|
Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
LongShiKong
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 1082
Location: China
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 6:21 am Post subject: Fluffyhamster's 'Conversational Analysis' Method |
 |
|
| Back in May on the 'CELTA Method' thread, Fluff wrote: |
I've tried in this thread and many others to give some indication of what I think would make for more effective teaching~learning methodology... based in no small part on conversation analysis.
|
Such a comment from a senior forum member seemed incredulous, especially from someone with plenty of Asian experience... and with kids!
| I wrote: |
| Yeah, I get that. But when (overt?) analysis takes precedence over even assessment, aren't we back to the study of revered dead languages? |
| To which Fluff wrote: |
| ...a lot can be obviously gained from its functional analysis (i.e. analysis can help the teacher prepare and get ideas for activities. I'm not an advocate of too much overt analysis by students in class however, if only because I think that might appear to be passing the buck, but then, I'm not into too much teacher-led overt analysis either). |
Given my own prior critique of the ELT industry in general, I was intrigued yet skeptical. I partly share Fluff's distaste for textbook-reliance but his 'conversation analysis' of what I could recall a friend use in teaching adults in Canada suggested an overly intensive focus on discourse analysis at the expense of more pressing considerations, namely the language needs of the students who were clearly beyond such basic practice:
| Fluffyhamster wrote: |
| I wrote: |
Who is he? He's a doctor. Who is she? She's a doctor. Are you a doctor? No, I'm not. |
Assuming your recollection is 100% correct about what this teacher did and said, LSK, his first and second (Wh-) question and answer ("drill") there seems pretty dodgy (Who BE X? doesn't usually elicit "identification by giving general profession, or indeed specific position held", right? And even then it would need to be used with caution [well, in anything but absolutely chaotic emergencies e.g. a terrorist attack] so as to not sound too brusque). The third question meanwhile (of the more open, yes-no sort) is fine in itself (out of context, at least), but was presumably added by accident or design to the "discourse" in order to make it seem more functionally watertight overall (doesn't stop it leaking like a sieve though, to a sharp eye!). Anyway, it's unfortunate that the cert this "teacher" took didn't cure him of his zombie-teaching ways (but then, as I've been suggesting, it's hardly a thinking man's qualification, and there is sometimes still a fair bit of quite mindlessly behaviouristic and/or decontextualized mash-up driller-killer baggage bumping along at least implicitly on a cert in practice, from which the trainee might "take their cue" and continue to extrapolate...).
http://forums.eslcafe.com/job/viewtopic.php?t=95859&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=105
|
So, I've been trying to find what exactly Fluffyhamster means by 'conversation analysis':
| FH wrote: |
In an ideal world of course, students would be clearly (that is, much more clearly!) taught and therefore left in no doubt about the differences between major registers (such as generally informal conversation versus formal academic writing - with the former usually [claimed to be ideally and comprehensively] taught before the latter), and relatively recent books like the Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English (Biber et al 1999), which looks at and compares variation in the grammar(s) of (British "versus" American) conversation, fiction, news, and academic prose, would seem pretty useful in this regard.
The following...
http://forums.eslcafe.com/job/viewtopic.php?t=83575&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=conversation&start=15
|
| But suggesting 'halfway decent conversation skills' are all teachers can/should (?) provide, Fluff wrote: |
If the student or better yet the teacher were honest, they would admit that if somebody can already speak enough English to hold their own in a halfway decent conversation, there isn't really a whole lot linguistically that they can be taught or learn - which obviously leads to the question of why exactly they are paying for the teacher's time.
........
Perhaps the best thing would be for "conversation schools" generally to get a lot more serious about the potential "methodology" of "teaching" conversation, and then only to those who really need still to learn "it", but of course that would involve too much work for everyone delivering "the" programme, and would be risking no more milking the cash cow (and who knows, its udders really might then burst!). (By the way, for those interested, over on the Teacher Discussion forums I and others have pondered how conversational skills might be developed better than they usually are (or rather, aren't!)).
http://forums.eslcafe.com/job/viewtopic.php?t=76089&highlight=conversation
|
Who here seconds my nomination to promote Fluffyhamster from his lowly TEFL treadmill to ELT's highest ivory tower? Seriously, Fluff, have you thought or looked into academia? I mean no offence, but given what you've written, I don't get you're cut out for 'treadmill' teaching. Most as you're well aware simply aren't, including many exceptional authors. That's partly why I'm suggesting it. Pursue your passion...but try to get paid for it.
If there's one thing my beginner to intermediate students don't need, it's conversation analysis which obviously can't happen overtly in L2 if as you imply, they're not yet able to hold a half decent conversation. What they do need is plenty of select language input and output practice in the form of conversations. On the contrary, analysis is something they do with an L1 teacher or on their own, with, for example the (only  ) recently published bilingual self-study texts such as Grammar in Use, etc. (weren't you the one who brought that one to my attention?)
Fluff, once again, I'm putting you to the challenge! Show your stuff!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
spiral78
Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Posts: 11534
Location: On a Short Leash
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 1:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not sure that academia is the ideal aspiration for someone who isn't convinced that official qualifications are necessary or sufficient - or even relevant - to teaching, all the way from CELTA to MA and presumably Phd level.....
Nothing to rule out a Fluffyhamster U. sponsored by the fluff himself, of course!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 3292
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@Spiral: Regarding qualifications, my main beef as you know is with the way the process is "spread out", which IMHO can discourage enough thinking at the "lower" levels, and perhaps too much thinking at the "higher". (It's all ultimately teaching, but not all of it is gravy). The conscientious person with half a brain can find their own happy medium, and it needn't cost an arm and a leg (though even books alone aren't always easy to afford on the average TEFLer's wages). Ah well, at least I'm convinced that better (i.e. bettering one's own) language teaching has, must have, something of the "rocket science" about it, if it is to reach any sort of height. Those boosters indeed need fuelling up etc. (Just make sure it's not diesel is all).
@LSK: I'm not sure people will be that interested in a selective let alone exhaustive plough through my previous posts, but I'll try my best to answer your queries.
I'm not sure why you would think that attempting to make the discourse in the classroom, "even in Asia, and with kids!", more natural and functional would be so impossible or not work (or whatever your reservations about it quite are). I can assure you that it does work, because it makes more sense to them than e.g. the bungled "grammar" practice that your Canadian friend inflicted on his paying students. And the only reason my analysis of his discourse seems "overly intensive" is because what he was doing was awry, plain and simple. (Not that un-awry language doesn't sometimes have questions raised about it (I won't say 'raise questions' because it's not usually me raising those questions, even though I do my best to answer them when I can LOL)). As for my analysis being "at the expense of more pressing considerations, namely the language needs of the students who were clearly beyond such basic practice", er, those weren't my students, so it wasn't me who'd misdiagnosed their needs (for ESP, i.e. EMP/Medical English - and what this teacher was giving them was anything but, and not even reliable general English).
Resources such as the LGSWE have become valuable resources in ELT and Applied Linguistics, for those teachers fortunate enough to have access to them. Is there anything more to say? I don't think so (unless "of course" one is the sort of teacher who confuses informal with incorrect). And the fact that one of the registers that the LGSWE analyses is conversation makes it of even more obvious value here.
| Quote: |
| If there's one thing my beginner to intermediate students don't need, it's conversation analysis which obviously can't happen overtly in L2 if as you imply, they're not yet able to hold a half decent conversation. What they do need is plenty of select language input and output practice in the form of conversations. On the contrary, analysis is something they do with an L1 teacher or on their own, with, for example the (only ) recently published bilingual self-study texts such as Grammar in Use, etc. (weren't you the one who brought that one to my attention?) |
I don't think I've ever said that it's the students (at least, not the beginners) who should be engaging in such (explicit) analysis themselves. I've always meant rather the teachers, in preparation for teaching, especially if their powers of intution seem lacking (i.e. they are the type who could happily drill the entire contents of a telephone directory without batting an eyelid).
Regarding the last quote you've made, I didn't say or suggest that "'halfway decent conversation skills' are all teachers can/should (?) provide" - that's rather what you wrote in the quote header. (Please stop misquoting me and putting words into my mouth, or I may cease responding to your posts!). Anyway, I don't quite see the relevance of this. That is, I'll say it again: yes, why do those who've somehow mastered conversational skills to a reasonable degree continue to pay for lessons (certainly at most so-called conversation schools)? Plus the exact context there was one of students using language classes as therapy (probably more common than certainly the teachers or language school owners would like). Still, it's their money, and perhaps a way of keeping in some sort of "plateau" shape at least. I suppose the teachers should be thankful for the income.
Not to duck out of providing a detailed answer re. my approach, but you could do worse than take a look at Lewis' The Lexical Approach, Thornbury's Dogme generally, and Thornbury & Slade's Conversation: From Description to Analysis (which mentions among other works the likes of Aston's Learning Comity, not that I yet have Aston's book. http://www.clueb.com/servlet/ParseHtml/html/index.html?url=/html/varie/ricerca.jsp (You'll need to type in his name or the book title in the search fields to get to the book details; click on the photo of the back cover to read the general blurb enlargement)). Saves me re-inventing parts of the great wheel of conversation.
| Quote: |
| I mean no offence, but given what you've written, I don't get you're cut out for 'treadmill' teaching. Most as you're well aware simply aren't, including many exceptional authors. That's partly why I'm suggesting it. Pursue your passion...but try to get paid for it. |
Heh, I have no intention of returning to the dark pedantic mills, but if I were to, I hope I'd still be hamster enough to think if not outright say No to the treadmill-mentality bosses prodding and hectoring me (and others!) to do things this way, not that. Developing Chinese learning materials is my main focus now, though I do intend to finish at least Morley's Syntax in Functional Grammar even if it's the last vaguely ELTy thing I do LOL.
