Korean Job Discussion Forums

[icnelly]

I'm working at a GEPIK public school (elementary), and have been changing the computer background picture every once in awhile to use it as a source of questions, and for eliciting language, but I was just thinking of ways to teach metalanguage: words about words (nouns, verbs, etc).

And I was planning on working on punctuation as well with this, but I was just going to use the backgrounds as a source for questions, etc to help build a basis for metalanguage: it's short, simple, straightforward, and you can incorporate the questions into your activites later.

Anyone have ideas to expand this idea?

Mine is really simple: Put a picture of an exclamation mark up as the background. Direct the Ss toward it. Ask if someone know's what it is. If so ask some more questions, if not introduce the language for it, transition into the rest of your lesson plan, but be prepared to ask Ss about what the word is later to reactivate the new language.

What are the uses for metalanguage?

I was thinking the S's knowledge of metalanguage allows them to connect to the language in a different method. For example: A teacher can introduce a gap fill: The bird is ____. Instead of just having to elicit through acting, make noises, etc for the answer, the teacher can tell the students what kind of word they need.

[ddeubel]

icnelly,

Please don't take my comments negatively but my opinion is that you should not be teaching "metalanguage" in elementary school and even up to high school. That it is taught, does not mean it should be. .....

There is more than enough evidence to suggest there is NO need for such reference unless it is personally satisfying or needed for critical/philosophical analysis. You will also, in my opinion, stunt the student's own development and acquisition of language (a major problem as we see in Korea where this is pervasive).

You don't need to know how a carburetor works, to drive a car. Especially, when first mastering the basics of driving a car. You don't put the cart before the horse, so to speak.

If you want any references regarding the above, PM me. But I would disuade you from taking this approach. Of course it makes the teacher feel more secure (as does a lot of rote learning / repetition and handouts) but it doesn't facilitate language acquisition. The goal is not to understand language, it is to produce language without understanding........

Sorry, I have no ideas to expand on this idea other than if you are interested -- get your Phd and teach linguistics.

DD

[icnelly]

No offense taken; that's the kind of stuff I want to hear. Obviously I'd prefer if someone agreed with me...

BUT, I'm just trying to be creative and more than anything adaptable, so if what I come up with won't work, and may hurt, than I'm glad to hear about it.

Maybe I've gotten some wires crossed about meta-anything.

Some of my TEFL info suggests metastatements about what the students will learn to be helpful when contextual and as real as possible.

How about metastatements versus metalanguage???

Or could all of this just be lumped into making sure the students have a heads up on what they're learning in a real way??