What do you think about strategy instruction?
Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2
-
Betty Swollocks
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:22 pm
-
fluffyhamster
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
- Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
Hi Betty, and welcome to the forums!
Hmm, perhaps your 'learning styles/preferences' are more tied to theories like Multiple Intelligences (Gardner), whilst LSI is more "theory-neutral" (that is, 'traditional')?
I just know that these forums tend to be more linguistics/SL/FL-education related than general educational - meaning that verbal-linguistic knowledge and skills located within a general structuralist framework are the usual focus round here.
Hmm, perhaps your 'learning styles/preferences' are more tied to theories like Multiple Intelligences (Gardner), whilst LSI is more "theory-neutral" (that is, 'traditional')?
I just know that these forums tend to be more linguistics/SL/FL-education related than general educational - meaning that verbal-linguistic knowledge and skills located within a general structuralist framework are the usual focus round here.
-
fluffyhamster
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
- Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
Well, you could've explained what you mean by 'learner styles/preferences'. As for what I wrote however, I was assuming that you could guess or look up whatever (but for what it's worth, LSI=that Language Strategy Instruction you mentioned in your post; SL=Second Language; FL=Foreign Language; Structuralism="an approach to the human sciences that attempts to analyze a specific field (for instance, mythology) as a complex system of interrelated parts. It began in linguistics with the work of Ferdinand de Saussure..." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structuralism ). But in plain English, I guess that we modern-day language teachers 'simply analyze and teach language (or rather, a particular language) as a system of at least implicitly-contrasting communicative choices', and try to keep the theory to a minimum! 
Oops.
Oops, I meant to reply here, but made a new post instead. Well, may as well double it up. Here's what I had meant to post:
Hi Betty,
Learning styles are about the learners themselves and what types of things they benefit from in contrast with what other learners benefit from.
A couple of examples:
* Auditory vs kinaesthetic vs visual
(Some people learn better by doing things, some learn better by seeing things, etc)
* Outgoing vs reserved
(Some people learn best through interaction and social activities, others learn best through introspect and reflection)
* Field dependent vs field independent
(Some people see things as a whole and find it difficult to break things up into smaller parts, others find it easy to do)
Learning strategies are about techniques that people can use in order to help themselves to learn better, and/or to: memorise things, develop skills and sub-skills, cope in interaction despite limits in lexis or grammar, monitor their own development etc.
A couple of examples:
* To make regular use of review using a spiralling review system (ie. review 3 hours later first, then again 1 day later, then again 1 week later)
* To use different methods for organising and recording lexis in a notebook (eg. sorting by part of speech sometimes, sorting by topic other times; using a mind-map sometimes, writing words in short made up stories other times, etc)
* To use a technique like 'The Keyword Technique' to help memorise vocabulary
* To make a point of looking at pictures, headlines, subtitles, and the introductory paragraph of a text to help in understanding the details when reading
* To 'make up' new words or to use circumlocution (eg. saying 'foot finger' when the word 'toe' is unknown)
Hope that helps.
Hi Betty,
Learning styles are about the learners themselves and what types of things they benefit from in contrast with what other learners benefit from.
A couple of examples:
* Auditory vs kinaesthetic vs visual
(Some people learn better by doing things, some learn better by seeing things, etc)
* Outgoing vs reserved
(Some people learn best through interaction and social activities, others learn best through introspect and reflection)
* Field dependent vs field independent
(Some people see things as a whole and find it difficult to break things up into smaller parts, others find it easy to do)
Learning strategies are about techniques that people can use in order to help themselves to learn better, and/or to: memorise things, develop skills and sub-skills, cope in interaction despite limits in lexis or grammar, monitor their own development etc.
A couple of examples:
* To make regular use of review using a spiralling review system (ie. review 3 hours later first, then again 1 day later, then again 1 week later)
* To use different methods for organising and recording lexis in a notebook (eg. sorting by part of speech sometimes, sorting by topic other times; using a mind-map sometimes, writing words in short made up stories other times, etc)
* To use a technique like 'The Keyword Technique' to help memorise vocabulary
* To make a point of looking at pictures, headlines, subtitles, and the introductory paragraph of a text to help in understanding the details when reading
* To 'make up' new words or to use circumlocution (eg. saying 'foot finger' when the word 'toe' is unknown)
Hope that helps.
-
Betty Swollocks
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:22 pm
-
fluffyhamster
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
- Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
Heath, you can delete your other thread's very existence, provided nobody has replied by the time you hit that x button (to the right of the edit one) on your two posts there (latest before earliest).
