Job Discussion Forums

[flutterbayou]

There seems to be slight but relevant confusion between language learning and language acquisition as interpreted by Stephen Krashen.


Language acquisition refers to the learner's ability to use the language, without necessarily knowing the mechanics of it. It does not refer to a fast-paced program that gets students speaking a second language quickly in a total immersion environment. Krashen is emphatically against "push" and promotes an individual's personal set of conditioned processes to guide the path of language acquisi tion.

Acquisition is about integrating the second language patiently while allowing the learner to self-pace the process without the need to get into linguistics.

You do not need to be in a native English speaking country to follow through with Krashen theory; you need patient teachers and plenty of time, undisturbed.

A visit to this site should clear things up:
http://www.sk.com.br/sk-krash.html

The problem, as Leon Purvis points out, is that Chinese parents have a preconceived idea that progress is only evident by a show of accomplishment, somewhat like having to wear a blue ribbon to show you are #1. Some parents are too impatient for gradual processing of the language: they want fast results.

Universities also test this way.

But I was corresponding with a teacher this weekend, who did not realize that some good joint ventures in China are able to employ Krashen-based learning processes when teachers are able to spend 20-24 hours per week with their students, making English-speaking films, dubbing Chinese films into English, holding debates and mock trials, creating PowerPoints for furnishing an apartment on a budget, creating a city-wide newsletter, playing football in English, getting together to sponsor a Jeopardy tournament, creating a tour guide book of the town ....

The key is not pushing grammar and who-knows-what about linguistics, but by applying language in ways that are useful to young people, who will pro-actively discover it beyond watching DVDs.

For those who think it cannot be done in China, I agree in part, if the learning environment is non-conducive to process learning. Many teachers only see their students once a week for two 50-minutes sessions and then the Chinese teaching staff takes over to get them through CET4. It is hard to effect process in this sort of sporadic and interrupted learning environment.

But if you like the idea of facilitating learning experiences that encourage language acquisition, then I recommend investigating working for joint ventures with western influences in the classroom. These employers help make teaching the joy it should be. (edited for typos)

[arioch36]

[arioch36]

PS I am not anti Krashen!!!

I just want to hear from the teacher who used Krashen theory in the classroom in China, and some examples. What theory did you apply, and how did you apply it, and how do you think it worked.

Isn't that basic research? Not expecting a scientific paper using statistics (though that would get you published)

[vikuk]

[flutterbayou]

All the questions you raise were addressed in my post.

Why don't people read accurately and attentively?

It sometimes seems as though posters start writing their rebuttals before reading the last post.

There is no communication when people talk without listening.

[vikuk]

[flutterbayou]

[un]

arioch

[SnoopBot]

You can get Krashen's theories to work. We studied each of the segments of L2 learning at my teaching university. Krashen seemed to have the latest research information and best success rate. However, one glove not fits all!

However, how many of those Chinese admin types have ever heard of Krashen or desire to impliment any of his suggestions for L2 learning.

I'll bet you a second-wife, and another BMW , none of them care or can understand these theories.

So unless you can show how Krashen will increase their cash flow, they don't give a hoot about most of these things. Almost like telling one of those guys driving a black Audi (that has a crew-cut haircut) that you think you should have the right-away on the street because the light was red. (After they just ran you over)

" You know Krashen doesn't understand our 5000-year history and we are just a developing country.. and.. harmonious society should... also..you just don't understand China.. therefore...but the Olympics are in China this year and Tibet is part of China so is Taiwan.. and you better not be Japanese."

This is about as far as you will get discussing Krashen.

[Lobster]

I believe that there are a few issues to consider when applying any particular teaching theory to a classroom environment.

1. Does the situation the theory was developed to address match the situation in which it will be applied?

2. Does the outcome predicted by the theory match the needs of the students?

3. Can the theory be successfully applied in the specific environment?

Discussion of the application of a particular theory must take into account the type of environment and institution and the expectations of the learners. Therefore, English instruction at a private language school, in a public school or university or in an academic foundation program will have quite different objectives. Even in China, there is more than one language-learning environment.

There is little point in attempting to bolster communicative capacity within a system focussed on proficiency in achieving high exam scores based on knowledge of analytical grammar, nor is there much chance of success teaching using a grammar rules focus with people who just want to speak and understand the language. As well, students' individual and group proficiency will dictate what type of activities can be used. Demands by administration to focus on achieving irrelevant or improbable results are doomed to failure, as the instructor and students will not have the time, resources or motivation to succeed.

Most formal teacher training emphasizes an eclectic approach that borrows from, modifies and adapts a wide range of approaches and activities in order to reach a majority of students with different learning styles.

