Mithridates and his secret

[fluffyhamster]

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?

Wny can't experienced teachers do whatever tickles their fancy? Surely this is better than doing only what tickled your boss's or the syllabus writer's fancy (and looking at some syllabuses and materials, you begin to wonder just how much experience, options and imagination some writers have).

I'm wondering when I'm going to run into one of my old CTEFLA fellow trainees again, the girl who got an A or B pass grade by religiously following the dictats of the trainers and who then immediately went off to peddle the best of what the course had offered on one of her own "refresher" courses; I'm imagining she is now flogging whatever method seems the most lucrative at the moment, without really knowing, even suspecting, and certainly not caring if it is indeed "the best".

So, there comes a time when teachers (usually can) make up their own minds (and would like to), and then it is a question of their mindset matching the student(s)'s. A teacher who can 'get inside the students' heads' and empathize with them is halfway there already...

[fluffyhamster]

Sorry to be posting again, but I just had another thought...

Woodcutter mentions he has had more than one trainer. Probably we all have! Anyway, the interesting thing is that a lot of this kind of "retraining" can make the CELTA course look like positively enlightened and tolerant...I don't mean in the actual techniques employed, but just in the attitude extended to teachers: 'You know squat, you've been doing it all wrong for years/decades, nobody but us can possible have come to any valuable realizations about learning this language (produces flimsy textbook) etc etc etc'. (Trainees yawn/roll eyes/rub necks/jump from window - door is locked/Snatch back signed contract before jumping etc).

I really think this kind of (pervasive) attitude isn't doing anyone any favours, and the sh*t it produces rolls and rolls downhill to all end up landing on the students' heads (that is, it is made more than the teacher's job is worth to treat the students with more respect than the teacher was). I'm not saying "anything should go", but it would be nice if there was more than the textbook and downloaded grammar practice activities floating around the classrooms.

I sometimes think the teaching industry could be summed up in one word: contempt.

[revel]

Good morning all!

Cup of coffee before I go start vacuuming books! (I've had the pleasure, thanks to a translation about smoked salmon I did the other day, to be able to write that word "vacuum" several times. It's fun to write a word that has two "uu"!)

Oh dear, I shouldn't say what I'm going to say, but here it goes anyway. I include myself in this group of people who haven't got there yet. When the need to justify based on the number of years we have been doing such and such an activity disappears, then we are possibly pretty comfortable with that activity and especially with others who share the activity. When I never again say "I've been teaching ESL for xx years" I'll be able to admit to myself that whatever way I've been doing it has been satisfying and has helped to develop me as a teacher. I say it less and less as time goes on, but just the other day I said it in class and nearly bit my tongue trying to stop myself.

Londo, I myself don't want to read your entire book. The blurb you have given us does not stimulate me for several reasons. However, I certainly would be interested in samples of your thought, I don't know, specific points illustrated with examples of how they have been applied in the classroom and with what results. I guess I'm looking for abridged information that would pique my curiosity or creativity. "Most learners won't like it though as it is most definitely not for the faint-hearted." Why not? Are most learners faint-hearted? What do you mean by "faint-hearted? "People who use it though will see massive improvements not only in their language skills, but in their ability to learn languages." What are these predicted improvements and how is the book used to make them and then recognize them?

I congratulate you on getting this book published. That saves me dragging out my notes from the mid-80s (there I am giving time references again!) and finally getting down to the end of the one that I was writing before I realised that I wasn't saying anything particularly new or even interesting but was simply taking notes for myself to make sure that I would always be able to chart my development as a teacher (and as a person). Perhaps I do everything you book suggests, method philosophies often have many many common denominators. I hope you are satisfied with its reception and (evidently) its sale.

peace,
revel.

[fluffyhamster]

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

I missed the last couple of posts on page 3 for some reason and didn't see them until just now.

Before I say anything else, seriously, I too wish you good luck with your book, Londo.