By the way, did you guys notice what Lolwhites had to say on page 1 of this thread? (It would appear to have answered Betty's question before she'd asked it!
).
I mean, I for one haven't had to read Gardner say to dream up visual aids to help relate English < > Japanese orthographies, or talk of "embodied" language (the metaphors of Lakoff & Johnson) etc, and I'd prefer that learners only typify or categorize themselves implicitly (or rather, think of a particular activity as simply helpful in that particular instance) than explicitly from any formal diagnostics.
Or, if we are to test potential foreign-language learners, why not talk more in terms of predicting the student's serious likelihood of reaching an appreciable level (through testing 'Phonological Working Memory' or whatever), which is what any government wary of wasting any serious investment would do, than in terms of the teacher's ability to almost bend over backwards, pull their hair out etc in seeming obeisance to what may ultimately just be theoretical faddish watchwords.
Ok, "rant" over!
By the way, did you guys notice what Lolwhites had to say on page 1 of this thread? (It would appear to have answered Betty's question before she'd asked it!
).
Me, I think education thinks too much nowadays in terms of 'diagnosis' (diagnosing "problems") rather than say "prognosis" (which would be good were it not for the constant relativization and apparent demotion of previously reasonably sure knowledge), and rather underestimates the resourcefulness of halfway decent teachers (and let's not forget halfway intelligent learners!) to make sense of facts (i.e. relate B to A through whatever means).My training did mention learner strategies (the PGCE, not the Cert!), and I've attended sessions on Learning Styles, but I don't put much stock in the latter as it tends to categorise people and, used wrongly, can, IMO, actually do more harm than good.
I mean, I for one haven't had to read Gardner say to dream up visual aids to help relate English < > Japanese orthographies, or talk of "embodied" language (the metaphors of Lakoff & Johnson) etc, and I'd prefer that learners only typify or categorize themselves implicitly (or rather, think of a particular activity as simply helpful in that particular instance) than explicitly from any formal diagnostics.
Or, if we are to test potential foreign-language learners, why not talk more in terms of predicting the student's serious likelihood of reaching an appreciable level (through testing 'Phonological Working Memory' or whatever), which is what any government wary of wasting any serious investment would do, than in terms of the teacher's ability to almost bend over backwards, pull their hair out etc in seeming obeisance to what may ultimately just be theoretical faddish watchwords.
Ok, "rant" over!
-
Betty Swollocks
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:22 pm
Fluffy, I don't see that this answered my very basic question:
My training did mention learner strategies (the PGCE, not the Cert!), and I've attended sessions on Learning Styles, but I don't put much stock in the latter as it tends to categorise people and, used wrongly, can, IMO, actually do more harm than good.
Heath's response did. Perhaps you should cut down the jargon. It was a very simple question, which you seem to be over complicating/going off on a tangent.
My training did mention learner strategies (the PGCE, not the Cert!), and I've attended sessions on Learning Styles, but I don't put much stock in the latter as it tends to categorise people and, used wrongly, can, IMO, actually do more harm than good.
Heath's response did. Perhaps you should cut down the jargon. It was a very simple question, which you seem to be over complicating/going off on a tangent.
-
fluffyhamster
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
- Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
Betty, this is a discussion forum (or is supposed to be, warts, tangents, and all), but if you are going to take such issue with every other response (which might not all have been addressed just to you, by the way) then people may very well not bother responding on whichever threads you may care to post on in future. (But for what it's worth, and just so you know, I am believe it or not actually one of the more personable and helpful posters around here - meaning, I'm sorry if I have offended you or gotten up your nose too much or whatever...).
As for jargon, good luck with continuing to seemingly cherry-pick what words you are willing to understand, but personally I feel that nothing I said was that abstruse. (Sorry if you need to look that last word up, but just this once I picked a potentially tough one deliberately). I mean, this is an Applied Linguistics forum. (Cor, I am beginning to sound like Metal56!).
The main point I'd like to make however is that there were actually quite a few reasonably clear and potentially illustrative points and/or leads, a fair proportion contributed by me, earlier in the thread (specifically, on page 1), that would've answered your "question", but true to form you apparently either chose not to read them very closely (if at all) or follow them up, or didn't understand much of what you did read.