I am all in favour of using activities that "trick" students into learning through enjoyable practice, but I also believe in the value of creating a firm foundation of rules and vocabulary to build on. There has been a lot of attention paid to the idea of lowering the affective filter, but to interpret this as "let them just have fun and relax and they'll progress rapidly" is, IMHO, a big mistake. Let's face it; staged classroom dialogues, movies and role plays are not really an authentic use of practical English, although they can provide valid preparation for it. In fact, effective practical language learning is as much a lifestyle as a course of study.

Another mistake I often see made, both by teachers and students, is viewing language ability in terms of either a "learning curve" or direct incremental or exponential progress. In reality, language learning )much like learning to play a musical instrument) involves a series of "flat lines" (representing subconcious assimilation and processing) and "rapid increases" (representing the practical application and use of this processed knowledge). Therefore, most of the outcomes of the learning process are both long-unseen and delayed. This will cause disappointment for those who expect to see immediate results, particularly in higher-level students.

Before (or now that) I get completely off track, I want to say that Krashen's theories can be applied in a Chinese EFL classroom that is focussed on building communicative capacity, but that in most situations it will have to find limited use. Realistically, students are not empty vessels of unlimited capacity. They certainly have limits that, particularly in public schools, are exceeded by the volume of daily information they are exposed to. In many cases, the poor EFL teacher is trying to pour more into a glass that's already full.

RED

[Anda]

Well Lobster you certainly summed it up. My method with young kids is to " I am all in favor of using activities that "trick" students into learning through enjoyable practice," to use your words by using DVDs and getting them to repeat statements first off and then questions and answers.

My next stage is starting sentences on the board or with handout where students have to finish off the sentence. Example: Layout doesn't work that well here but you should get it!



when
Where were you:

who / to do what / when
Could you help:

At the same time I will be doing conversational scripts with my students on the blackboard.

The next stage is getting them to write half page stories.

[Lobster]

Another important factor I think we should look at is the personality of the instructor and interaction with the students. Some teaching styles are more effective in certain situations. A teacher's patience level, ability to guide and manage students, preparation skills and methods of feedback and correction can also make or break a class. Between the extremes of listlessness and hyperactivity, most experienced teachers should do fairly well adapting their style as required.

Anda, you're certainly on to something with your approach. The role of posing and answering questions should not be underestimated, as much daily conversation revovles around these exchanges.

By examining the process of learning and enhancing our teaching to optimize each subprocess, we can further develop our skills and efficiency in aiding:

Perception
Comprehension/Categorization
Memorization
Application/Production
Creation

Keeping a well-balanced approach to addressing various language skills and having several types of activities in each class will help keep students' energy levels high. A familiar format using changing material will help students concentrate more on content and less on figuring out what they're supposed to be doing.

The topic of this thread, "Why teach oral English when it simply does not work", leads me to wonder whether some are getting caught in a semantic trap between language learning and language acquisition. Would that in turn change your role from "language instructor" to "language provider'?

Focus more on achieving the goals set by the curriculum or agreed upon at the start of the program. Ensure these goals are realistic from day 1. Vigorously combat classroom interference from non-professional stakeholders. Teachers who are unable or unwilling to stand their ground on these things are going to have a rough ride. They will find themselves bending to the methods favoured by the die-hard old system adherents whose failure to achieve results can clearly be seen.

RED

[Anda]

By teaching statements first off with the use of DVDs you are teaching answers to questions. Teaching statements is the obvious and once they get their minds around it, it is time to move on to the teaching the question that proceeds the answer. So after a couple of semesters of once a week 40 minute classes I have students able to converse at a simple level.

By the end of a couple of semester students are also taking in what is being spoken on the DVDs so it is only a matter of time before their vocabulary starts to expand the same way that small children learn their native language.

Teaching a second language doesn't have to be rocket science. The main thing with immersion teaching is to not expect results until enough input has taken place. Children placed into another country start to speak spontaneously after two or three months after having a need to learn a basic vocabulary to go about their school life with other children.
Once they have learned a basic vocabulary it becomes easy to add to this as the need occurs. Keep it simple I say and you will get results.

[flutterbayou]

... and people have been learning languages by experiential learning techniques for centuries, long before anyone labeled it "Krashen."

When I train teachers, I encourage them to facilitate a student-created picture dictionary. Nowadays, so many people have the cameras built in to their phones, they can set up a pic-dictionary nicely (and they can make home movies). And as I mentioned earlier, mock trials, dubbing movies, setting up theme-based exercises... all these things cause students to discover ways to get things done with a new language.

As Gattegno teaches, students learn by solving problems. Give them something to do and they will discover language in the process.

As a teacher trainer and coordinator of curriculum, the challenge I often face is helping teachers see things anew, not changing the way students learn. If I may say so with regard, teachers tend to talk too much in class.

Those of us who prefer experiential learning for our students try to allow the students' talk to upstage us in the classroom. Teachers can re-think themselves, first: How can they set up the structure in their classrooms to allow students more talk and less listening to the teacher talk.

All I can say is that my students learn solidly and travel abroad, even to the States.

[un]

Flutterbayou: