Job Discussion Forums

[gugelhupf]

Anyone had experience of this teaching methodology? How does it work in a real-world situation?

[TEAM_PAPUA]

It doesn't!!!

[uilleannpiper]

I've not come across 'CALLA' as such, but in glancing over some websites just now, it appears somewhat similar to the Task-based approach that I use in my current place of teaching. In Task-based Learning (TBL) students are not taught according to a traditional set of systematic grammatical structures where Unit 1 teaches present simple with some exercises and drills.

Instead, it gives learners a series of tasks which they work through using language which they are exposed to in the process.

Again, it's based on Krashen's I+1 theory (comprehensive input +1) whereby students are exposed to increasing amounts of language (NB not necessarily simplified language, but managable amounts of 'natural' language).

To say it doesn't work is not an accurate appraisal. I firmly believe that learners can learn (and acquire) communicative language skills from any method that they themselves feel works best.

I have used traditional methods (exercises and drills - standard textbook-based stuff) and communicative TBL methods and different students prefer different approaches. Some even express 'delight' at how much more interesting it is to learn a language using TBL as opposed to what they're used to.

The other issue is that it is widely accepted among SLA researchers that learners learn and acquire language at their own pace and not according to any pre-determined systematic manner. Alongside this it is also acknowledged that learners learn and acquire language best when they are working with the language for real-life purposes (ie to complete a task) as opposed to simply completeing a series of exercises and drills.

However....and it's a BIG however.....from my experience, the language learning context also plays a big role in the success or otherwise of any given teaching method. TBL and Communicative language learning requires good resources and room to move so to speak. The cramped (spatial and temporal) conditions of the EF -type classroom are less conducive to that sort of language learning hence it's apparent failure in these types of conditions.

In my situation - a government primary school where languages in the curriculum are largely sidelined and little funding is provided for - it still has been a successful way for my students to learn the language. But at only 1 1/2 hours a week they're not going to become competent users of the language no matter what method I employ.

If this is what CALLA is then it has a place in 2nd language learning. I'd have to read into it more to see what it is really about and why Anna Uhl Chamot and J. Michael O'Malley claim to be the ones who invented it.

[TEAM_PAPUA]

The Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach

Requires: cooperative group work, shared aims and goals, assigned individual roles - members rely on each other to achieve the end product, positive interdependence, individual accountability, group processing...etc

Though I admit this method of teaching may have its benefits in a classroom full of eager to learn students who come from different cultural backgrounds, and who do not share the same first language (for example: overseas students studying in England/America etc) my conclusion that it 'doesn't work' is based on attempting to teach it in an Indonesian classroom to students who would rather be in the Mall, and who spend most of the lesson drawing in their exercise books or playing with their cellphones.

[uilleannpiper]

Exactly. Motivation is the key to language learning success or failure no matter what method is employed. That's why using a structured text book approach can also be deceiving. Students, particularly East and Southeast Asian students have English instruction from a text book from the word go, so they can go through all the motions, explain all the grammar, complete all the exercises and even pass their end-of-unit tests yet still be incompetent in the language. What have they gained from their expensive ESL course? Not much more than at school.

My students are all Australians learning (being forced to learn, that is) Indonesian yet because of the nature of the lessons based on real tasks in which they use the language for a genuine purpose, not just filling in exercises (although exercises do play an important role), and even though, as I mentioned in another thread, the problems of behaviour management are prominent, I generally have about 99% of my students - and there's about 300+ of them - 'on task', working with the language, and generally completing their 'projects' to a satisfactory or higher standard - even the 'nutcases' sometimes get involved. So the requirements that TP outlined above are largely present in my classrooms except that the nature of the behaviour management issues means that 'cooperative group work' is often compromised.

[TEAM_PAPUA]

[uilleannpiper]

When I taught in Sydney I had a Korean student who had an excellent command of English grammar from daily English lessons at school. Nearly every lesson he would take exception to sentence structures which were examples of the many exceptions to the rules.

We had a few arguments but, on a positive note, at least he was learning to use his communication skills and his limited spoken English for a real-life purpose - arguing with the teacher

[uilleannpiper]