Now, to address what you said in the quotes I've taken: I'm not trying to prove anything, I'm just saying, your arguments, whilst sometimes amusing to read, are a little glib - that's all; I'm cautioning against sticking a lot into an "idioms bin" (there is a LOT of language that could be incorporated into structural accounts, but isn't).

Again, there has been a fair bit of discussion about what is meaningful practice (specifically, whether to ellipt or not, whether to provide "fuller" answers to questions - is this a "proportional" response and approach?), but even without this context, I don't see that lolwhites was under any obligation to provide specific examples when the general point was clear enough (which is more than can be said for your points regarding idiomaticity, Londo).

It is of course your prerogative if you don't wish to go into more detail, and I would agree that a lot of stuff we are forced to do at univeristy is "tossy" (not our cup of tea, at the very least, if anyone's), but now that you have sussed everything out, you seem tired even with what you yourself (might) have to say about it all.

It shouldn't come as a surprise then that nobody here on a Teacher Discussion Forum is going to be prepared to "buy into" your methods without more idea of what they would entail (or can we take it we have understood enough from what's been said so far?); certainly, it would be a bit much to expect us all to now be writing cheques for the privelege of continuing to be enlightened by you.

[woodcutter]

Well, don't play with Londo for a bit, since he is getting haughty!

Answer my point about accuracy. As I've said before, many of you seem obsessed with accuracy from the teacher, and utterly unconcerned that the bulk of a CLT class will be conducted in pidgin by the students (very misleading pidgin in a mono-nationiality class). Does that make sense?

[fluffyhamster]

The least we should expect is accuracy from the teacher (especially as regards finding actual functions for forms): if the teacher has given up even trying in the planning, what's the point of having ("teaching") a class at all?

When it comes to students accurately using the form(s) for themselves in the process of completing some task (rather than simply repeating the text, including the form, verbatim), well, you can insist on one and only one form, no more or less, slap bang here if the nature and expectations of the task are very limited. It takes quite a bit of skill to design a task that is not too obviously limited and limiting (otherwise, why not just carry on repeating and drilling), and with some language, the fact is, there are many ways to skin a cat, and the cat may struggle free and leave you with a bloody mess on your table (e.g. restrictive/identifying relative clauses*). You can try to club and bag the cat, but don't be surprised if your students then consider you cruel to animals.

*I suspect this is an area in which students can soon grasp the "mechanical" aspects (general shape of this area) of the grammar easily enough; when it comes to communication, what would be so bad with the use of the RP being only one of several communicative possibilities? Its use or otherwise would make no difference to e.g. conveying that it is my upstairs neighbour/the guy above me/the guy who lives above me (or upstairs) that I'm about to say something interesting about...(and then the task is to convey the interesting news in a reasonably clear way...). Presenting a "cluster" of related ways to convey a similar meaning might be the way to go in helping the teacher at least...
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/teacher/v ... 1374#11374

There are more areas where one can "escape" the exact form the teacher has been stressing, for example, (over)using 'X said...(direct speech)' for a variety of reporting structures. If a student used that, it wouldn't necessarily mean they couldn't understand 'asked if you could' (versus 'Can you...), nor form it themselves. The important thing is that the various structures are presented at some point, for the student's continued reference.

I guess what one will see as the pros and cons here depends on how "lockstep" one is about things generally.

[woodcutter]

You are not grasping the nettle. CLT exercises are often relatively free form. What the teacher has modelled is a very small part of it.

Nor is it only a problem for the student involved in the production of mistakes - everyone else is exposed to those mistakes at the same time.

Anyway, don't you realise you are on the slippery slope? You are supposed to say "It doesn't matter! We now know that toddler Timmy improves in any case!"

[Londo Molari]

Well thank y'ol for your best wishes.

Just a couple of points:

(1) I don't care whether you read my books or not. I'm not writing for approval or necessarily for wealth, although I see no reason why I should not profit from information that I regard to be the best I have to offer. I'm simply passing on what I have learned and developed for people to learn languages more effectively and with a far greater chance of success. That part of my passion for language learning and teaching, thankfully, remains untainted by the cynicism I have developed as a classroom teacher. Is there an idealist inside me somewhere? I have not yet turned completely to the Dark Side.

