|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
the saint
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Location: not there yet...
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2005 6:02 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
What Van Islander is talking about is called "concept checking" in the literature. Qinella, you need to get hold of any or all of the "How to Teach..." series
...Vocabulary by Thornbury
...Grammar by Thornbury
...Writing by Harmer
...etc etc all published by Longman.
you can get some of these in Kyobo and order the ones that aren't there. Bit pricey but a great investment and very practical - very simply written. They are like a CELTA in book form complete with activities to do in class and basic but key concepts explained.
If you or anyone wants to take it deeper check out a copy of "About Language" or "Uncovering Grammar" by Thornbury. These books will show you quickly how little you know about your own langauge and why you (and me) end up confusing students through oversimplification and 'rules'. Every technique, every approach and every method are worthwhile and useful (yes, even grammar translation) at the right point and the right time. There are very rarely rights or wrongs...
IMHO, a good teacher abandons no approach but simply adds arrows to his/her quiver pulling them out as and when appropriate. This is the next stage after the CELTA. The DELTA will give you a good head start in this kind of stuff. Translation for example is very useful for raising students awareness of L1/L2 differences. For example, have them translate some sentences in the present perfect into Korean like
I've been reading a good book recently.
I've never eaten a Big Mac.
and then cover the original and translate them back. It will highlight exactly what they have and haven't acquired yet because present perfect doesn't exist in Korean. Those that aren't able to use it yet will produce something like
These days I read a good book.
I didn't eat a Big Mac.
So, that's just one example of a very quick acquisition check activity that can be done using translation.
Qinella - I admire the fact that you want to improve how you do what you do. It's a long but very rewarding road becoming a skilled EFL teacher. All the best.
BTW, anyone who thinks "have to" is easy for K students gets my full sympathy. Even upper intermediate students in my experience have serious issues with the should/must/have to distinctions in all their forms. If it was easy, how come I hear everyone saying must left right and centre? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Badmojo
Joined: 07 Mar 2004
Location: I'm just sitting here watching the wheels go round and round
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2005 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| VanIslander wrote: |
Avoid ever asking "What does it mean?" and ever saying "It means..." or any equivalent attempt. This is hard to do because it goes against the grain of habits developed in a learning context where a common language is shared. Second language learning, especially in the foreign context, just doesn't lend itself to explanation, just as it doesn't help much to use translation.
|
Van Islander, what did your CELTA say about higher level students?
Let's say I have a word like "deceive" - I can't just tell them, "It means to lie, not tell the truth?" Afterwards, I'd give them some example like "Yesterday I told my friend I was married. I deceived him because, of course, I'm not married, I'm single." Afterwards I'd ask them for some examples of when they deceived people.
What's wrong with that? Seems pretty straightforward to me, by using "It means..."
Last edited by Badmojo on Sat Jul 16, 2005 6:16 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2005 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| the saint wrote: |
| For example, have them translate some sentences in the present perfect into Korean...and then cover the original and translate them back. |
This kind of translation can be useful, in some contexts.
The issue is the Korean style of teaching 90% to 95% in their own langauge and translating everything all the time...I watched a so-called Korean-news-in-English show late last night. It had a few English words on the screen, but the dude was talking in Korean non-stop. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VanIslander
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Location: Geoje, Hadong, Tongyeong,... now in a small coastal island town outside Gyeongsangnamdo!
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2005 11:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Badmojo wrote: |
| VanIslander wrote: |
| Avoid ever asking "What does it mean?" |
Let's say I have a word like "deceive" - I can't just tell them, "It means to lie, not tell the truth?" Afterwards, I'd give them some example like "Yesterday I told my friend I was married. I deceived him because, of course, I'm not married, I'm single." Afterwards I'd ask them for some examples of when they deceived people.
What's wrong with that? Seems pretty straightforward to me, by using "It means..." |
There's nothing wrong with giving examples, according to the CELTA method, and then elliciting examples from the students. That's great. The important thing is not to ask the students what words mean, as part of a teaching tactic, because the giving of a definition is not a skill they are developing, using the word is. You are tempted to say that to deceive is almost the same as to lie but how about giving them an example and elliciting it from them? especially if they are advanced students! Tell them of a scenario in which the word is used (set the context) then use the word in that context. For instance, A man meets a beautiful woman. He wants to kiss her, and more, but he is married. He takes off his wedding ring before she can see it and removes his wedding photo from his wallet. The beautiful woman will think he is not married. "He is deceiving her." Then ask the students to describe what the man is doing, using other words. If they are indeed an advanced class, then someone will say "He lied." But did he really? He never said anything false. But he did something to try and make her think he isn't married.
