Conversation classes with 40 students?

[Optimist]

I am teaching in a middle school in China. It is a school which has fewer students than most in each class - only 40 - but I am having extreme difficulty in getting any sort of effective conversation class working. My students are in their early teens and are nice kids. My "non conversation" classes are fine but I feel that converation is where I can contribute most - if I can get it working.

I have tried pairs, small groups, infomation gaps, structured dialogues but in all cases the result has been bedlam (and usually in Chinese). The only effective conversation happens when I deal with one student at a time. In a 40 minute period that's 1 minute per student and the other 39 are probably bored for all but their one minute. An additional problem is that I only have each class once per week. Their other English lessons are taken by Chinese English teachers who work strictly from a textbook where rote repetition is the norm.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

[fluffyhamster]

When you say 'My "non conversation" classes are fine', are these the same classes as 'Their other English lessons' ('taken by Chinese English teachers who work strictly from a textbook where rote repetition is the norm')? I am presuming that they are (it would be unusual if you had more "sole" responsibilities than the conversation class), and that in this "one and the same" non-conversation/taken-led-organized by Chinese teachers class, you simply team-teach/assist/try not to look too bored.

Anyway, perhaps you could try looking at that textbook and seeing if there are any useful examples at all in it; if there are not, you could try adapting the useless or silly examples into more genuinely (DIScontextually-speaking) amusing/strange/ridiculous examples, or if that is still hard work, fusing two sentences to produce the bizarre result.

Examples: Are you coming to the party?
> Are you flying/swimming/jumping/hopping to the party?

(Okay that wasn't so funny perhaps).

Are you coming to the party?
+
What's your dog's name?
= Is your monkey coming to the party?

(Again, not hilarious, but I am thinking off the top of my head here. At least you have a book, and a silly one to start with, from which you can draw and alter examples).

Note that the grammar is still perfect in every case, regardless of the nature of the transformation (testing the rules of humour, rather than those of syntax. Humour is probably something Chomsky should consider introducing into his method - he might even end up with some sentences that would make more sense than many of his "stupid", silly AND BORING, ones ever do).

Note also that you could add things like 'your mother and her pet monkey/elephant/hamster etc', or 'Are you AND your mother coming to the fancy dress party/brothel/orgy/graveyard?!' (Okay, I admit, some of those may be just a little too bizarre or racy for JHS kids once you've quickly explained the meanings by gestures etc. ).

Recombining the previously introduced elements is also an option, as that 'Are you AND your mother...?!' shows. BTW, it's primarily you, and not the students, who thinks up the funny sentences to begin with, but if they want to have a go at making up their own once they can see how you're thinking, you could let them try maybe.

A freer/easier way than sentences would be a word jumble (think, "cut-up substitution tables", where beforehand/before cutting them up , every cell was filled with a word - so that in principle equal numbers of equal-length sentences are made later by students arranging the individual words - and where as many cells as possible i.e. in the "content/open-set" as opposed to the "function/closed-set", were filled with silly, "interesting" words ('interesting' does not need to be 'archaic': banana' is interesting right away. 'The teacher threw the banana/brick/grenade at me').* -See end of post.

Such a sentence building activity would need to have some rules e.g. Begin making "silly sentences". Begin each one with a 'The' card. (Play then passes to the player on the left. They can lay a card down, or pass. This is the "card game variation"). Each sentence should have 7 words in it - that is, try to aim to make five sentences. Call the teacher if you are not sure what card to put down next. You will have five minutes. When 'time' is called, you must stop playing and wait for the teacher to look at your sentences. Groups will be awarded a point for every correct sentence they make. An additional point will be awarded for especially funny sentences.

The game is co-operative in nature, working together to beat the clock and win. You would need to decide if sentences such as 'The teacher threw me at the banana' are correct or not. I doubt it: although the aim is certainly to have fun and not worry too much, 'The teacher threw the banana at me' ultimately makes more sense. So, nil points for 'me at the banana', 2 points for 'the banana at me'.

