Teacher Discussion Forums

I'm teaching in Korea and I've often wondered about the benefits to learners of English of the much touted (in Korea at least) Free talking classes (completely topic based teaching). I'd be interested to know if there are any other countries which has "free talking". The way it usually works is as follows:

students are given an article about a particular subject. they read the article, answer comprehension questions about the article, and then, in groups of 3 or 4, answer a series of questions which they voice their opinions on. After that the class comes together and the class would talk together about their opinions/ disagreements.

In theory it sounds like a plausible way to educate ESL learners, at least for building up students' sets of vocab about specific topics, but in practice it is an unmitigated disaster(in terms of learning outcome).

Korean students who would be say level 2 (preintermediate) would skip levels to an intermediate class so classes have extreme variations of level.

Teaching this way completely neglects pronunication (you could drill some of the words) and doesn't even address suprsegmental pronunciation. It could help listening skills- listening to what people in your group have to say but because it isn't necessary to complete say a task- students usually don't listen to their classmates.

In my experience free talking is actually detrimental to the learners but i suppose it could be because the learners themselves were complete bludgers (often they wouldn't even have a pen or book for class and wouldn't write anything down) and their english ability wasn't good enough to cope for the situation. when we came to revise the students hadn't even learnt the vocabulary but because the students demanded such classes we had to continue teaching in such a way.

I have read somewhere in an article (can't recall the name) about a test of task based vs free conversation classes which confirmed what my experience with free conversation classes is (ie above) but i would be very interested to hear from anybody else who has had a similar or different experience with topic based learning.

Good morning!

Hey jase! I understand completely where you are coming from. Though the "free talking" type of class is not a product offered in Spain (except, perhaps, in computer schools where students spend three hours a week in front of a computer and perhaps one hour supossedly chatting with a native speaker, I won't mention companies that offer such, since they are rapidly going out of business and have enough troubles without me bad-mouthing them), every once in a while you get a student who just wants to practice conversation. The problem is, that student is usually one who just isn't ready for conversation, as you mention, a pre-intermediate. I can only see a little bit of value in the type of class you mentioned in very high levels, where the students are totally able to use structures and pronounce their utterances "correctly" and thus can improvise within those frameworks.

I myself have always refused to give these so-called "conversation" classes. It is easy to identify the weaknesses of any student after just three minutes hearing them struggle with trying to say what they want to say. In the limited time they have with me I see much more value in the identification of difficuties and the application of exercises that will help them overcome such difficulties by acquiring habits that will put the work in their mouths and free their brains for thinking.

Unfortunately, the market for such classes is much more powerful than the reality of language learning. It is so easy to get bored in a class where the teacher insists that the student practice a form or a set of sounds until it sounds and feels comfortable to the student. I know teachers who are always photo-copying articles from the New York Times, spending more than half the class reading the article and explaining words and idioms, and then struggling through opinion sessions, the teacher usually talking much more than the student. These teachers then complain that their students "understand quite well" but are not getting ahead in their speaking skills. In a real practice session, the student should be doing 2/3 of the talking at least, and the teacher should be assisting, correcting, informing. When the class becomes more than private, students have even less time with the teacher and tend to learn more mistakes than "good" usage.

So, though there is nothing you can do about what the academies sell in Korea, at least know that I share your feelings on the subject. The best we can do in these situations is either specialize in a certain type of teaching and refuse to do those other classes or do those classes but find a formula for making them truly a learning experience and not just a babble of "bad" English!

peace,
revel.

Had many free talking classes here in Japan, including what you described, but only for advanced level students.

I've found that a lot of (Korean) students use the term "Free Talking" yet have only a vague idea of what that might mean ("Uh... we talk freely?"). That can be good news for you as the teacher, because you can then add segments to the class as you choose. Sure, spend most of the time discussing a topic. But the topic doesn't have to be an article they read. It could be an art project they work on, a debate, a cooking lesson, or a challenge to build a bridge out of toothpicks or build a protective coating around an egg so it won't break when dropped. Really any group activity that requires consultation between team members is a good topic for a free talking class. Then, besides just talking about the topic, you can also add a 10-minute-or-so segment at the beginning of each class that identifies and works on a key weakness many of the students have. That might be a pronunciation point, a grammar point, a nonverbal communication point, etc. Ideally, this segment's lesson will be useful to know when they then start discussing the day's topic, so they can practice as they "talk freely."