(2) I would ask you NOT to purchase it or even to read it if you do not want to, or if you have adopted a critical stance (of me, rather than my work) before you read it. I don't mind criticism, in fact I welcome it - I'll put my money where my mouth is, but you will not see the benefit in the techniques, let alone actually TRY them if you are looking for things to nit-pick about! If you are adamant that you will not read a book by that bloody outspoken Londo chappie, then how do you know you won't be missing some of the best imformation available for language learning? Now I'm not saying it IS the best, necessarily. That would be arrogant and I wouldn't want to come across that way, now would I? It's what I believe to be the best, and it is not a pile of boring theory either! You can actually use what I have to offer.

(3) You don't know who I am so you can't buy it anyway!

[fluffyhamster]

All I can say is, don't give up the teaching job for a career in book promoting/publishing just yet, Londo! (I'm surprised the people at CUP or OUP or whatever major publisher weren't doing this kind of stuff for you...eh? What's that? He's using a vanity publisher? Ah, I seee...).

[fluffyhamster]

You are not grasping the nettle. CLT exercises are often relatively free form. What the teacher has modelled is a very small part of it.

The purpose of some exercises is (and should be) precisely that - to point towards the (relatively) unknown (that is, to add a number of factors to "help" complicate things from an obvious starting point form-wise). There needn't be a lack of forms waiting to be supplied (the linguistic needs having been accurately predicted and anticipated by the teacher on the basis of examining how such talk usually progresses and works itself out to whatever logical conslusion)...only if teachers were not bothering to familiarize themselves with the nature of extended discourse would there be a problem.

Nor is it only a problem for the student involved in the production of mistakes - everyone else is exposed to those mistakes at the same time.

I hate to sound so CLT-y here, but if the students seem to understand each other well enough, are the mistakes of any real consequence? And there will always be plenty more native or competent input floating around before and after the mess the students make of it to suggest to them "the" correct way to go phrase things if not specifically (who can really know what form a student's intended proposition should take?), then at least generally.

Anyway, don't you realise you are on the slippery slope? You are supposed to say "It doesn't matter! We now know that toddler Timmy improves in any case!"

I like slippery slopes - at least when you admit you're on one, nobody's pretending it isn't always a bit of an uphill struggle, in which you need to be continually on your guard and aware of the surrounding terrain.

[woodcutter]

If one Japanese student says "How bank?" in a strange accent to another, during a direction asking roleplay, they will be understood. It is no help in the real world.

In CLT, you should provide a small percentage of the input. It is quite vain to think that the students will focus like a laser on that, and tune out the bulk of the class.

OK, OK, you are obsessed, inexplicably, with extended discourse and top-notch collocations. Unless you have a highly corrective atmosphere, the students will make a muck of those things too.

How much do we need to lauch students into the unknown? Well, for starters, unless you help them, they will only drown in your unknown anyway. And if you really help them, you will kill all the fun. Anyway, every situation we encounter in a foreign country brings a sentence to mind. We are never at a loss for words. We need to know how to translate those words.

[Londo Molari]

Vanity publisher? Ha ha! Nice try, Fluff, but ever so predictable!

[fluffyhamster]

Just felt like stirring a bit again...

If one Japanese student says "How bank?" in a strange accent to another, during a direction asking roleplay, they will be understood. It is no help in the real world.

That is a very unlikey "error" (i.e. you made it up).

OK, OK, you are obsessed, inexplicably, with extended discourse and top-notch collocations. Unless you have a highly corrective atmosphere, the students will make a muck of those things too.

I might be a bit obssessed, but that doesn't mean the students themselves necessarily need to be (made so)...and if I wasn't, they'd be even surer to make a mess of things (and that's if they could even make a start let alone continue in reasonably clear and efficient ways). Paying attention to the linguistic details in the planning stages increases options and awareness for at least the teacher.