...and do you know for certain that it helps you to master the language better, faster, easier?SD wrote:As a language learner myself, I always appreciate being corrected.
Larry Latham
Are mistakes bad for students?
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
-
LarryLatham
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 6:33 pm
- Location: Aguanga, California (near San Diego)
I liked revel's answer the most!
My students couldn't care any less whether they make mistakes or not; they babble and expect me alone to listen to them, nobody else; often we have a communication chaos as I don't understand their botched English, and they don't understand standard English.
This is, among other reasons, why I don't want any "oral English" any more (in this country, anyway).
For students to profit from conversation classes, they must be fairly good at listening, and they must be able to distinguish between the correct and the wrong. This ability cannot be expected from the majority of my students.
Writing is a much better method that enables you to give individual feedback to each student.
Still, your students will have to study their own mistakes AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT THEM.
Will they?
My students couldn't care any less whether they make mistakes or not; they babble and expect me alone to listen to them, nobody else; often we have a communication chaos as I don't understand their botched English, and they don't understand standard English.
This is, among other reasons, why I don't want any "oral English" any more (in this country, anyway).
For students to profit from conversation classes, they must be fairly good at listening, and they must be able to distinguish between the correct and the wrong. This ability cannot be expected from the majority of my students.
Writing is a much better method that enables you to give individual feedback to each student.
Still, your students will have to study their own mistakes AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT THEM.
Will they?
-
LarryLatham
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 6:33 pm
- Location: Aguanga, California (near San Diego)
I have a feeling, Roger, that this is highly insightful.Roger perceptively wrote:For students to profit from conversation classes, they must be fairly good at listening, and they must be able to distinguish between the correct and the wrong. This ability cannot be expected from the majority of my students.
Writing is a much better method that enables you to give individual feedback to each student.
Still, your students will have to study their own mistakes AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT THEM.
Will they?
You recognize that the onus is on the STUDENT rather than the teacher to seek, identify and correct mistakes. Students do know...better than teachers do, because they know what they intended...where their mistakes are. But they have to be (get) involved enough to care enough about them to pay attention. For teachers to "catch" errors all around the classroom, or find some that several students make, or however they may identify what they think are mistakes, and then to "correct" these mistakes either directly to particular students or generally to the whole class is, in my view, a waste of time. There are many more valuable things teachers can do in class. Who can deny that the corrections teachers make usually go in one ear and out the other? They have little impact on students...until finally the correction has been made so many times that students just feel beaten down with them. At that point students may finally pay attention long enough to make a change in their behavior. But it is very behavioristic as a method. And teachers should be aware of that and proceed accordingly. There are certain times, such as the pattern drills that Revel identified, when behavioristic methods make good sense. But I really wonder if correcting grammatical mistakes (especially oral mistakes) is the right situation for behaviorism. I have grave doubts about that.In addition, 90% of students are intermediate level students. (Typically, about 5% are true beginners, and 5% are truly advanced, leaving all the rest spread out along a rather long continuum as intermediates.) Teachers have to expect errors from learners. It's only reasonable. Mistakes during this period will not necessarily "fossilize," and become impossible for students to change later on in their development (should they get that far). A fossilization is only a habit, and habits can be changed in an instant, IF THE STUDENT IS PAYING ATTENTION TO HIS PERFORMANCE. Besides, mistakes identify where students are thinking wrong about English. They are absolutely necessary tools to the further development of each student. But only if THEY find them, figure out why they are mistakes, and correct them themselves. Forcing intermediate students to speak English correctly slows down their development, I believe.