Indicate a context of use and invite students to talk about it in other words, and to come up with examples of their own.
| the saint wrote: |
| What VanIslander is talking about is called "concept checking" in the literature. |
A part of what I'm saying is that. Notice I distinguish between demontrating a context, elliciting meaning from students and checking the concept, all distinctly different activities, though related.
| the saint wrote: |
...get hold of any or all of the "How to Teach..." series
...Vocabulary by Thornbury
...Grammar by Thornbury
...Writing by Harmer
...etc etc all published by Longman. |
I haven't read those ones. But I've read other work by Harmer and it had helped in the CELTA course. I'll be getting my hands on those books sometime this year myself.
| stalinsdad wrote: |
| Demonstrating a word may be fashionable at present, but allows the student to be passive. |
A passive student learns less than an active one, so by all means engage them. Demonstrate the context by setting the scene for the use of a word is not a first option (elliciting is), but it gets them to think about what the word does, not about other words (not about a definition).
| stalinsdad wrote: |
| I use direct translation frequently as well as other methods because the process of "doing" is more effective than other techniques. Sure continual translation will disengage the students but it shouldn't be dismissed because teachers want to be "popular." |
How does direct translation get students to do anything? I think we agree more than disagree, since we share the aim of encouraging active students.
| the saint wrote: |
| BTW, anyone who thinks "have to" is easy for K students gets my full sympathy. Even upper intermediate students in my experience have serious issues with the should/must/have to distinctions in all their forms. If it was easy, how come I hear everyone saying must left right and centre? |
This goes to the very heart of the difference between two approaches to teaching. One tries to teach a word by means of definitions and rules. The other tries to teach a use of a word in a given context. The former oversimplifies, the latter undergeneralizes.
This really is a fundamental difference. When I said it's easy to teach students how to use "have to" I clearly set out a context for its use, in talking about having to do homework, the dishes, etc. By no means did I try to have made the students familiar with every use of "have to".
The difference can be highlighted by means of an extreme example: One of my intermediate level adult students wanted to know how to use "so" whenever he sees the word. He wanted a general rule or two so that he no longer has to be confused when he encounters it. I told him it would take several weeks to do that, to which he was puzzled, because he was used to the definition-and-rules approach to language teaching. I then did a lesson on the spot about how to use "so many" and "too much" to emphasize. Then I covered one other use. The next day I gave that inquiring student a photocopy from an ESL book which described 24 different uses of the word "so"! and told him if there was one or a few more of them he'd like us to cover in class, to let me know.
Teach students how to use words, not in every possible way, but in a few clear ways. I can't imagine being successful doing more than that, though many teachers try to, according to an alternative conception of what teaching is all about.
| the saint wrote: |
| IMHO, a good teacher abandons no approach but simply adds arrows to his/her quiver pulling them out as and when appropriate. |
Great point. A CELTA tutor put it: tools in the toolchest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Badmojo
Joined: 07 Mar 2004
Location: I'm just sitting here watching the wheels go round and round
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 12:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| VanIslander wrote: |
There's nothing wrong with giving examples, according to the CELTA method, and then elliciting examples from the students. That's great. The important thing is not to ask the students what words mean, as part of a teaching tactic, because the giving of a definition is not a skill they are developing, using the word is. You are tempted to say that to deceive is almost the same as to lie but how about giving them an example and elliciting it from them? especially if they are advanced students! Tell them of a scenario in which the word is used (set the context) then use the word in that context. For instance, A man meets a beautiful woman. He wants to kiss her, and more, but he is married. He takes off his wedding ring before she can see it and removes his wedding photo from his wallet. The beautiful woman will think he is not married. "He is deceiving her." Then ask the students to describe what the man is doing, using other words. If they are indeed an advanced class, then someone will say "He lied." But did he really? He never said anything false. But he did something to try and make her think he isn't married.
|
That's pretty good, Van Islander, thank you. That's a nice technique to use every once in a while. I think the students have to be a little higher though, or you risk confusing them by introducing a story. Anyway, wish I thought of it before. Pretty clever! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VanIslander
Joined: 18 Aug 2003
Location: Geoje, Hadong, Tongyeong,... now in a small coastal island town outside Gyeongsangnamdo!
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 12:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Badmojo wrote: |
| I think the students have to be a little higher though, or you risk confusing them by introducing a story. |
Not so much a story. More a live drama accompanied by commentary, acting it out, often getting students to describe what I'm doing. "You are putting your ring in your pocket" (What ring? I ask, humming the wedding march), etc.
Before doing such things, the first principle applies: "Ask before tell"
When a student doesn't know what a word is doing, often another student does. Getting students involved is a priority. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the saint
Joined: 09 Dec 2003
Location: not there yet...
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 1:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
The issue is the Korean style of teaching 90% to 95% in their own langauge and translating everything all the time.... |
Actually that's not really the issue.
To translate or not is a moot point in a large number of cases. Let's move away from that. Let's think about redeeming a bas*tardised method. If we have the ability to consider not IF translation is useful but WHEN it is, we are streets ahead of the Korean style of teaching.
VanIslander, you sound like a guy who knows what he's is doing in the classroom: a refreshing change  You were right that PART of what you were saying was concept checking but I mentioned that because I think that that process was what Qinella was awed by and, by the sounds of it, needs practice in.
I also forgot to mention that when I said "must/should/have to in all their forms" I meant "in all the forms that Upp Int students should by now be aware of" SOmtimes I forget to say the obvious, a weakness the DELTA is rectifying!
You are absolutely right that context is everything. The danger in explanations sometimes, I'm sure you'll agree, is that we provide minimal context just to get the point across and this can provide shaky ground for student assumptions about language.
Great discussion though... |
|
| 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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
