Mithridates and his secret

[fluffyhamster]

The point is, if it's idiomatic and ungrammatical how are you (the teacher and the student) going to know unless you have a solid grammar base to work from and to use for comparison. If it is idiomatic and grammatically correct too, then what are you complaining about?

Nobody has been complaining about language that is ("both") idiomatic and grammatical (two sides of the same coin, when you stop and think about it). The only complaining has been from you, about what we should do if language is ever 'idiomatic and ungrammatical'.

There can't be too much of this "problem" type of language floating about, can there, if the only example you could think up was 'Long time no see' (which is a borrowing from Chinglish, not a product of native speech processes), and why should its ungrammaticality be a barrier to understanding it, using it and appreciating why it was borrowed (it's charming, concise etc)?

I thought the whole point of grammar was to reveal systematicity and give a good indication to students of how to remain closely approximate to English word order especially when they have a go at speaking themselves, rather than "correcting" input! (If some input seems incorrect, and this is confirmed by a more competent speaker than the student, then obviously the student should seek a better way to express the intended meaning and learn that instead; in cases where the input seems incorrect but is actually a standard, approved phrase, what then is the problem? We all accept that, and so too should students, although I'd obviously have no objection if students preferred to master 'Wow, it's been a long time/ages (since we last met)! How long's it been?' etc to 'Long time no see'. Do you actually have a point to make here, Londo?).

The only students I might get saying 'It's a my car' are those ones who look like and talk like Benny 'The Jet' Urquidez (from 'Dragons Forever' - he says 'It's a deal!'), but the brain damage in this case is not a result of kick-boxing so much as endless rounds of silly drills (What is this? Is it a pen? No, it's a car - a model one, obviously, otherwise I wouldn't've been able to lift it! Oops, broke drill discipline then to make a joke! ). Were this to happen, I can assure you I would go twelve rounds with the offender until he could see 'a' and 'my' as belonging to a set from which only one, mutually exclusive choice, can be made. Saying that 'CLT allows this' is yet another example of how silly and glib you can be, Londo.

I don't mind people criticisizing things when I get the feeling they would actually do a better job, but it's kind of hard to imagine that happening with you, Londo, because what you're saying makes little sense, and your responses to challenges even less - not exactly indicative of having things all figured out, of having a better approach yourself worked out, is it?

[fluffyhamster]

By the way, it seems to me that the "science" behind CLT is simply research showing that a joyful, natural utterance is better retained than any kind of artificial one. As usual, such science is unnecessary, that's obvious. The point is whether the extra work needed to facilitate it, and difficulties involved, are worthwhile.

If that type of sentence is better retained, then surely it IS worth the extra effort (on the TEACHER'S part at least - where's the grief for the student?).

I know what you're thinking woody - drill the mother a few dozen times whilst going through all the colours of the Q+A rainbow just to make sure it sticks like sh*t, but personally, I'd prefer to press onto another memorable, well-chosen example; they'll soon build up into an internal "monitor corpora" for the student.

Lolwhites, thanks for addressing the issue of correction. I would've said more about it myself if I felt it hadn't all been said and done already, or, more importantly, I was actually using a text(book) that I considered very valuable for my students to master (more or less the entire contents of). Seeing as such a book doesn't seem to exist, I guess I'll need to keep on planning my own, and/or cobbling the best bits of several published ones together whilst supplementing heavily.

[revel]

Hey all.

This one didn't slip by me unnoticed:

"Yes, make it the most moronic load of crap available with a teaching guide with unrealistic suggestions (My favourite ones are the ones that instruct the teacher to tell the beginners what the lesson is going to be about and what the targets are. How for f' sake? If the class could understand that much they wouldn't need the basic class, now would they? Of course you could explain it in pictures, but what a waste of time for something that isn't necessary anyway!)" (Londo writing)

I'm not going to discuss whether outlining objectives for students at the outset of a class or a semester or a week is necessary or not, I tend to think it very useful. I certainly don't find it a waste of time. How to do it? Well, figuring out (or simply knowing) how to make students aware of what the class is going to be about is something my bosses pay me to be able to do. In the European Community, recent documents about adult education and work formation clearly stipulate that adults must be made aware of the objectives of the course they are taking as well as the day to day objectives of the individual classes. In classes with little ones, they oh so often ask "What are we going to do? What should I do now?" There's no reason not to openly let them know. What's more, they should be reminded at the "end" of whatever session what they ought to have been doing and just how well or poorly they have met expectations.