So, now, if you buy this argument (and I recognize that not all of you will...at least not yet), then it seems to me that a better way to approach errors is to try to find some way to heighten student involvement in the class process. Roger believes, as do I, that the students, to profit much from any conversation class, have to be fairly good listeners. I'd say they have to be good listeners--fairly good is not good enough. They have to hear their mistakes and care enough to do something about them. There are some ways to help students with that, and that is what teachers ought to be doing instead of "correcting" mistakes. Have you been reading Revel's posts on this forum? He doesn't seem to be having much trouble (comparatively speaking) with bored students leaving his classes. He gets them moving, but his ideas seem to be way beyond TPR. HE seems to be involved in his classes in a much deeper way than simply showing up and doing the lesson. It is a mistake, I believe, to focus too much on the lesson. You have to focus on the students. Teacher training stresses lesson plans way too much, in my view. I don't know how much lesson planning Revel does, but I suspect not much. Because of his intimate involvement with his students, and his experience, he knows what they need moment by moment. That doesn't mean he goes to class without some idea of what he's going to do that day. But most likely (and I'd be grateful if you could confirm or deny this, Revel), his plans are quite general, and he fills in the details on the fly...during the class. Since he is so personally and intimately involved, moment by moment, in the class process, his students pick up on that and respond in kind. This is not a method. Yours is likely to be different from Revel's. It is a personal commitment. It seeks a responding personal commitment from each student in the class.
Perhaps correcting students is a colossal waste of time. Eventually successful, maybe, but at the cost of huge inefficiency.
Larry Latham
-
Duncan Powrie
- Posts: 525
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 3:33 pm
Hiya Larry!
I think we would all agree that many of our students need to take more care in how they express themselves (some just don't ever seem to notice in what ways their approach to "constructing" their awkward phrases is flawed, or ever notice the regularities in more "standard" English).
We all also seem to be dissatisfied with forcing students to speak (especially in "conversation" classes) before they have had sufficient input from which they can form...
I was going to continue, "form generalizations in their mind, and make general statements", but I then realized the problem students face is one of specific phrasing.
Can we expect students to NOT make mistakes when the input we give them is actually, when you think about it, quite meagre, almost randomly selected and badly organized, especially when there is no specific purpose involved in learning? (Probably talking more about myself here
).
I know there are things like "interlanguages" adding to the brew, but I am of the pessimistic view that the glass we are giving students is barely half-full. There could be a lot more ingredients added, and to achieve quite different goals than just a healthy "competence" (e.g. re-realization of self, socialization into a new language, making friends through extended real-time relationships, replete with a growing base of shared knowledge, with "teachers" etc).
Perhaps "general" English courses are a waste of time, and students could achieve more by contenting themselves with "self-study" courses?
For comparison, when you look at a martial art like karate, it is often quite amazing that many students never get around to buying a single book on kata (traditional, usually solo, "dance-like" forms) and consequently take years to get the basics down pat (and, of course, they never get to the point of questioning the validity of the forms for fighting, or promoting health etc, and can therefore end up "benefitting" - in their own personal ways - from the "system" they are studying for years to come!).
That's not to knock tradition, just to say that people seem to prefer not to assume real responsibility for themselves (either as teachers, but especially not as students).
Ahem. Apologies for the tangents.
I think we would all agree that many of our students need to take more care in how they express themselves (some just don't ever seem to notice in what ways their approach to "constructing" their awkward phrases is flawed, or ever notice the regularities in more "standard" English).
We all also seem to be dissatisfied with forcing students to speak (especially in "conversation" classes) before they have had sufficient input from which they can form...
I was going to continue, "form generalizations in their mind, and make general statements", but I then realized the problem students face is one of specific phrasing.
Can we expect students to NOT make mistakes when the input we give them is actually, when you think about it, quite meagre, almost randomly selected and badly organized, especially when there is no specific purpose involved in learning? (Probably talking more about myself here
).I know there are things like "interlanguages" adding to the brew, but I am of the pessimistic view that the glass we are giving students is barely half-full. There could be a lot more ingredients added, and to achieve quite different goals than just a healthy "competence" (e.g. re-realization of self, socialization into a new language, making friends through extended real-time relationships, replete with a growing base of shared knowledge, with "teachers" etc).
Perhaps "general" English courses are a waste of time, and students could achieve more by contenting themselves with "self-study" courses?
For comparison, when you look at a martial art like karate, it is often quite amazing that many students never get around to buying a single book on kata (traditional, usually solo, "dance-like" forms) and consequently take years to get the basics down pat (and, of course, they never get to the point of questioning the validity of the forms for fighting, or promoting health etc, and can therefore end up "benefitting" - in their own personal ways - from the "system" they are studying for years to come!).
That's not to knock tradition, just to say that people seem to prefer not to assume real responsibility for themselves (either as teachers, but especially not as students).
Ahem. Apologies for the tangents.