There may be possibilities either way, given a certain 7 cards, that would be worth exploring and both ultimately not only correct but interesting too. For example, 'The teacher/tiger threw the tiger/teacher at me'. It could even be a lot of fun to act out these different senses to explore/establish their meaning: 'The teacher threw the tiger at me' - Is the teacher a tiger-trainer who wants the tiger to maim the student - teacher points and indicates what needs to be done to the student by the tiger, which is perhaps a cowardly tiger; or was the teacher attacked by a tiger that they then "passed" like a hot potato to the student, also part of the safari group?

Students could even sketch what they think is being conveyed by the rest of their sentences - that is, the ones that you indicated were correct - once you've acted out a few of their first ones and they can see how you're approaching the sentences - as holding and conveying possible meaning(s)).


I could go on, but I won't, lest you shout at me for being stupid and unhelpful to boot. And the length of the post is no indication of the quality of the ideas...I'm just showing you how I run with ideas. This is the sort of typical instance in which I have put in an hour or two thinking, and where I then would, in real life, spend a few hours developing materials, then possibly a few lessons trying to improve the activity before finally scrapping it.

I'd just like to add that, if the non-conversation classes are relatively ordered, orderly affairs, you might consider adopting their approaches (and, in connection to that, their "language", but subtly altered to produce interesting behaviour/resonses/>eventual communication?), at first to the whole class and, if the response is okay, then in terms of worksheets for pair or small groupwork.

(Actually I would be tempted to give them any fun handouts as quickly as possible, in case a long explanation or demo by the teacher and class/nominated students itself turns into a drag for them, despite the potential fun factor. Try to get their attention with that big "shock", then get the handouts distributed and the activity up and running as quickly and efficiently as possible. Some more guidlines along these lines can be found at the link immediately below. The links after that help provide more context).
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/teacher/v ... 0680#10680
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/teacher/v ... php?t=2149 ('Guess the movie' game)
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/teacher/v ... php?t=2122
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/teacher/v ... .php?t=912 (about serious vs. fun)
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/teacher/v ... 1947#11947 (my own suggestions for a "serious" curriculum)

You may have read most if not all of those, but hey, what's wrong with re-reading stuff?

I'm imagining that the students won't mind being silly with the English, rather than being 'serious, oh no not AGAIN' they groan, about something seemingly "interesting" to and vital for only the teacher, which in today's class is called "conversation", 'yuck!'. Perhaps if they are allowed to take it a little less seriously/actually have some fun at first, they will more eagerly get into the habits you were previously trying to simply force them into, after which you surreptitiously and subtly start upping the ratio of more "serious" forms-functions-activities.

How does that sound? I haven't done anything like that explicitly, but this way of thinking (avoidance?!) is a part of my approach in less-than-ideal situations (and which aren't in some way or another!), and I have always had "some" (usually noticeable improvement, at least, given time, patience, humour and above all kindness - humour minus any sarcasm) measure of success (some teachers on Dave's seem to have reported things getting worse as a result of them trying to "get tough" or lay down the law).

Threats (not that you've made any yet, but you might have been tempted to) are a pain in the ass for everybody, especially the teacher, ecause they then have to actually inflict the punishment or lose face. Better to lose face gradually...by resorting to humour!!! Forget self-respect! YEY!


*Hmm, all these slashes also have reminded me that sentence stems, with a silly potential choice heading the gap, might be an "easy" option, and would certainly look a bit more more inviting than the usual "test" items these kinds are probably sick of by now:

The teacher threw the banana/.............../.............. at me.

[woodcutter]

If the problem is "bedlam", then maybe this is essentially a discipline issue, rather than a methodological one?

