Job Discussion Forums

[fluffyhamster]

I'm not particularly championing her work, but stuff like Jenkins' The Phonology of English as an International Language etc arguably has had implications for training, but doubtless has been studiously ignored by UCLES as too theoretical or nitpicking or whatever, even though it might hold out the hope of getting the priorities in pronunciation clearer beyond the "reductionist" attitude of 'core native speaker is always best'.

Short version, for impatient or challenged readers: Reducing the phonemic inventory to the fudgy level that learners get by with fine enough among themselves could be the, or at least one, way to go.

[LongShiKong]

[fluffyhamster]

I don't have the text to hand, but IIRC it only dates from around 2000 - hardly antiquity! (Compare that to say the tired photocopies of excerpts from 70s textbooks that formed the basis for much of the TP on that CTEFLA I did in '96 - it would've obviously been far more useful had the school used the textbooks its actual students were using, for example Swan & Walter, or even Abbs & Freebairn). As for it being OUP, yes, that could limit the fair use that might be made of it, but one of the purposes of training at any level should as I've said and IMHO be to offer potted versions of potentially relevant works (not again that I particularly wish to champion Jenkins, I'm just offering her as an example of why some might consider or have considered the CELTA to be out of date. For example, one of the quotes that Sasha presented on page 1 said something about it still having an imperial mindset. Me, I've just been aware that students who are directly paying usually expect if not demand teachers from core countries, but that pronunciation will naturally diverge from the model no matter how sternly it is taught).

It was interesting dipping into Haycraft's (founder of IH and main driving force behind creation of original RSA cert) autobiography recently. He was a history graduate who knew little about grammar, phonetics etc when he started (that was left to his Swedish wife to impart to trainees), and his insights into contextualizing and personalizing the language are hardly unique (they have occurred to reforming teachers since time immemorial). I'm assuming it was his old school and Oxbridge ties that really cemented his position in the (EFL) establishment, but still, there is no denying his achievement.

[LongShiKong]

[fluffyhamster]

Works that are reasonably seminal don't need that much updating in themselves, nice though that would be. Jenkins has written at least one other book since, also in that OUP AL range, but I'm not sure it's as good. Wasn't intended as a name drop (though the forums could do with some! Assuming people are still earning enough to keep up with LT~AL publishing LOL), and I doubt that many have even really heard of or taken that much note of her, let alone actually read her work. She's simply one of the authors I recall have opined that TT might benefit from the occasional shake up, hence my mentioning her in the context of this thread's topic. Anyway, you might disagree with her views and similarly dissenting ones, but those who pretend that no ripples ever disturb the surface of the pond come across as not that widely read, to say the least!

[mk87]

I'm still kind of lost here. I just don't really see anything that contradicts any of the advice I was given in my CELTA, understanding the CELTA for what it is. We we're constantly told that it was more likley that we would be teaching English for international communication purposes rather than as a copy of the language we speak ourselves, infact I remember having to do a part of one of my written tasks detailing the issues of my korean learner and hte liklihood of his exposure to 'British english'.

It doesn't really seem that revolutionary to me, that when a language becomes global it becomes more diverse. Vocab, grammar and pronunciation wise. It's certainly something that was looked at on my course.

[fluffyhamster]

But did your course look at which phonemic distinctions (native, full-inventory ~) would seem, in the light of research into successful non-native to non-native interaction, to be irrelevant or certainly less relevant in the context of ELF (English as a lingua franca)? Jenkins is probably still one of only a handful who've actually bothered to do any empirical research in such areas, and until one reads at least a potted account of especially her "lingua franca core" (the ELT News book review would be a good place to start) then any talk of EIL is just that - talk, handwaving, mere lip service (if one is halfway serious about a genuine EIL, not just a native-speaker controlled imitation). Then again, reducing the inventory down could have a somewhat displeasing effect similar to that of hearing your kids pronouncing three as free ("Imagine there were three people in prison, wrongly accused, who became known as 'The Three'. Now imagine you are on a march chanting 'Free the Three', or as you would have it, 'Free the Free'!").