But hey, if all of what I just said was again too much to actually bother reading, here's the really condensed version: Learning styles/preferences=Handwavy general education-lite guff; Learner strategies=More concrete techniques to learn (surprise surprise, what with this being an ESL site) items of a foreign language especially. All just in my humble, completely uniformed opinion, of course.
Anyway, I was rather hoping that you could shed some light on the value of learner styles/preferences for any ESL/EFL professionals who might be interested (hearing some considered words from you might just beat listening to me, eh), but I might have been assuming a bit too much in thinking that you knew or cared that much about it.
(Heath) The Keyword technique seems such hard work (and so few examples of it provided in those books that mention it - usually there is only one example!) that I doubt it is used much in practice (as opposed to theory)!
As for jargon, good luck with continuing to seemingly cherry-pick what words you are willing to understand, but personally I feel that nothing I said was that abstruse. (Sorry if you need to look that last word up, but just this once I picked a potentially tough one deliberately). I mean, this is an Applied Linguistics forum. (Cor, I am beginning to sound like Metal56!).
The main point I'd like to make however is that there were actually quite a few reasonably clear and potentially illustrative points and/or leads, a fair proportion contributed by me, earlier in the thread (specifically, on page 1), that would've answered your "question", but true to form you apparently either chose not to read them very closely (if at all) or follow them up, or didn't understand much of what you did read.
But hey, if all of what I just said was again too much to actually bother reading, here's the really condensed version: Learning styles/preferences=Handwavy general education-lite guff; Learner strategies=More concrete techniques to learn (surprise surprise, what with this being an ESL site) items of a foreign language especially. All just in my humble, completely uniformed opinion, of course.
Anyway, I was rather hoping that you could shed some light on the value of learner styles/preferences for any ESL/EFL professionals who might be interested (hearing some considered words from you might just beat listening to me, eh), but I might have been assuming a bit too much in thinking that you knew or cared that much about it.
(Heath) The Keyword technique seems such hard work (and so few examples of it provided in those books that mention it - usually there is only one example!) that I doubt it is used much in practice (as opposed to theory)!
General
On deleting posts.
Thanks Fluffy. I thought there was a delete button, and had a quick look but must've given up too quickly. Now I know, I'll make sure I look a bit harder next time.
On forums and e-motions.
Don't worry too much about people's posts here Betty. I think the thing is, people often say things with a wry smile, or laugh, a bit of sarcasm, polite intonation, or something along those lines... and whatever the real intention, online we only see half of it. Then we get upset and bite back, making the other person bite back harder, and on and on... The nature of the e-world for now, unfortunately.
We all mean well, deep down, though.
On learning styles.
I don't see a huge lot of value in learning about specific learning styles either. Knowing a bit in general, though, does help me teach in a couple of ways:
On the keyword technique.
Yeah, it just seems a bit too time consuming for most students to bother with.
I think most of the strategies are good to introduce at some point, in combination with other learning tasks, with a brief focusing step afterwards (eg. after a reading skills task involving 'predict paragraph 2 - check - predict paragraph 3 - check - predict paragraph 4 - check, etc, asking the students "Were your predictions mostly correct? Did predicting help you understand the next section? Did it ever mislead you or cause problems?"). But yeah, the keyword technique doesn't slip in quite as easily as many other strategies.
Thanks Fluffy. I thought there was a delete button, and had a quick look but must've given up too quickly. Now I know, I'll make sure I look a bit harder next time.
On forums and e-motions.
Don't worry too much about people's posts here Betty. I think the thing is, people often say things with a wry smile, or laugh, a bit of sarcasm, polite intonation, or something along those lines... and whatever the real intention, online we only see half of it. Then we get upset and bite back, making the other person bite back harder, and on and on... The nature of the e-world for now, unfortunately.
We all mean well, deep down, though.
On learning styles.
I don't see a huge lot of value in learning about specific learning styles either. Knowing a bit in general, though, does help me teach in a couple of ways:
- * Slipping in a bit more analysis of grammar than I personally tend toward doing, because I know that a couple of the learners like that.
* Remembering to encourage Ss to write things in their notebooks, to include a bit of mechanical/tactile emphasis that I might otherwise overlook.
* Letting the shy students stick to presentations in small groups only, while allowing the social ones to get their spotlight time.
On the keyword technique.
Yeah, it just seems a bit too time consuming for most students to bother with.
