Posts: 234
Location: Neither here nor there
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
G Cthulhu
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
Posts: 1373
Location: Way, way off course.
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongShiKong wrote: |
| Thanks for clearing that up. Actually, it's seems a toss up between Britain and the EU. I'd been told in my TEFL course it was Chomsky but he didn't develop the approach, just the theory. |
Then you were told wrong.  Chomsky doesn't work (& never has) in the field of language teaching. Taking any of his theoretical (& wrong, IMO) work in the field of theory of language acquisition and creating a SL/FL teaching method out of it is a stretch IMO.
That said, how does this relate to Japan? The thing to remember is that you'd be being paid to teach the way you're told to. Personally, I'm not really sure Japan has a preferred "style", outside of the public schools system. If it really makes you uncomfortable then simply find another employer that matches. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr_Monkey
Joined: 11 Mar 2009
Posts: 661
Location: Kyuuuuuushuuuuuuu
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Interestingly, I find many American texts needlessly prescriptive and without a clear referenced base for the functions that they teach.
You cite the Berlitz and Pimsleur methods - behavioristic and audio-lingual approaches to teaching languages that haven't featured in the theoretical literature (or in mainstream texts) for over 40 years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 3292
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Longshikong, whereabouts did you post that in the China Job-related forum? I've been searching, but don't seem able to find anything like that there.  (I'm just interested in reading the differing responses to what you've posted - the General Discussion responses are somewhat different to these "Japanese" ones, for example). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongShiKong
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 1082
Location: China
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 3292
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No worries, LSK! I've replied over on the GD forum, but picking up here on what seems to be the main point or implication of your similar OP above, I doubt if many would agree that non-communicative methods apparently thrive in Asia due to the blessing of supposedly non-communicative European methodologists, despite what locally-marketed books might otherwise suggest! Then, there are the factual errors or distortions that others (and I'm afraid I have to second them!) have picked you up on. (Dell Hymes was American though, if that's any consolation!     ). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