I admit again, as I did earlier, (that's redundant, isn't it?) that I was not at all aware that there was some plague on the ESL community called CLT. I am aware of useless or inexperienced or lazy teachers out there making as much as I do while just getting through the hour playing games and filling in blanks. But most of those teachers I know about are unsuccessful in thier classrooms because they are unable to combine the heart with the head....they spend hours filling in blanks and memorizing lists and ploughing through the book, ignoring the boredom factor that they themselves are causing. I suppose the other extreme is those that Londo is familiar with who are just clowing about and not getting anything done, of that kind I've not seen any, but then I don't work in Japan but rather in Spain. The closest I've been is that old "Natural Method" bullpoop that a former boss sold to about fifty parents just two years before having to close his academy because of a high level of dissatisfaction from those same parents.

Finally, I'm with fluffy, what's the answer? We're all good teachers here discussing this matter, we all claim to have pretty good results with our respective classes. What do we do then, shoot the others who are not doing our profession any good service?

peace,
revel.

[fluffyhamster]

We're all good teachers here discussing this matter, we all claim to have pretty good results with our respective classes. What do we do then, shoot the others who are not doing our profession any good service?

I was intending to say something like that myself, but you beat me to it, revvers!

Although I might seem very critical of Londo, and have regular run-ins with woodcutter, I don't imagine they are BAD teachers: we're all just trying to work things out for ourselves, and a lot of our posts should be seem as windows into our individual minds (and often confusion, groping towards some sort of light where we can hopfeully see that bit better than before).

Ultimately, anyone who posts more than a few times on Dave's, with anything remotely interesting or probing, deserves to be heard, and is on their way to becoming a better teacher already.

I kind of like the EU's contributions to specifying learner needs, measuring progress etc, but it can get a little tick-the-box if it is ultimately for "political" reasons (e.g. to make it look like something is being done) than to help the teacher and learners themselves get their bearings better.

For example, the curriculum at the awful private junior-senior highschool that I had to work at for 4 months (it's a long story) just got in the way far too much and sucked the lifeblood out of the teachers' desire to PLAN BETTER LESSONS ("exhaustive" assessment frameworks should only be implemented if the lessons to be taught are already reasonably well-established).

[lolwhites]

Sharing the aims with the students is something I've only started doing in the last couple of years. Basically, I might say "Today we'll look at bars, the verb to want and revise numbers". I write the three things up in the top right hand corenr and tick them off as we go through them. I think this gives the students a sense of where they're coming from and where they're going. I'm also finding that fewer students moan that they aren't learning anything because I've made clear to them what is obvious to me.

Some might dismiss this as a cynical exercise in keeping the punters happy. I find that it actually works, and that happy punters learn more than those who can't see the point in what they're doing.

[revel]

Hey fluff and lol.

Thanks for the kind words. I hope I didn't imply that Londo and woody should be shot with those other worthless blonde (why are they bonde) clowns who, with the help of seemingly incompetent linguists are doing so much damage in certain areas of the world. Nowhere in Huesca, Spain, is there that type of class being given.

And yet, I myself could start a new thread and in purely shun-like bravado, name it "The REAL truth behind the Small Private English Academy that is not supervised by any powers that be on a state administrative level." This is non-regulated educational activity and as long as the clients are satisfied the business stays open. This administrative vacuum leads to a lot of dubious practices in the classroom (there's me happily skipping over the school administration....don't get me going!) but I'm afraid that the wanton mediocre teaching that I see here might just be a local phenomena and would not accuse all small academies in the world to be suffering from this REAL truth. I guess I don't like ultimatism, especially in my own writing.

I do agree, fluff, that there is too much "entrance level exam" and "mid-course evaluation survey" and "attendance inspections" and such, and that such comes directly from these general ideas that the EU has set up. They are based on certain "research" and the comments of recognized educators, so there is something to them and perhaps for me the most remarkable was "plan and reveal your planning". This, at least in the circle I find myself moving, is a rather novel idea for the Spanish way of thinking, the culture is more likely, in my opinion, to think ahead about things but do things either at the last minute or the day after. Having worked with so many Japanese students during my time in New York, I find it difficult to generalize this "problem" that filters down to teaching phenomena since I can't see it taking place in the Japanese way of doing things.

Anyway, thanks to you both for stimulating me to write this post. Been preparing the move to the new house and needed a break....

peace,
revel.

