Job Discussion Forums

[womblingfree]

[Mark]

Hi womblingfree,

Ok, I understand your points more clearly now. You're talking about "English only" as it is typically used in Japan, rather than in a general sense.

But, having to choose between "English only audiolingual" and "grammar-based with lots of L1", I'd probably choose to go the park and have a nice stroll.

I really honestly believe that the whole language system in Japan is not only ineffective, but actually detrimental to the students' chances of ever learning a foreign language.

Students in high school currently use a text-based approach with discussion of the text in Japanese. It's just that they discuss a 1,000 word story for 3 weeks! And by discuss, I means the teacher lectures about the story and the students try not to fall asleep.

I've had these kinds of conversations with the English teachers in my high school and my experience has been that they are unwilling to stop lecturing. I think they are unlikely to allow students to interact with texts in small groups (even using the L1) in the manner that you suggest.

That's my experience anyway, other schools are obviously more progressive.

[womblingfree]

[taikibansei]

[Big John Stud]

patsensei wrote:

Should Japanese English teachers teach English in English or in Japanese? I think English would be better. I believe this could start as early as the first year of Junior high school. Obviously this would be a bit harder for the students but better for them in the long run. Also the Japanese teachers may have some pronounciation issues but there are many non-native English speakers and I think everyone has to be reminded that the purpose of a language is for communication not to be perfect. Japanese teachers may also be shy at first to speak in English but they`ll get over it.

I pretty much agree but would like to add! A Japanese teacher speaking English and making mistakes would be a great roll model of not being afraid to make mistakes. I can't see how anyone can learn a language if they are afraid of a pronounciation mistake!

[sethness]

If the students are just starting out, then teaching in Japanese is absolutely the best.

For one thing, you needn't wonder that the students are misunderstanding terms like "noun" and "verb". For another thing, you can make the words more memorable by suggesting Japanese words that sound similar. For example, when I wanted my students to remember "I'm sorry", I said "I'm sorry, hige sori, koizumi sori". Or when I want my students to remember "Over-the-counter" (medicines), I say "Obaa ga kaun'da!" (= "old ladies bur it").

Also, it's a fact that if students are permitted to think or speak first in Japanese, then in English, it helps them to organize their thoughts. Listening and moving jaw muscles while saying something in Japanese and English also makes the English more memorable, since it's got an "anchor point" in the students' memory.

On the other hand, the teacher should absolutely not allow students to communicate purely in Japanese. Even the little comments like "unfair" or "I forgot my homework" or "lend me an eraser, buddy?" shoudl be done in English (with Japanese in parallel, if they want).

When students speak to the teacher, the teacher must make a hard and absolute rule that the teacher will not listen to statements made in Japanese. I usually look around like I'm lost and say "I don't speak Japanese. What do you mean?" If you don't do this, then the students will quickly become lazy, preferring to communicate in Japanese-only.

[gaijinalways]

taikibansei posted

[GambateBingBangBOOM]

I learned French using French grammatical terms and explanations. I learned German the same way. For the Japanese that I took in a formal classroom in Canada we used English names for terms. Using the L1 names for grammar leads students to mistakenly think that the target language grammar and the L1 grammar cover the same things, even when they don't. For example, if you learn the subjunctive in French and German as 'the subjunctive' then you may think that not only are they very similar to English, but that they are very similar to each other. But they aren't.

As far as grammatical rules are concerned, they should definately be taught in the target language- especially when there isn't really a corresponding grammar in the L1.

The problem is that most Japanese teachers haven't learned English grammatical terms and honestly don't understand them well enough (despite it being their 'specialty' in the class- the ALTs 'specialty' being natural pronounciation and culture) to teach them, especially the things that don't really have a corresponding grammar in Japanese because they insist on trying to describe it and think of it in terms of Japanese. It would be like us trying to figure out a way to get the reading of kanji by how similar it looks to a roman character, and insisting that there 'must' be a way to do it.

It boils down to something very simple. Japanese teachers of English will tell you that Japanese is the most polite language because of all the endings and polite forms it has. This is what they think because they simply don't understand English well enough to understand non-marked levels of politeness (other than body language and tone of voice, it isn't really something that is used in their language AFAIK- so it isn't used in written correspondence), and then they don't understand why people react badly to demanding or even threatening sounding letters that they've written in English, because these letters wouldn't sound that way in Japanese- the politeness level is marked in the language itself.