-
LarryLatham
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 6:33 pm
- Location: Aguanga, California (near San Diego)
Alas, I suspect you have a major point there, Duncan. Perhaps my post above leaves the impression that I think if only teachers will do the right thing, then our problems with students will be over. I do not think that for a moment. But I cannot help coming to the conclusion that direct correction of student mistakes does not seem to help them much, and it does take up a lot of class time. I suspect there is something better we can do with the time. Something that will more efficiently connect with students and, all other things ignored for the moment, help them learn how to help themselves. Of course, that is clearly an oversimplification because we cannot ignore all other things in the end. Human nature being what it is, some of our students just cannot, will not, be cajoled into giving a damn about learning English. Perhaps those can all be herded into a single large classroom and provided with teachers who insist on correcting them.Duncan wrote:...people seem to prefer not to assume real responsibility for themselves (either as teachers, but especially not as students).
Larry Latham
-
Duncan Powrie
- Posts: 525
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 3:33 pm
You do the herding, Larry, and I'll do the "correcting" (I could do it for free, but if their course refunds could somehow find their way into my pocket it'd be appreciated).
What do you think I should hit them over the head with though, a shinai (bamboo sword used in Kendo, Japanese fencing, seems a popular choice here in Japan) or a baseball bat (popular choice with despairing English teachers the world over)?
NO, wait, I just thought, a dictionary would be better (image-wise, and less injurious) wouldn't it...COBUILD's pretty hefty eh! (I would go for NODE, but that's not really a learner's dictionary).
What do you think I should hit them over the head with though, a shinai (bamboo sword used in Kendo, Japanese fencing, seems a popular choice here in Japan) or a baseball bat (popular choice with despairing English teachers the world over)?
NO, wait, I just thought, a dictionary would be better (image-wise, and less injurious) wouldn't it...COBUILD's pretty hefty eh! (I would go for NODE, but that's not really a learner's dictionary).
So much to reply to....so little time....hehe!
Hello everyone!
I have a lot of resources. It's taken me over twenty years to accumulate these resources and I am constantly adding more items to that list of "things to do". These resources are the details. However, under all this, there is of course a grand plan.
I do plan my classes down to the day-to-day details. I hardly every follow those plans exactly, because they are almost always made before my first class with a particular group. Those plans will change based on my perceptions of the group dynamics. I have the resources necessary to make those "think on your feet" changes while always following that grand plan.
Yesterday my fellow teacher and I gave out the evaluation forms for an adult class, cleverly titled "Commercial English" (marketing!). Most of the fifteen students rated my colleague and I as either 3 or 4 on a scale of 4 (4 being very good). A couple rated me better than her, and one rated me as a 2 while rating my partner as a 4. My partner and I had a good laugh comparing the results, "look, I beat you here.... look what they said about you there!", but we are both quite sure of our work as teachers and scales of 1 to 4 on general evaluations that also ask about the air-conditioning in the classroom don't have a lot of influence on our development as teachers.
However, that "2" that I received reminded me that perhaps a review of objectives was needed in this class, for at least one person. I am a fun teacher and my classes are fun, and that's in part what they pay me for, so it never impresses me that the majority of a class rates me well. I have to address that single individual who rated me as simply average, find out if there has been a confusion in the objectives of the student and those of the teacher.
My objectives, this grand plan, is always "to provide the student with a framework for self-improvement, using the language itself as an example of how to work alone, how to attain good study habits that will result in good linguistic habits, as much in using English as a communicative device as in always improving on that device." This can be seen in one of the first lectures (yes, I do give four or five different "lectures" in any class I take on, they are the same for everyone) that I offer: Regularly, Repeat, Review, Reward. The individual exercises that we do, the pronunciation with minimal pairs, the sentence transformation drills, the short role-plays in every-day situations, the song cloze exercises, the detailed work with video, all of this material is basically example material to illustrate how the student can, should, must, ought to do the most of the work him/herself.
I like the word "habit" which has appeared here. Part of the process of learning to use a language is the acquisition of habits, often new habits. As Larry points out, "A fossilization is only a habit", that is, it is a behavior that has been accepted by the individual (right or wrong has little to do with it here, I believe) and that is then used consistently by that individual when the circumstances call for it. I don't know if, as Larry also points out, these habits can be changed in an instant, but I do agree that they can be changed, and under the criteria boldly stated by Larry as well: "IF THE STUDENT IS PAYING ATTENTION TO HIS PERFORMANCE".