I suppose the problem with the students (Korean) i taught thought they knew exactly what free talking was- other teachers had "taught" them using this "method". Some of the students had been taking classes (and i use this term loosely) for up to a year and really wanted me to give them this kind of style of classes. Seeing that i was in a hagwon at the time i acquiesced -it was really easy to prepare lessons- jsut photocopy something out of one of the many "conversation" books available in korea. People spoke and didn't understand each other and most of time i just pretended to understand what they were saying. One guy was so weak that in forty hours of instruction he didn't/ couldn't string a sentence together, but insisted on remaining in the class. I suppose in retrospect it was pretty funny- i'd really like to know what they were thinking. I'm glad i don't have to kowtow to students now that i'm working at a uni.
anyway cheers

I wonder where the terminology originated - "Oral English", "Free Talking", "English Corner"; the scene is dominated by institutionalised occasions when our charges are given an opportunity "to practise oral English".
Do they actually need a "chance", an opportunity? I don't quite believe this!
It makes them dependent on us - they have no ideas of their own, are socially clumsy, linguistically under-developed - topics must be tailor-made to suit them, never the other way around; they have to be "interesting" (pray, tell me: what's "interesting"?).
I have never been comfortable with organised talk fests! But East Asia is thriving on them! Why? Who brought these silly concepts here?

I'm afraid they don't exist only in East Asia, Roger. But I share your (and clearly the other posters here too) disdain for these practices. For all the hours and hours of time put into "free talking", barely a whisker's worth of language improvement comes of it. I believe it's one of the significant reasons why so many students around the world 'study' English for years and years without ever getting to the point where they can hold a reasonable conversation on their own, or write a paragraph anybody can understand.

If we care at all about this, we teachers must demand some genuine improvement in the methods we employ. We have to look at what we're doing and question whether it's the right thing, or the most efficient way.

Larry Latham

I must admit, I hate so-called 'conversation classes' too. I am admiring of teachers who say they are 'the easiest classes to teach' and require 'no preparation' - obviously I am doing something wrong! My experience here in Germany has been that there are two types of students who come to a'conversation class' : those who enjoy speaking and hearing themselves speak, but don't necessarily bother with listening to others; and those who couldn't chat or hold a casual conversation in their mother tongue, but believe that such a class in English will miraculously transfer these social skills in the L2. People who genuinely like to chat - with the teacher, with fellow students - most often turn up in my general English classes where their delight at the opportunity to speak makes them a joy to teach.

What do I do in conversation classes? Well, to be honest, I don't teach them any more. Like Larry, I consider them a waste of time. I think more valuable 'conversation' often comes sponateously out of an interesting class, as opposed to a class where We Must Converse. For conversation classes in the past I worked on small 'sequences' or exercises to practise situational gambits, i.e. working with students on those all-important little phrases like "After you" (when you hold the door open for someone) or "It's my treat", (when you buy someone a coffee) for example. Or phrases for opinion expressing or (gentle) disagreement (and looked at the way English speakers disagree with an opinion and the way it is done in German - far more direct and abrupt-sounding for us.) That sort of thing. When it came to the 'coversation' itself, I worked with dilemma exercises (your plane crash lands in the desert and you have the following items with you. What do you choose to survive and why ...) or moral dilemmas. I tried politics and social issues but I found many German students unwilling to discuss 'private' opinions among 'strangers' so they often didn't go down well.

My respect goes to anyone who has to 'teach' 'free speaking' classes... You poor things ....

As usual, Rania, you offer something of genuine value to anyone taking the time to read your posts. I found that most of my Chinese speaking students in East Asia reacted to 'conversation classes' just about the way you described for German speakers. I did believe that my Hispanic, Spanish speakers here in California were generally more gregarious by nature than Asians, and so tended to enjoy the "chance to party" offered by some of the conversation classes. But they got no more value from them, insofar as improvments to their English language abilities were concerned.

But you are too kind to teachers who love to "teach" conversation classes. I suspect it is precisely because there is no preparation involved (their impression) that they like them. These are the same teachers who don't discern that nothing of value is obtained by students from conversation classes. Nor do they generally care.

English language instruction as a whole needs more people like you and the others who have expressed themselves here who can see what is not working and can express themselves well enough to say so. Just spending time in conversation classes is not enough for our students. They deserve better, and we can, if we will, offer better.

Larry Latham

Aaaach, Larry, stoppit... You make me blush!

It came as a total surprise for me to read that "conversation English" classes are held in German schools. So that makes three of us who share experiences across national boundaries.
In my foreign language classes at school we didn't have any oral practice except during lessons devoted to the study of "substantive" subjects such as grammar (at college-level, no instruction ever given in our first tongue).
I am not without sympathy for my Chinese charges. In fact, I do understand that they cannot overcome their various inhibitions which are culturally-induced.
Their own teachers drum things into them using an approach that I call "communitarian" - doing just about anything together: new vocables: the teacher pronounces them each once at a time, then the class choruses after him, then he repeats it one or two more times, and the class choruses again and again. How this can foster any self-esteem in young learners I can't fathom!
Even in western classrooms where a kind of dialogue between teacher and students does take place, students don't generally fancy raising their hands to ask a question - it might betray them as "stupid" in the eyes of their classmates.
A classroom is a very artificial setting. For students to really excel at speaking they should be encouraged to stand in front of their own class and deliver a speech on a topic agreed on beforehand.
To some extent we did do that in my school days when we had to recite poems!