[Mark]

That's bang on, Mr. BOOM. You've pretty much said it all.

The bottom line is that most English teachers don't really speak English. They're just the people who turned out to be really good at the translation-based approach. They've gotten good at speaking Japanese using English words and syntax (more or less anyway, as far as syntax goes). They say what they would say in Japanese, using English words and syntax.

It's freaky, but that's the way here. What was it that the education minister said recently? That "Japanese is the basis of all intellectual activities" or something to that effect?

I've even had teachers at my high school tell me that the students can't learn English because they don't even speak Japanese very well!

I'm not normally much for giving up, but the situation in Japan really seems hopeless, at least for the near future.

[Venti]

[SeasonedVet]

I have been thinking about this topic for some time.
I am taking the Unpopular Position.
I am making a case for using BOTH languages in the classroom.

From the get go in Japan after my arrival I kept hearing "No Japanese In Class". That was at an eikaiwa.
Somehow I never agreed with this rule. I noticed that whenever students used Japanese during the lesson to explain something I easlily ended up learning something in Japanese. My Japanese skills got better. I occasionallyt used a Japanese word or phrase to explain something that was difficult to explain and the student would say "OHhhhhhh, I understand I understand." And that would cut a 10 minute explanation of a word or phrase in English into 1 minute by using the Japanese word. Now having said that I am NOT advocating that you just use Japanese in the lessons at will, or willy nilly. What I am saying is that there will be times when it is better to just tell the student the word in Japanese and Move On rather than wasting away the minutes trying to explain something that the student is not getting at all, and Iwould feel terribl;e if I sent that student away not having understood what it meant to come back another day and try again, ( or the student would probably just look it up in the dictionary anyway, that's what dictionaries are for)
Furthermore, while teaching Real beginner students ( usually old ladies and sometimes young girls ) when explaining something in English, on understanding the explanation they would say something like "Ahhh Japanese word inserted here" and it was from these beginer students that I learnt some Japanese. Almost every class we would BOTH leave both having learnt the others language. That was because Both languages were used.

At the high school level, because many students do Not have a strong foundation in English it is quite difficult to teach them Solely in English. And I believe that the Japanese teacher is quite valuable to have there to explain things that confuse them. In High School there is not the Eikaiwa situation where there are 3- 8 students in a room. The High School situation is Different. There are 35 - 40 students alot of whom have no strong foundation in English. teaching them in English Only would be a task and a half. I want to insert here that it is Not Impossible to teach them solely in English but you would need to have certain things in place, like unlimited time, lots and lots of teaching realia, no focus on the exam to come, smaller classes and so on ... But in the situation that we are in which is far from Utopia, using Japanese in class becomes necessary.

So although I am making a case for using Japanese in the English lesson I am Not saying that using only English is impossible. However we need to look at Which Method Is More Effective. That question might be best answered by people who have tried both or two parties who have tried one or the other.
In my experience learning French at school, we had a very active teacher (she was new) and she brought her husband in to help her. She spoke Only French. I was lost. Some students caught on. She used a tape recorder with a song. I think the lyrics were something about a big besou ( grand basier?) and I had No Idea what was going on. we learned the song and sang it together. When she stopped the tape she asked in French what big besou was. I still had no idea. By the end of the class she told those of us who didn't know. By using the action. a big Kiss. (Maybe, I think. )
That wasn't effective for me and some others in a class of 30. Other students excelled because they were grounded in basic or higher French and were dilligent students. In that class of (how much of the 50 minutes was spent on that I don't remember) I had Not understood the meaning. Had it been a class where the teacher tried to explain for 5minutes or so and if we werent getting it just explained by using the action or even just telling us the word, Big besou ( grand baser?) means Kiss, and now we're going to practice (reinforce the meaning) by using a song, I think the whole class would have understaood and learned and retained,rather than half of the class.

Now I think of my situation then and I think of my students now. Do I want to put them through that? Or do I try first and if they don't get it then throw in either the word only or the word and the action where necessary?

[patsensei]