A safe way to get pair work going is to provide one half of it, ie give them questions to ask each other. (in turn!)I am a huge fan of this because it introduces items into the ensuing answer (or discussion) which the students may not have used before, and it means that there is some input with well-formed English (if you think that's important), and even the laziest students will have plenty to do - there shouldn't be too much silence, or a complete lapse into Chinese.

With a little imagination you can provide interesting questions, just right for the context. (Which I add just in case the only person who ever reads this happens to be a person who feels that we must ask "Are you and your pet hamster coming to the graveyard?" in order to make our classes a hoot! )

[Sally Olsen]

I think you are right track here. Often we think that something doesn't work because the students take what has worked in our own country - Canada in my case - and turn it into bedlam. But we have to consider in what ways they have been taught and are being taught in other classes. You have to teach them to work in pairs as a first step. They may have not done this in Chinese. You have to convince them that this is work and that you are trying to teach them English and this is their opportunity to do that. It may take a visit from some school official or teacher or parent they respect to come and tell them that English is important and they can learn if they spend this time doing it. Don't be too sure that they all know this and it never hurts to have someone who they respect tell them again. Then explain how things work in a classroom in the country you are from and demonstrate with this respected person how to talk in pairs or do the information gap or the dialgoue and he/she can explain what you are trying to teach them and what they might learn. It is important to convince them that some of them might be able to learn this way. Concentrate at first on them doing the pair work well and speaking in English all the time - keep the times short at first so they can do it. Then reward them (it can be a smile) for doing the task. If you concentrate for awhile on teaching them the way to do the tasks and why, especially the why, they will come on board. Don't hestiate to get more people in or the same person back when things break down. They are still learning English when they are arguing in English about having to learn English and when you have established your place and importance, the rest will fall into line.

[fluffyhamster]

Ooh hi again Optimist. I somehow missed that 'My students are in their early teens and are NICE kids' in your post...which implies they aren't opposed to doing any work at all and don't necessarily need things to be made goofy or supa-fun (so 99% of my long post above is probably kinda irrelevant now). That is, it isn't necessarily a discipline/errant naughty students problem is it...

So, the problem probably then is, as Sally has noted, "simply" that the students are not used to pairwork, intensive practise, taking the initiative, the need for inventiveness, dealing with the unexpected etc. You could tell them of the utility of all this directly, as Sally suggests, but if the process of introducing pairwork itself is not gradual it might not work out as well as you anticipate in either the short or the long-term.

I saw a 10-week method years ago in the back of a course or activity/recipe-type book once for introducing classes more used to lecture-style classes to pairwork gradually, but I can't for the life of me remember where exactly! If I can remember I'll obviously post it.

[Glenski]

Here in Japan, we have the same problems. You just have to do the best to control the class from day 1.

As for "bedlam", there is controlled and UNcontrolled bedlam. With my pair activities and surveys and such, I have 45 students chattering, but they are usually DOING the exercise, mostly in English. Ok, so it's not perfect English, but that's because they are STUDENTS. And, if you have 45 kids, that means you have to monitor half of them at a time (22 GROUPS) instead of individuals. Yeah, that may still seem like a lot of work, but it's better than some classes that I've heard of with 70 - 100 students! And, are you wading into the class, taking part in some of the pair work to check on them, add your own answers, point out mistakes? If there us a misunderstanding about directions, you just stop the class and re-explain.

I think you should also consider things from another standpoint. How well do you set up the exercises? The best way is to go from teacher-focused, highly controlled to a few teacher-student elicitations/models, to more complicated pair work. If you just explain a grammar point then throw a pair activity to a group of 45 kids, you should EXPECT bedlam (the uncontrolled type). Warm them up. Get a few talking to you first. Model the activity itself, either with a student or a team teacher or a "ghost" partner, THEN give it to the kids. Ease into things rather than throwing them in the deep end of the pool and hoping they will do the Australian crawl for 200 meters.

Look at what Penny Ur's books have to say.

[Optimist]

Hi
Thanks for the postings. I feel a little less isolated now and have some good ideas to work on. Cheers.