I try to make it clear to my students that I haven't got the magic wand that will make them speak English. I can inform them, I can comment on their mistakes, I can offer them homework, material, practice techniques, time organization, even lists of vocabulary if they want (that last I usually refuse to do, but in the end, if they insist, they are the customer and often believe that they are right!
). However, if you want to learn to play the guitar, you have to sit down every afternoon and play it. If your objective is to strum out a couple of basic chords, then you won't have to get into sight-reading (if you have a good ear). If you want to learn a great variety of music, develop an interesting repertoire, you might have to study tablature, or even regular scores, and teach your fingers to move about in the right way. In the end, changing from Sol to Re in this or that song cannot always be a case of theory, must convert itself into a habit. And you will get it wrong hundreds of times before you get it right. And you yourself will hear that error and will correct it yourself. And you will save your guitar teacher the horrible boredom of telling you once again how to make that chord change.
Sorry, this is too long now, have more to say, but will make lunch first, organize my thoughts, and continue a little later. Did want to thank Roger and Larry for their nice words and thoughtful comments on what I have shared in this forum. I try not to make anyone get huffy with me and sometimes I feel like my "neutral" approach leaves me on the sidelines. Thanks for making me feel included!
peace,
revel.
I have a lot of resources. It's taken me over twenty years to accumulate these resources and I am constantly adding more items to that list of "things to do". These resources are the details. However, under all this, there is of course a grand plan.
I do plan my classes down to the day-to-day details. I hardly every follow those plans exactly, because they are almost always made before my first class with a particular group. Those plans will change based on my perceptions of the group dynamics. I have the resources necessary to make those "think on your feet" changes while always following that grand plan.
Yesterday my fellow teacher and I gave out the evaluation forms for an adult class, cleverly titled "Commercial English" (marketing!). Most of the fifteen students rated my colleague and I as either 3 or 4 on a scale of 4 (4 being very good). A couple rated me better than her, and one rated me as a 2 while rating my partner as a 4. My partner and I had a good laugh comparing the results, "look, I beat you here.... look what they said about you there!", but we are both quite sure of our work as teachers and scales of 1 to 4 on general evaluations that also ask about the air-conditioning in the classroom don't have a lot of influence on our development as teachers.
However, that "2" that I received reminded me that perhaps a review of objectives was needed in this class, for at least one person. I am a fun teacher and my classes are fun, and that's in part what they pay me for, so it never impresses me that the majority of a class rates me well. I have to address that single individual who rated me as simply average, find out if there has been a confusion in the objectives of the student and those of the teacher.
My objectives, this grand plan, is always "to provide the student with a framework for self-improvement, using the language itself as an example of how to work alone, how to attain good study habits that will result in good linguistic habits, as much in using English as a communicative device as in always improving on that device." This can be seen in one of the first lectures (yes, I do give four or five different "lectures" in any class I take on, they are the same for everyone) that I offer: Regularly, Repeat, Review, Reward. The individual exercises that we do, the pronunciation with minimal pairs, the sentence transformation drills, the short role-plays in every-day situations, the song cloze exercises, the detailed work with video, all of this material is basically example material to illustrate how the student can, should, must, ought to do the most of the work him/herself.
I like the word "habit" which has appeared here. Part of the process of learning to use a language is the acquisition of habits, often new habits. As Larry points out, "A fossilization is only a habit", that is, it is a behavior that has been accepted by the individual (right or wrong has little to do with it here, I believe) and that is then used consistently by that individual when the circumstances call for it. I don't know if, as Larry also points out, these habits can be changed in an instant, but I do agree that they can be changed, and under the criteria boldly stated by Larry as well: "IF THE STUDENT IS PAYING ATTENTION TO HIS PERFORMANCE".
I try to make it clear to my students that I haven't got the magic wand that will make them speak English. I can inform them, I can comment on their mistakes, I can offer them homework, material, practice techniques, time organization, even lists of vocabulary if they want (that last I usually refuse to do, but in the end, if they insist, they are the customer and often believe that they are right!
). However, if you want to learn to play the guitar, you have to sit down every afternoon and play it. If your objective is to strum out a couple of basic chords, then you won't have to get into sight-reading (if you have a good ear). If you want to learn a great variety of music, develop an interesting repertoire, you might have to study tablature, or even regular scores, and teach your fingers to move about in the right way. In the end, changing from Sol to Re in this or that song cannot always be a case of theory, must convert itself into a habit. And you will get it wrong hundreds of times before you get it right. And you yourself will hear that error and will correct it yourself. And you will save your guitar teacher the horrible boredom of telling you once again how to make that chord change.Sorry, this is too long now, have more to say, but will make lunch first, organize my thoughts, and continue a little later. Did want to thank Roger and Larry for their nice words and thoughtful comments on what I have shared in this forum. I try not to make anyone get huffy with me and sometimes I feel like my "neutral" approach leaves me on the sidelines. Thanks for making me feel included!
peace,
revel.
-
Duncan Powrie
- Posts: 525
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 3:33 pm
Nothing wrong with a neutral approach, Revel! Sounds like you are more organized, and do things on a more consistent basis than me, anyway!
One thing that might help you get even better feedback from your students would be to offer them: Revels: Milk Chocolates with Assorted Centres (Nestle, Zurich 1998). You can find online reviews at: http://snackspot.org/thread.php?story=0407191728sbc
Ignore reviews like the ones that read:
Posted: 21:06 Mon 19-Jul-2004 by "Stuart Campbell" # permalink comment
Comment: So are there any horrible ones left in Revels now? Is coffee still in there? If peanut and coffee are both gone, the idea of Revels Russian Roulette is dead, which would be a sad cultural loss on one hand, but might make me buy Revels on the other.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: 21:21 Mon 19-Jul-2004 by "Stuart Campbell" # permalink comment
Comment: Also, if it's so funny and great to deliberately put sh*t sweets that everyone hates into the packet, why not go the whole hog and make every 10th raisin one a mouse p** or something? Maybe you could do limited editions where one in every 10,000 packets had a chocolate-coated cyanide capsule in it, and your next of kin got a holiday to Disneyland?
I did some "action research" and found that especially the coffee-flavored ones improved my pronunciation of fricatives no end.
One thing that might help you get even better feedback from your students would be to offer them: Revels: Milk Chocolates with Assorted Centres (Nestle, Zurich 1998). You can find online reviews at: http://snackspot.org/thread.php?story=0407191728sbc
Ignore reviews like the ones that read:
Posted: 21:06 Mon 19-Jul-2004 by "Stuart Campbell" # permalink comment
Comment: So are there any horrible ones left in Revels now? Is coffee still in there? If peanut and coffee are both gone, the idea of Revels Russian Roulette is dead, which would be a sad cultural loss on one hand, but might make me buy Revels on the other.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: 21:21 Mon 19-Jul-2004 by "Stuart Campbell" # permalink comment
Comment: Also, if it's so funny and great to deliberately put sh*t sweets that everyone hates into the packet, why not go the whole hog and make every 10th raisin one a mouse p** or something? Maybe you could do limited editions where one in every 10,000 packets had a chocolate-coated cyanide capsule in it, and your next of kin got a holiday to Disneyland?
I did some "action research" and found that especially the coffee-flavored ones improved my pronunciation of fricatives no end.
-
Duncan Powrie
- Posts: 525
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 3:33 pm
I found this other "review" to also be rather silly and of absolutely no Applied Linguistic use whatsoever:
Posted: 11:41 Tue 20-Jul-2004 by Snackspot # permalink comment
Comment: for a TV ad, they could CGI a packet into the the Rutger Hauer face-off scene from "Blade Runner"...
Roy: I've eaten... questionable things
Tyrell: But also extraordinary things. Revel in your time!
Posted: 11:41 Tue 20-Jul-2004 by Snackspot # permalink comment
Comment: for a TV ad, they could CGI a packet into the the Rutger Hauer face-off scene from "Blade Runner"...
Roy: I've eaten... questionable things
Tyrell: But also extraordinary things. Revel in your time!
-
LarryLatham
- Posts: 1195
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2003 6:33 pm
- Location: Aguanga, California (near San Diego)