| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
matthewwoodford
Joined: 01 Oct 2003
Location: Location, location, location.
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2003 5:28 am Post subject: Teaching discussion |
 |
|
Are any of you teachers still meeting at weekends to discuss how to improve your teaching? I'd like to come and poach ideas off you...I mean contribute to the group... 
Matt |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
the_beaver
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2003 5:31 am Post subject: Re: Teaching discussion |
|
|
| matthewwoodford wrote: |
Are any of you teachers still meeting at weekends to discuss how to improve your teaching? I'd like to come and poach ideas off you...I mean contribute to the group...
Matt |
Five of us met last Sunday. Talked about kiddie teaching. I think we're discussing CLT next time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kiwiboy_nz_99
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Location: ...Enlightenment...
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2003 5:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I think we're discussing CLT next time |
Forgive me, what is CLT, computer learning techniques? Or is it more along the lines of cliterous licking techniques, because I think a lot of teachers could really benefit from a bit more knowledge in this vital area. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the_beaver
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2003 5:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kiwiboy_nz_99 wrote: |
| Forgive me, what is CLT, computer learning techniques? Or is it more along the lines of cliterous licking techniques, because I think a lot of teachers could really benefit from a bit more knowledge in this vital area. |
With a nickname like the Beaver do you really think I need to learn licking teachniques?
CLT means Communicative Language Teaching, which boils down to a focus on meaning rather than form. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kiwiboy_nz_99
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Location: ...Enlightenment...
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2003 5:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| CLT means Communicative Language Teaching, which boils down to a focus on meaning rather than form. |
Yeah, read about the stuff, just never seen it written that way.
It sucks dogs bollocks in my view, just another excuse to avoid doing the hard work of teaching the basic mechanics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the_beaver
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2003 6:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kiwiboy_nz_99 wrote: |
Yeah, read about the stuff, just never seen it written that way.
It sucks dogs bollocks in my view, just another excuse to avoid doing the hard work of teaching the basic mechanics. |
It doesn't mean not teaching grammar. It means (ideally) giving students the grammar and vocabulary they require to complete a communication task. In my own view, grammar and vocabulary should constitute 10% of a lesson max, and guided practice (through activities) the remaining 90%.
The old school way of focusing on grammar study works for exceedingly few people. English is a skill and as such it's comparable to learning to play guitar -- you could memorize a book about guitars, but when you pick up the guitar, even though you know what you should do, you'll just make some odd noises. Had you referred to the book less and practiced much more you'd be farther ahead in actual skill, and that's the essence of CLT. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kiwiboy_nz_99
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Location: ...Enlightenment...
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2003 6:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| and that's the essence of CLT |
Thankyou for the lesson father. I'm quite aware of what it is as I'm enrolled in my MA TESOL and started prereading the course books some time ago.
We may in fact be arguing semantics here. To me, teaching grammar does not mean only doing book work. I'm big on pair exercises, but they too can be arranged to enforce proper use of grammar. I'm just not big on the whole "if you communicated your meaning successfully then that's enough" philosophy. If you say to me "How's you feel?" I know what you meant, so you have communicated successfully, but we want to aim a little higher than that don't you think? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the_beaver
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2003 7:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kiwiboy_nz_99 wrote: |
| Quote: |
| and that's the essence of CLT |
Thankyou for the lesson father. I'm quite aware of what it is as I'm enrolled in my MA TESOL and started prereading the course books some time ago.
We may in fact be arguing semantics here. To me, teaching grammar does not mean only doing book work. I'm big on pair exercises, but they too can be arranged to enforce proper use of grammar. I'm just not big on the whole "if you communicated your meaning successfully then that's enough" philosophy. If you say to me "How's you feel?" I know what you meant, so you have communicated successfully, but we want to aim a little higher than that don't you think? |
You're welcome, lad.
Yes, of course you want to aim higher. But, it's a second language learning fact that no matter how much you teach and preach certain language points they don't come together until a certain level of ability is reached. Take something like subject/verb agreement, for example. Despite being one of the first things taught it's one of the last things to gel among language learners.
At first, language learners should feel a sense of accomplishment in just conveying meaning. As their ability improves so does their accuracy and ability to communicate more concisely.
Trying to get a beginner to use perfect grammar in spontaneous English would be like trying to get a novice guitar player playing a Hendrix rift when they still don't have a handle on Smoke on the Water -- talk about disheartening for the student. . . |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2003 6:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting thread. Just as an example, I know some very successful Korean English teachers here, who spend most of their day teaching correct grammatical sentences to their students. 
But try and talk to them, yikes!!!!! Their English is awful. I've often wondered how this can be. Are they really teaching correct sentences in their classes, or are they teaching Konglicized syntax patterns.
I saw an interview with prominent executive on TV last week. He was asked to describe how he started out and what his life was like. He gave an entire narrative about his first years in business; his English was almost flawless.............. except that he used the future tense the whole time to describe events in the past!!!!!!!!!!!
I just wonder if there is any hope of ever teaching them proper use of tenses and or subject-verb agreement. 
Cheers |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the_beaver
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 09, 2003 11:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| some waygug-in wrote: |
I just wonder if there is any hope of ever teaching them proper use of tenses and or subject-verb agreement.
Cheers |
You can teach it easily enough and students will be able to do it on paper and controlled exercises. In order to do it correctly and consistently in actual communication requires achieving a higher degree of fluency using practice as the cornerstone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. Pink
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Location: China
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2003 2:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hey I forget again which book are you guys reading for your discussions...I know it is the green book with the apple...but the name escapes me. I might ask my school to buy it for our teacher library. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the_beaver
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