[woodcutter]

Yes, three cheers all round boys and girls for at least one piece of insight. Actually, anyone who posts here is probably amongst the most hardworking and thoughtful of teachers. Think about it and weep.

I'm not impressed by your other compliments. Indeed, I hope I am not a "bad teacher", and the fact that I have actually attempted another kind of approach, have had training from more than one kind of trainer, seen the results of more than one kind of method, you know what, the chances are it will make me more aware of what is going on than someone who has only done one kind of thing their whole career. Like it or hate it, time in a method school of some sort is the only way that raw teachers are going to get any kind of extra-training, any hard core feedback.

If you believe in the "fundamental difference hypothesis" - if you have bothered to look inside your own head and notice how you translate everything - (how your learning is quite, quite unlike that of a toddler), if you have seen certain people seem to take a lot from heavy correction, if you have learnt languages yourself and been desperate to find some teacher who would only help you to put the stuff together properly in a systematic way instead of promote endless jabbering, then the general ethos of modern teaching is depressing. Teacher, how should I learn better? I (and Londo I suppose) are kind of forced to give the answer - don't take my class! That's extremely unmotivating.

I kind of get the impression that FH, Lol (and especially Revel!) do whatever tickles their fancy. Why not, if you can get away with it? Again though, I ask you, what is CLT? How is your multi-faceted approach deserving of those 3 august and holy letters? How does the sloganizing of CLT, or of "only English in the class!" help anyone?

[woodcutter]

Actually, were I a DOS, you know the kind of person I would hire above all others?

Somebody who had taught CLT, taught GT, taught for Callan, Montesori and Caleb Gattano, and could produce a good reference for them all.

Show me that person, and I will show you no mere collocating rodent. I will show you a TEACHER!

[Londo Molari]

Nobody has been complaining about language that is ("both") idiomatic and grammatical (two sides of the same coin, when you stop and think about it). The only complaining has been from you, about what we should do if language is ever 'idiomatic and ungrammatical'.

My reply was in response to this:

One things I've yet to see on this list is how Londo avoids the all too common situation where students' utterances are grammatically correct but totally unnatural.

I don't mind people criticisizing things when I get the feeling they would actually do a better job, but it's kind of hard to imagine that happening with you, Londo, because what you're saying makes little sense, and your responses to challenges even less - not exactly indicative of having things all figured out, of having a better approach yourself worked out, is it?

I think my response made perfect sense. It is you who are deliberately misunderatnding it, I feel.

The bottom line for me is that if it is wrong in any way (and that takes into account grammar, idiomacity, genre and whatever else...) then it is unacceptable. We should be striving for perfection as learners and most of the ones I have seen are happy to pidgin away if the teacher or institution lets them.

As for having a better method, you don't know the half of it!

[lolwhites]

As for having a better method, you don't know the half of it!

How about enlightening us instead of playing Mr Mysterious? Some of us come here to share our knowledge and experience.

[fluffyhamster]

I don't know if I was being tongue in cheek or serious when I wrote what I did, woody, but I hope you don't think I've been too disrespectful. I do note and respect your passion. Maybe Larry can write a post or two for me to placate you even more (if it's at all necessary). That being said, it does sometimes sound like you are preparing now to do only (the) one thing for the rest of your career...((that's) good for you, bravo etc, BUT...)

If I ran a school I'd get some reasonable materials in order first (yes I know I keep saying that, but it IS important, you must admit! Mere "collocating rodent" indeed! And how would being faced with piles of collocations free me to 'do whatever tickled my fancy'...unless you mean by that that I'd have multitudes more options than the average "drillerkiller"? ), and then let those teachers who seemed to like the look of the syllabus (i.e. that I'd hired) get on with teaching the fine print in whatever way they thought best and appropriate (and if there were complaints from students, I'd really try to see the teacher's side of things). Not fantasizing here about the ego trips that would be possible, no, not at all!

So, woody, no need to feel that you can't slap yourself on the back until you attract the attention of some curious students wanting to see what the crazy guy is doing, and no need to turn them away with cries of 'I am not a true CLT teacher! I'm not worthy! Seek ye out thee the fluffy one!'.

Londo, you haven't produced many examples of 'idiomatic language that is UNgrammatical' (because as I say, most idiomatic language IS grammatical), but that did seem to be your beef (others, please correct me if I am mistaken here). I don't see how that constitutes a meaningful reply to lol's challenge that GRAMMATICAL language may not be very satisfactory functionally (that is, inappropriate, or 'overkill' etc).