I think most of the strategies are good to introduce at some point, in combination with other learning tasks, with a brief focusing step afterwards (eg. after a reading skills task involving 'predict paragraph 2 - check - predict paragraph 3 - check - predict paragraph 4 - check, etc, asking the students "Were your predictions mostly correct? Did predicting help you understand the next section? Did it ever mislead you or cause problems?"). But yeah, the keyword technique doesn't slip in quite as easily as many other strategies.
-
fluffyhamster
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
- Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
Re: General
In my case, very deep down, far far below the matted fur covered in savaged sunflower-seed shells.Heath wrote:We all mean well, deep down, though.
I think we've got to do a lot better than that if we're to convince anyone of the value of learner styles/types (unless we mean that in so broad a way as to be meaningless in theoretical terms)! I mean, taking notes is a time-honoured thing with no necessary relation to 'tactile' factors at all (or, what else could note-taking be, other than 'PEN in HAND that is WRITING things down in order to AID later RECALL'?!On learning styles.
I don't see a huge lot of value in learning about specific learning styles either. Knowing a bit in general, though, does help me teach in a couple of ways:But mostly just useful as little reminders to vary task types, etc.
- * Slipping in a bit more analysis of grammar than I personally tend toward doing, because I know that a couple of the learners like that.
* Remembering to encourage Ss to write things in their notebooks, to include a bit of mechanical/tactile emphasis that I might otherwise overlook.
* Letting the shy students stick to presentations in small groups only, while allowing the social ones to get their spotlight time.
), and it is a well-known fact (or soon will be, to any inexperienced language teacher!) that some students like lashings of grammar, whilst others may shy away from the spoken performance spotlight.The keyword technique, for some reason every example I've seen in books has had something to do with, some relation drawn to, cats: an Arabic learner of English apparently thinking that 'kitten' (oh what super-highly useful vocabulary these students are learning!) sounds like 'kitab' (book) in Arabic, so she pictures a kitten reading a book; then there's somebody learning Japanese who reckons that a cat waving a sword is a good way to master 'katana' (sword); and lastly and IIRC something about a door or handle or something being related to a cat - or maybe it was an incontinent parrot with Tourette's. Anyway...what examples have you seen of this infamous technique, Heath?
Last edited by fluffyhamster on Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Betty Swollocks
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:22 pm
Hi Fluffy
"Up my nose?"
Not al all, I appreciate the streams of consciousness that you have bestowed upon this forum. I haven't had this much fun since reading Jack Kerouac.
"Abstruse"
wowee, your verbal flexing is a credit to the world of applied linguistics. You are clearly of a supreme intellect...
"Up my nose?"
Not al all, I appreciate the streams of consciousness that you have bestowed upon this forum. I haven't had this much fun since reading Jack Kerouac.
"Abstruse"
wowee, your verbal flexing is a credit to the world of applied linguistics. You are clearly of a supreme intellect...
-
Betty Swollocks
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:22 pm
Also, Fluffy:
Having now took the time to read some of your previous posts I have gleamed some enlightening information on the subject, which I am currently reflecting on...
It's a lot to take in for one wet round the ears such as myself.
I'm sorry if I seemed ignorant by asking for a quick summary of the issue, In future I will try to think and respond with a higher level of sophistication.
Yours in reflection and gratitude,
B. Swollocks
Having now took the time to read some of your previous posts I have gleamed some enlightening information on the subject, which I am currently reflecting on...
It's a lot to take in for one wet round the ears such as myself.
I'm sorry if I seemed ignorant by asking for a quick summary of the issue, In future I will try to think and respond with a higher level of sophistication.
Yours in reflection and gratitude,
B. Swollocks
-
fluffyhamster
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
- Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again
I've come to the conclusion Betty (or should that be Sw...y B...s) that you're simply an itch that's best not scratched. I'm glad however that you've enjoyed yourself, and who knows, you might even find yourself a new playmate here...I myself however won't be bothering continuing to respond to you, unless of course you add anything of genuine interest or value (which seems unlikely).
-
Betty Swollocks
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:22 pm
Oh come on Fluffy, admit that you have enjoyed this little "scratching" as much as I have...I'm only spinning your wheel! Don't leave me (you are the only person who has tried to help me, apart from the mysterious and pragmatic, Heath)
I am only a newcomer and I admit to knowing very little about linguistics, you should be gentle with me. I just want to know how I can apply it to my teaching. I DO appreciate your replies!
I am only a newcomer and I admit to knowing very little about linguistics, you should be gentle with me. I just want to know how I can apply it to my teaching. I DO appreciate your replies!