Last edited by fluffyhamster on Wed Jun 27, 2012 1:33 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ariadne
Joined: 16 Jul 2004
Posts: 960
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 1:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Gosh, you guys lost me along the way. I'd be happy to take sides but I'm not sure what they are.
. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 3292
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| There is only one side to choose, Ariadne, and that is my side - the Dark Side. Take my hand. <Vader-like wheeze> Disregard LSK's jedi mind tricks, for he knows not the true way. <More wheezing> Plus with me you get a complimentary cuisenaire rod-c*m-lightsaber (batteries not included). Oh, and a packet of smokes plus lighter. <Cough hack splutter> Wish there was a cigarette hole in this helmet...I need one after all that! <Wheeze> |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongShiKong
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 1082
Location: China
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 4:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fluffyhamster wrote: |
| @Spiral: Regarding qualifications, my main beef as you know is with the way the process is "spread out", which IMHO can discourage enough thinking at the "lower" levels, and perhaps too much thinking at the "higher". |
You lost me there. Are you suggesting certified teachers are trained to discourage lower level students from thinking? I would think there's far more mental gymnastics involved for beginners to just comprehend and respond to even the simplest of questions.
| Quote: |
| I'm not sure why you would think that attempting to make the discourse in the classroom, "even in Asia, and with kids!", more natural and functional would be so impossible... |
But when the approach "is based in no small part on conversation analysis" I start to question your purpose. If you're putting most of your effort into analysing the language you teach your students, then that tells me perhaps this may not be the most suitable work for you.
Your analysis of "Who's she?" "She's a doctor." suggests you're far too focused on your analysis at the expense of more important considerations in ELT. "Who's she?" is usually followed by a name, but not exclusively. Such a question can also be followed by any identifying information, as you especially should know given your passion for discourse analysis, it all depends upon context.
| Quote: |
I don't think I've ever said that it's the students (at least, not the beginners) who should be engaging in such (explicit) analysis themselves. I've always meant rather the teachers, in preparation for teaching...
|
I'll admit, I didn't read that carefully enough at first. But what do you expect us to analyse? Most of us are too busy selecting or adapting activities or other language to the needs of our students. If that doesn't qualify as analysis, what does?
| Quote: |
Regarding the last quote you've made, I didn't say or suggest that "'halfway decent conversation skills' are all teachers can/should (?) provide" - that's rather what you wrote in the quote header. (Please stop misquoting me and putting words into my mouth, or I may cease responding to your posts!).
|
Well, here's that quote again:
[quote="Fluffyhamster]If the student or better yet the teacher were honest, they would admit that if somebody can already speak enough English to hold their own in a halfway decent conversation, there isn't really a whole lot linguistically that they can be taught or learn - which obviously leads to the question of why exactly they are paying for the teacher's time.
http://forums.eslcafe.com/job/viewtopic.php?t=76089&highlight=conversation
[/quote]
What do others think FH means by this? I'm not the only with difficulty understanding you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ariadne
Joined: 16 Jul 2004
Posts: 960
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LongShiKong, I know this is a serious discussion, but since you're not really bringing in the crowds and since I am FINISHED with all grades/tests/reports for the term (hurrah!!!), hey, gotta go with the Hamster. I always wanted a light saber.
. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongShiKong
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 1082
Location: China
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 4:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
WARNING: That's a saber-toothed hamster!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DebMer
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 232
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ariadne wrote: |
LongShiKong, I know this is a serious discussion, but since you're not really bringing in the crowds and since I am FINISHED with all grades/tests/reports for the term (hurrah!!!), hey, gotta go with the Hamster. I always wanted a light saber.
. |
You might appreciate this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiloZd1H4ow&feature=related |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fluffyhamster
Joined: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 3292
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 11:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
I gotta get me one of those prairie dogs or whatever they are. Especially one wielding a lightsaber! But meanwhile, back on the ranch:
Again, quite a few misreadings and misquotes there, LSK.
| LongShiKong wrote: |
| fluffyhamster wrote: |
| @Spiral: Regarding qualifications, my main beef as you know is with the way the process is "spread out", which IMHO can discourage enough thinking at the "lower" levels, and perhaps too much thinking at the "higher". |
You lost me there. Are you suggesting certified teachers are trained to discourage lower level students from thinking? I would think there's far more mental gymnastics involved for beginners to just comprehend and respond to even the simplest of questions. |
To be honest, I think you are losing yourself, LSK! I thought I was quite clearly talking about the training process ("qualifications") for TEFL trainees, while you are for some reason talking about them once "certified" and in the job. Two somewhat different things (as we all appreciate how non-native "actual students" will not always be capable of performing quite the same analyses or following the same level of discussion as native trainees).