There were a few quite long discussions about how much (practice of) grammar is enough (in answers) across a few threads a few months ago, if providing some background context would help you unravel the assumptions that have developed "between" the regular contributors here on Dave's (and there's no reason you shouldn't become one yourself! ).

By the way, if you are going to quote, can you use the quote function (you'll soon see which characters you can type manually to duplicate it as you wish to open and close multiple quotes), or at least preface plain text with a name e.g. Lolwhites/Fluffy (wrote): ..... .

[fluffyhamster]

The bottom line for me is that if it is wrong in any way (and that takes into account grammar, idiomacity, genre and whatever else...) then it is unacceptable. We should be striving for perfection as learners and most of the ones I have seen are happy to pidgin away if the teacher or institution lets them.

Obviously nobody is interested in listening to much less teaching language that is (too) flawed (the reason for the bracketed 'too' just then is this: is language ever perfect?), but as I keep saying, how many institutions are really getting the language (that is to be taught) right? If the input is not as perfect as it can possibly be at whatever moment in time (and in the teacher's "knowledge-ability opinion"), the result will not be perfection but a pidgin of a sort that ought to be at least whispered here: 'language-like behaviour "language" ' (LLB(L))!!!

All I'm trying to say here is that handwaving about 'genre and whatever else' isn't exactly doing justice to the language of genre and whatever else, and a few snappy drills or "a bit of the old method shtick" won't compensate nearly enough: put the language first and see what methods suggest themselves.

But at the end of the day I suspect I teach much like woody (although he perhaps doesn't venture into extended discourse as much as he could): introduce students to some language, then nudge them into using it themselves. Fill the empty cup, Grasshopper.

(Woody wrote the following on the 'The CLT Fraud revealed!' thread: (M)y method of choice is essentially to give input and ask a question in which learners must come out with that kind of input while engaging in bona fide communication with me, which I will correct.).

P.S. Is it ever really bona fide with you (or with any other teacher or method for that matter)? What can we do to make the "communication" (it is ultimately a classroom, after all, and they ain't nearly fluent enough yet) that bit more bona fide (rather than 'Bone, Fido! Fetch!' LOL)?

[woodcutter]

Well, maybe we are all using an integrated approach. We all think that some L1 can be useful. We all correct. We all do a bit of old fashioned stuff, then a bit of CLT, as far as I can see. We have to, because CLT is only a context fixing form of revision. When it comes out well in a communicative activity, then it has already been learnt.

We all worked this out from practical experience, and we can all fulminate against the mendacious CLT sloganeers together.

I'll add a caveat though, in case Londo is disgusted with my caving in! Londo believes that really accurate input is key. Within even the most well designed Headway class, you cannot prevent the general use of inaccurate language - the cementing of incorrect translation - the cementing of getting some of the context quite WRONG. That's because in that kind of communicative activity, too much correction will just kill it.

Of course, we have heard tell that research says correction does not help. I must say that it makes little more sense to me than saying the right answers do not help in a math class. A sophisticated language framework is in place. We have to assist in the translating of it. Correction helps me to learn, and I do not think I was born on Venus or Mars.

[Londo Molari]

No hamster, I haven't provided many examples of language that is ungrammatical because there would simply be no point. My response will be the same - strive for correction, correct all mistakes. The example I used was just off the top of my head. I am not writing any more tossy university linguistics essays so I really don't have the time or the need to think up more, just to back up an argument. I don't know why you are fixating on this. What exactly do you think you are proving by it?

Furthermore, if you are impying that an argument is invalid without copious examples, then let's go back to the start of this part of the discussion - lolwhites challenge. You will notice that he didn't provide even one example. So lolwhites, if you would like to give a few examples we can start it all over again, with specific discussion points.

P.S. Make sure you give more than three examples, or fluffy won't take you seriously!

[Londo Molari]

How about enlightening us instead of playing Mr Mysterious? Some of us come here to share our knowledge and experience.

Oh, you mean my method based upon over 20 years of language learning, eight years of language teaching and as many years searching, researching and testing for more effective ways to learn languages? Yes, I will share that knowledge but not for free! I think I should see some reward for all the time and money invested, so it will be released in book form later this year. Most learners won't like it though as it is most definitely not for the faint-hearted. People who use it though will see massive improvements not only in their language skills, but in their ability to learn languages.

Good plug, eh?