[mk87]

No it didn't. But then it also didn't contain a lot of other things which I now consider to be pretty useful. What it gave me was a very basic and solid understanding of how one way of learning/ teaching works. That is what it is meant to do. Its only a 4 week course. That is what I dont understand, what more do you expect out of it? 9short of turning it into something else)

You might wonder about whether 4 weeks is really long enough to become a teacher. Its a fair point, but what is true is that if teaching English required a formal university education in teaching english there would be a lot less people learning english over the world - interestingly that could have some effect on the phonemic changes we're talking about.

[fluffyhamster]

So it didn't contain that much other than one very basic way of teaching/learning, but was nonetheless "very solid". You've sold me!

But seriously, a lot more could be done in those four weeks, and in the prep reading leading up to it (which could be much more comprehensive and guided, were UCLES to bother producing a standardized reader). I think far too much time is wasted going through the motions and second-guessing the trainers.

I've never advocated ELT becoming entirely the province of specialized degree holders - much again would depend on the quality of the programmes, and just as certs are no guarantee of ability, nor would degrees be, especially those that lack ANY practicum - but it would perhaps be understandable if they became more required for work visa purposes.

[mk87]

[fluffyhamster]

I noticed you mentioning your academic background earlier, and how your trainers had been amenable to justifying the methodology. So yes, not all of us need to be spoon fed, and clearly some centers have better trainers than others. Pity then the brighter or indeed struggling trainees stuck with apparently dullish/tight-lipped/impatient/smug/self-satisfied/biased trainers (or that's certainly how they can come across, if one is unlucky enough to be at a less than stellar center. Delete or add adjectives as appropiate. BTW I'm going by more than just my own experiences - one sometimes reads reports on these very forums of CELTA trainers who sound awful - rude, playing favourites, you name it).

I think there is more and less effective. The CELTA way may for many be better than nothing, but a lot depends for a start on where one then teaches (one-to-one and small classes, large classes, schoolkids, children, indeed mature adults, may all require different approaches; then there are e.g. Asian students who may be very communicative and able but who owe their success to quite bookish study, much of it without any teacher at all! It happens LOL). It might be more accurate to say that one is teaching effectively in UCLES' opinion (and also always the trainers', let alone one's own?), but should that count for more or for less in this apparently "post-method" era? (I interpret such pronouncements to mean that CLT has trumped the more far-out weirdnesses, but that CLT in itself is not yet a 2001-like monolith run by monkey-taming supreme beings. It's a broad church).

The best training would perhaps be like an apprenticeship - more personal, even idiosyncratic, longer, and with essential small tasks only gradually building to taking over the genuine work. So-called standardized mass courses seem too hit-and-miss with this stuff, so the least they could do is take the more or less personal variables out of the equation, even if that would leave less for individual trainers to do (or inflict LOL). Anyway, building a solid lesson takes craftsmanship either way!

[Sashadroogie]

Fluffy, why do you say 'teaching effectively in UCLES' opinion' as though this is somehow at variance with teaching effectively?

[fluffyhamster]

Somebody made the point (in the thread leading on from the penultimate link you posted near the top of page 1) that UCLES is not in itself a teaching department but more (just) an exam provider generating revenue for the university. It follows then that their conception of what constitutes "good" teaching ("sellable", marketable) depends on who they choose to consult and how much or little of the advice is taken on board rather than dismissed. I imagine it is a bit like advising government ministers.

And let's say the CELTA got taken over by the providers of the TOEIC say - what would your opinion of it be then?

Ultimately, who is assessing the assessors, just mates in the same industry, or some equally cosy arrangement?

Still, I suppose we should remain thankful that ELT isn't as political as mainstream education!

[Sashadroogie]

What we need is a rank outsider to critique from the sidelines!

[spiral78]