A classroom is a very artificial setting. For students to really excel at speaking they should be encouraged to stand in front of their own class and deliver a speech on a topic agreed on beforehand.

Feeling, as I do, that I know you after a fashion from your many posts here (often wise and well grounded), I'm wondering if I am misunderstanding you in this case. Surely, Roger, you aren't suggesting that your students be required to stand before their classes to deliver a prepared speech as part of their English studies, are you?

Larry Latham

Yes, Larry, that's what I meant - you did not misunderstand me! Why are you surprised?
Surely for students to learn to talk to their own peers is a challenge they can be expected to accept. Didn't you do that when you were at school? From the cartoons in my favouite papers - Calvin & Hobbes for example! - this custom is not totally out of touch with contemporary school life.
I don't know about Western students these days, but Chinese students definitely need to learn to listen to others rather than merely talking without knowing whether anyone is paying attention to what they are saying. Talking is a two-way street. And those who actually do listen benefit the most as they learn to identify their own English and the English spoken by native speakers. Above all, they should learn to respect each other when they are speaking a foreign tongue.
Only this way do they show that they take English seriously!

I agree with Roger – public speaking is a great skill to learn!

I have never tried using it in a ‘conversation class’ but I do it a lot with business classes. Many of my students will need to hold a presentation or chair a meeting at some point in English, so standing up in front of their classmates to do a short presentation really helps them. I have also assigned presentations to groups of teenagers; they generally work on ‘projects’ in small teams, then present the results to the group, each taking turns to speak.
For example,
a big company (Coca Cola? Nike? Lego?) wants to move its headquarters. Your town is being considered. It could bring a lot of benefits as well as a lot of new problems to your town (students are told that it will mean building a new, campus-like facility, and 1000 workers and their families will move to the town.)
One group is the town council and prepares a pitch for the company – why they should move there, why the town is so special (location, facilities, culture etc), what demands the town council would have (environmental, infrastructural etc).
Another group could be against the move and prepare a short presentation for the people of the town about why they think it would be disadvantageous (insufficient facilities for so many new inhabitants, concerns about pollution, increased traffic etc.)
Another group could represent … whoever!
Something simple like this often becomes very heated, producing a lot of ‘free-speaking’. Involving the students’ own town makes it personal and they get all het up about it!

I learned public speaking at school – we held debates and learned to hold short presentations or speeches in English and our second/third languages and it is one skill that has proved invaluable over the years… Not only for the language value, but also for skills like being able to speak clearly and distinctly in the target language for example, developing self-confidence, learning to build and present a logical sequence of ideas or arguments. I found that my teenage groups were not able to present a logical argument or develop a sequence of ideas: opening, argument, counter-argument, conclusion, so we worked on that, learning the linguistic elements needed to deliver it (“It seems that.. In my opinion… I firmly believe … It’s clear to see that … On the other hand…”)

I understand Roger’s reasons for having students hold speeches – is it effective, Roger? Do students actually listen, or do they use it as an excuse to daydream? Do you have them ask questions afterwards, or do you question them?

hello, Nania,

thanks for the succour! You have added a few more reasons to convince me. My prime consideration is to motivate my Chinese students to listen to each other rather than just to deliver a monologue.
But the fact that their argumentative skills leave a lot to be desired is a further reason. In fact, many Chinese officials - those at schools for example - don't know how to develop a captivating speech. When I taught writing/composition, I noticed the same phenomenon. Students would not argue in coherent ways. Often they would restate some passage they had come across somewhere else, rehashing phrases or mantras that they thought I wanted to read again.
In the process they would write too long. If I told them to do an essay of no more than 150 words they would produce one of 250 words.

The truth of the matter, however, is that I get very few chances of having them talk to their peers. at public schools students lack the discipline that's necessary to do it this way. Class sizes vary from 40 to 100, so inevitably as some speaks in front others start their private discussions among themselves. Besides, it's new for most of them, and what's too new in China will often be rejected out of hand.
My greatest successes were with adults. But "success" cannot be taken for granted. Many evening classes are full of bored adults that only come for diversion, though they do expect to "practise their oral English". This, however, often is substandard, and you see the odd guy standing in front of the class, staring blankly at the ceiling, with the rest of the students getting restless.

Actually, I remember my own school days when we would give speeches to our classmates. These always were interesting lessons and we did hone our skills. At the end of our speeches we would answser questions from our classmates - who paid a lot of attention to what we said during our presentation. Let me add we were allowed to have notes before us - but we weren't allowed to read aloud from them!

I wonder, Larry, why you seem to be so surprised? Is it uncommon in the USA to do this? i assure you, we did speak, and I don't see why this cannot be done anywhere else in the world! You can even say it helps form character!