| Fluffy wrote: |
| I'm not sure why you would think that attempting to make the discourse in the classroom, "even in Asia, and with kids!", more natural and functional would be so impossible... |
| LSK wrote: |
| But when the approach "is based in no small part on conversation analysis" I start to question your purpose. If you're putting most of your effort into analysing the language you teach your students, then that tells me perhaps this may not be the most suitable work for you. |
Again, you have misread and/or selectively quoted me. What I actually said was this:
| Fluffy wrote: |
| I've tried in this thread and many others to give some indication of what I think would make for more effective teaching~learning methodology as regards conversation at least, and I guess one way of assessing that would be to use observation schemes based in no small part on conversation analysis. Just a thought! |
( http://forums.eslcafe.com/job/viewtopic.php?p=1020268#1020268 )
Assessing a teacher's interactions (and thus "teaching style" at least) by means of e.g. a more or less detailed CA framework would in no way imply that the non-native actual students need be presented with the same or expected to make head nor tail of it. And as I have tried to stress several times now, there is a difference between teacher education~continuing self-education (which should be reasonably wide-ranging and sophisticated, IMHO), and how the individual teacher will present and boil all that down for their "less capable" student audience. (The problem with current, generally "quick-n-dirty" TEFL training however, is that it gives the teachers little more than that which their learners can immediately comprehend, with the result that the teacher may actually be incapable of fully understanding, by way of being able to swiftly give or formulate perceptive explanations, of much more themselves).
| LSK wrote: |
| Your analysis of "Who's she?" "She's a doctor." suggests you're far too focused on your analysis at the expense of more important considerations in ELT. "Who's she?" is usually followed by a name, but not exclusively. Such a question can also be followed by any identifying information, as you especially should know given your passion for discourse analysis, it all depends upon context. |
Again, be fair: that was in the context of your having presented that essentially as bad practice. And what I said stands despite your mentioning of extraneous factors that your friend overlooked (and that I could obviously have not been aware of until you then mentioned them, not that they invalidate my analysis). And let me stress that too much explicit analysis becomes unnecessary, once one has attuned or trained one's intuitions sufficiently or simply been made aware of (told in no uncertain terms, if necessary) what is questionable practice. The way you write, it is as if (my) class time is devoted largely to countering awry examples, rather than introducing students to and familiarizing them with perfectly fine, unproblematic examples (provided of course I've taken the time and effort to select good 'uns).
| Fluffy wrote: |
| I don't think I've ever said that it's the students (at least, not the beginners) who should be engaging in such (explicit) analysis themselves. I've always meant rather the teachers, in preparation for teaching... |
| LSK wrote: |
| I'll admit, I didn't read that carefully enough at first. But what do you expect us to analyse? Most of us are too busy selecting or adapting activities or other language to the needs of our students. If that doesn't qualify as analysis, what does? |
I think some teachers are too busy selecting or adapting activities that fit THEIR needs rather than those of their students!
| Fluffy wrote: |
Regarding the last quote you've made, I didn't say or suggest that "'halfway decent conversation skills' are all teachers can/should (?) provide" - that's rather what you wrote in the quote header. (Please stop misquoting me and putting words into my mouth, or I may cease responding to your posts!).
| LSK wrote: |
Well, here's that quote again:
| Fluffy wrote: |
If the student or better yet the teacher were honest, they would admit that if somebody can already speak enough English to hold their own in a halfway decent conversation, there isn't really a whole lot linguistically that they can be taught or learn - which obviously leads to the question of why exactly they are paying for the teacher's time.
http://forums.eslcafe.com/job/viewtopic.php?t=76089&highlight=conversation |
|
|
Again, that is quite a (deliberate?) misreading~misquoting of what I wrote, regarding conversation lessons (and again, the exact context was those that turn into therapy). Obviously there can be and is more to language learning than conversation, but that is not what that thread was concerned with (unless I missed a bit in about chatty housewives doing SFG analyses of academic written texts or something). Many students pay simply to converse, and if they are already good enough to go on about husbands~break-ups etc then it is surely language-learning money wasted.
| LSK wrote: |
| What do others think FH means by this? I'm not the only with difficulty understanding you. |
Well, all I can say is I'm not aware of anyone else with the problems you appear to be having. (TBH the feeling that I'm getting, and this wouldn't be the first time, is that you are quite often trying to arrive at all sorts of grand conclusions that the "evidence" simply does not warrant). Mind you, perhaps others have been too polite to say either way, or simply aren't as interested in the original topics, much less the digressions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
