Job Discussion Forums

[jammish]

All very well Roger, but I still maintain that with Chinese kids, sometimes a bit of guidance in their own language is necessary, particularly, I would say, with the younger kids. (Kindergarten to grade 1/early grade 2)

[kev7161]

I think Step, that probably most that are saying to use Chinese in an English class are agreeing to use it sparingly - - not 50/50 but maybe 80/20 or even 90/10 if possible. I think most English-teaching FTs worth their salt would certainly WANT a golden world where everyone (student and teacher alike) could just chatter away in English and the classroom was filled with smiling, happy students using all that English they've acquired over the years. But translating a complex (or even simple, based on the class make-up) set of instructions or having a TA figure out why little Wang Yi is crying hysterically by asking him in Chinese is reality and usually a necessity. There may be a select few on this forum who've mastered the skills necessary to have a 100% English speaking environment in their classroom and that's certainly laudable, but most of us are going to have to muddle along using the "scaffolding" I'm afraid.

[vikdk]

[william wallace]

nil

[vikdk]

Hey WW, if your post is highlighting the problem of FT's using the English classroom as a Chinese language practice area without due regard to the task of teaching English - then I'm afraid this argument kind of falls out the discussion area regarding the support of L2 learning through an L1 - since this kind of behaviour doesn't have much to do with English teaching - and could better be described as "skiving-off" from the job in hand, rather than bringing a new dimension of bilingualism into the classroom that actualy aids L2 acquisition.
The measure of banning Chinese from all English classroom, because of the behaviour of unprofessional "teachers" does seem a tad unfair - employers seeking more professionaly qualified FT's seems a far juster solution to me - but then again why pay more and go for better when those big foreign companies like EF give out the impression that they can do the job with the same "work for peanuts" FT material.

[Gregor]

Thank you, Steppenwolf.
I just couldn't say it like that. That is exactly what I'm trying to get at.
I also agree with vikdk in that using English class to practice Chinese is a skive, and quite outside the topic of discussion, and thank you for saying that, sir, I would have, had you not.

I do not QUITE agree with your approach of bilingual education in a language class. It strikes me as a bit too Utopian to be practical.
But it is interesting, they way you approach it. I will at least admit that, in you (and teachers like you) case, it isn't a skive. But I still go with my own approach, with the addendum that I will be a bit more open-minded about the introduction of Chinese into an English language class.

Still, I have to say that I have never encountered anyone who approached it like you. Whenever I hear Chinese in class (in my job as a DoS, observing classes or just slyly listening in at the door), I hear either poorly-trained CTs using it as a crutch and NOT taking advantage of situations to use English, or FTs practicing their Chinese, and neither is tolerable, in my opinion.

[vikdk]

Gregor (and indeed Steppenwolf - while considering suitable answers for my questions) you might want to consider that CT's and the way they use their traditional learning sentences, phrases and texts by rote methods (a method that makes the venerated grammar/translation approach look almost hyper-modern) - you know where English is mindlessly memorised so that it can be regurgitated to simulate English conversation - actually could be critised - through meaningfull pedagogical argument - for not using enough Chinese instruction (as in a grammar/translation approach - just like our mates the missionaries did ) with regard to trying to explain the meaning and the mechanics of the English that's being taught. Infact if you really come to think about it - for the Chinese teacher the simplest way of teaching "English" would be to use these all too common rote methods, with absolutely no Chinese included in these lessons - while just treating the students as flock of parrots who were to be drilled to make English sounding utterances - you know demoting language from a communication form into a series of almost abstract sounds
Gregor - hope you ain't encouraging those poor ol' CT's into using these terrible methods

[Steppenwolf]

[Steppenwolf]

[vikdk]

Steppenwolf - how do you equate this comment -

[jammish]

One useful way to use Chinese in the classroom is to check that the students understand something you are studying (e.g. a passage). If the ideas in it etc are complicated, I think this is vital. You can use endless amounts of pictures, illustrations etc to demonstrate the meaning, but there will still be some students who don't get it. So it's useful to ask them to translate it back into Chinese (but not spoonfeed them the meaning in Chinese).

I see nothing wrong with this. I studied French at University, and we would have to translate passages two ways: French to English, and English to French.

[Gregor]

Not that Steppenwolf needs any help from me, but vikdk, you are trying to turn this intelligent discussion (of which you are a capable contributor) into a silly semantics game.
Steppenwolf did not contradict himself in the least. When he spoke of the CTs using Chinese as a medium of instruction, that was the useless explanation of the rules of English, explained in Chinese. He sopke of the mindless repetition of English words and phrases as their means of teaching vocabulary and the stilted conversation skills we've all heard these students utter.

To an extent, I agree with you. Your way may be effective, and it may be faster than mine. I don't know. I have never seen the results of such a style, because the only teaching I have seen, I've already described, and so has Steppenwolf, i.e. Chinese teachers explaining in Chinese and engaging in rote repetition, or FTs practicing their Chinese on their English students.

Using the way I advocate teaching (and I learned what Steppenwolf describes, in my teaching courses), I have seen dramatic and positive results. This is evidence I have gathered with my own experience as a teacher and as a DoS observing other teachers.
It's not rote memorization. It's actually using the language.
I've seen it work. Students who learn good English from the CTs' methods are few and far between, and they are a testament to their own talents, emphatically NOT the CTs' teaching pedagogy. If there really IS any. Some students slip through my cracks because of being slower or less engaged in the topic or even just being overworked. Your method may be what gets through to those few slower ones. But, as you said yourself, that makes it easier for the stronger and more interested kids, who seem to enjoy the challenge presented by an English-only environment.
I'd like to see how you actually operate in the classroom before I made a decision on your method, but I have had too much success with my own, thanks so much, to try your way, which in this thread sound thought out, but not tried out.

As for Steppenwolf, all I can add is, Yeah. What HE said.

[Gregor]

Oh, and jammish,
Didn't mean to ignore you. You posted as I was writing.
I'm of two minds about the students' translating for me. I've done that. I can imagine doing it again. It kind of breaks the spell, if you know what I mean, but it's quicker. I try to avoid it, unless it's not the focus of the lesson. But even then, I feel like I somehow cheated. It IS sort of a cheat, for weaker stuents, isn't it? The stronger ones translate and the weaker ones get the translation.
Good for private lessons, though.

[vikdk]

Gregor - steppenwolf said this -

[Gregor]

vikdk, man,
I'll tell you what. I would have either trained or just got rid of the CTs I've worked with, if it were within my authority to do so. You're right, if they don't know what they are doing, it turns into mindless drilling or Chinese explanation, or both.
But that isn't the point. We're talking about what SHOULD be; what works the best.
How I'm learning Chinese is based on A) my experiences with Chinese teachers wanting to speak English in the classroom and B) my having to study on my own, in which case a LITTLE bit of English is helpful.
So what are you refering to here: