Let Go of the Matrix! - the non-grammar approach

fluffyhamster · Post by **fluffyhamster** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 6:07 am

Way back on page 1 of this thread, I wrote:Interesting that you should mention the forms that answers to Y/N Qs take, Abu, 'cos there were a few threads a year or so ago where the "Drillerkillers" tried to take on the "The real difficulties lie elsewhere" crowd (the former clearly lost the debate, to my mind).
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/teacher/v ... php?t=2620
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/teacher/v ... php?t=2642

Another reason for not insisting on full-sentence answers is that even during tests, students may not always be aware (or maintain an awareness) of what it is exactly that is required of them at any moment in time: just today, I had to mark as wrong answers such as '(For) ten months' (some students' written reply to a question asking how long sb e.g. Jane has lived in Tokyo). I am not allowed to show the slightest hesitation in not accepting anything less than 'She has lived in Tokyo/there for ten months', even though in a conversation a short answer would be perfectly acceptable (and indeed, probably the most natural, most frequent response). Back in the classroom, how much murkier still things must seem, without the iron rule mongering of the test writers to keep the students on the "straight an narrow", "provide" them with "optimal" amounts of "practice" etc etc (or so the arguments go in favour of this kind of silliness).

Andrew Patterson · Post by **Andrew Patterson** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 8:13 am

The hamster wrote:

Another reason for not insisting on full-sentence answers is that even during tests, students may not always be aware (or maintain an awareness) of what it is exactly that is required of them at any moment in time: just today, I had to mark as wrong answers such as '(For) ten months' (some students' written reply to a question asking how long sb e.g. Jane has lived in Tokyo). I am not allowed to show the slightest hesitation in not accepting anything less than 'She has lived in Tokyo/there for ten months', even though in a conversation a short answer would be perfectly acceptable (and indeed, probably the most natural, most frequent response). Back in the classroom, how much murkier still things must seem, without the iron rule mongering of the test writers to keep the students on the "straight an narrow", "provide" them with "optimal" amounts of "practice" etc etc (or so the arguments go in favour of this kind of silliness).

This is something that the Cambridge Certificate examinations manage to avoid while still testing English at a very high level.

fluffyhamster · Post by **fluffyhamster** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 8:24 am

Andrew Patterson wrote:This is something that the Cambridge Certificate examinations manage to avoid while still testing English at a very high level.

I probably should have said that the "test writers" I was alluding to were Japanese Teachers of English. Sometimes the actual individual test items they cobble together aren't too bad, but the JTEs do unfortunately then often rather insist on there only ever being one correct answer (even when I'll be the one marking a manageable number of (sections of) papers - I guess some JTEs don't want to have to explain anything beyond what they themselves have taught or are "confortable" teaching...but it's not like I am incapable of making the reasoning for awarding or withholding points perfectly clear myself on the students' papers, time-consuming though this indirect feedback is for me to write).

I'm brewing a thread (or a continuation of a Japan TEFL-themed thread) on the joys of marking these kind of tests, so keep your eyes peeled/your breaths bated etc.

fluffyhamster · Post by **fluffyhamster** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 2:20 pm

fluffyhamster wrote:I'm brewing a thread (or a continuation of a Japan TEFL-themed thread) on the joys of marking these kind of tests, so keep your eyes peeled/your breaths bated etc.

Le voila!

http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/teacher/v ... 6310#26310

woodcutter · Post by **woodcutter** » Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:36 am

I made some narky and OTT posts a while back when I was very busy. I'd like to revisit this topic and state that I've calmed down again now! Personally, I've always believed that most teachers take up rather extremist positions, and that I try not to. Some might disagree.......

I seem to be arguing here that differences in the grammatical structures of languages are the only things that will make students of one particular nationality relatively poor learners of another tongue. That remains my no.1 factor, but of course there are many factors, including cultural reluctance to communicate in class, though I find that overemphasized.

I also insinuated elsewhere that contributing to a forum like this is not a good use of time, but of course it is very helpful if you use it wisely, though that can prove difficult sometimes.

I shouldn't really roll my eyes at the "no grammar" people because I have every sympathy with those who do not wish to spout metalanguage at those who cannot digest it, or those who dislike decontextualized grammar parroting, of course. I think there are a few basics always worth saying though, and the real question is, how useful is metalinguistic explanation for an accomplished linguist? As Mesmark and Abufletcher both seem to know their onions very well, I don't see how either could claim that a "no grammar" approach works for them. I suppose they could give a pretty good grammatical description of the languages they study.

lolwhites · Post by **lolwhites** » Tue Nov 20, 2007 10:16 pm

Hey woody! Nice to see you again.
And thanks for bumping the thread, which provided a little trip down memory lane and reminding me what discussions here used to look like.

Pity abu disappeared after failing to convince us all that his research proved that noone else knew how to teach

fluffyhamster · Post by **fluffyhamster** » Fri Nov 23, 2007 2:54 am

Who needs abu when there's woody?