Should I use L1 in my english classes?

[Stephen Jones]

Andrew do a Google search for the morpheme studies. Krashen managed to manufacture a lot of snake oil from them but the basic order seens to hold for most learners of English as a Foreign Language

[Andrew Patterson]

Well, I thought that the information would be best as a simple table. I found this at:
http://www.gsu.edu/~eslnxj/8250/ms.html

Order and Morpheme Example
1. present progress -ing He is sitting down.
2. preposition 'in' The mouse is in the box.
3. preposition 'on' the book is on the table.
4. plural -s the dogs ran aways.
5. past irregular The boy went home.
6. possessive -s The girl's dog is big.
7. uncontratible copula 'be' Are they boys or girls?
8. articles 'a'/'the' He has a book.
9. past regular -ed He jumped the stream.
10. third person singular -s She runs very fast.
11. third person irregular, has/does Does the dog bark?
12. uncontractible auxiliary 'be' Is he running?
13. contractibel copula 'be' That's a spider.
14. contractible auxiliary 'be' They're running very slowly.

Everything else seemed to discuss stuff endlessly without any meaty stuff that I could actually use. Trouble is, this table doesn't ring true to me. Most obvious are the [inconsistant] spelling mistakes in lines 7., 13., and 14. and the fact that articles seem to be half way through. In my experience students find articles very difficult (or is this mearly getting the gist of what they are?)

Most beginner textbooks seem to begin with imperatives to teach the verbs with pictures of nouns, then adjectives to describe them, gradually building up in complexity.

14 pieces of grammar isn't really going to get me far in any case. Anyone got a longer (and more accurate) list?

It should be remembered too that the level of difficulty cannot be perfectly graded because although such things as articles and irregular verbs are more difficult than other pieces of grammar, it is not possible to write much meaningful English without them. (Irregualr verbs are of course the most commonly used verbs. They are irregular precisely because of their familiarity - because they are so commonly used, everyone knows their form.) At lower levels, we mearly need to ensure that they get the basic gist of what is being said before they perfect their understanding.

[Stephen Jones]

The order you give is for L1.

As the page states, there is considerable discussion over the order for L2.

[ricky]

Manolo,
I'm very grateful to have the opportunity to respond to your post. I work in Spain in a private language school as a native English teacher and the subject of my students' English lessons in normal school seems to come up very often. I’m assuming that you are a Spanish teacher of English in a Spanish state school. Forgive me if I’m wrong.

The general view of my students is that the level in state school is very low and the classes therefore very boring for them. They have been attending a private 'academia' for some years and their level is considerably higher than their classmates in school and their spoken ability very good.

I believe the reason they have been able to advance so quickly is simply down to the fact that I have never allowed them to speak L1 in the classroom nor have I used it myself to explain anything. You may ask, of course, how it is possible to explain a complicated grammar point to a ten-year-old without using their mother tongue. The point is, of course that it is very difficult to explain anything complicated to a ten-year-old; you have to use other, more cunning, techniques.

I don't know if you have students in your class that also go to a private school, but I would also like to mention an experience I had that left me completely amazed. A few years ago I attended a Cambridge event, and in a session about the Young Learners exams, attended by both native and Spanish teachers of English, I heard the comment from a secondary school teacher that she absolutely hated it when her students also went to private language schools, because it made her life more difficult. There is something seriously wrong with teachers who do not seem to welcome the progress of their students. I hope there aren't many of them around.

My suggestion, then, is do not overuse L1 in the classroom, especially when explaining language, try to speak as much English as you can and insist when you can on English from your students.

ricky

[Roger]

In principle, I am in favour of using the target language for grammar instruction but I am beginning to understand that mother tongue use may sometimes be helpful
The thing to consider is: do the students have a good grasp of their own language's grammar? If so, then I would assume that using their first language to impart grammar instruction for English might be good at the beginning.
One of the side effects of acquiring a second language is that the learner acquires a deeper understanding of his first tongue.

[revel]

Hey guys and gals!

I read an article about the history of the "English Only" movement in American ESL teaching being linked to political and social values at the time of its birth. Something about teaching all those hispanics English as a prerequisite to becoming real American Citizens. A bit like Rex Harrison asking "Why can't the English teach their children how to speak." I've also read on the use of language to create class structures. Either you speak like the Queen or you're just not up to the grade. "The French don't care what you say as long as you pronounce it properly" (My Fair Lady again!)

Teaching in Spain as well, I understand the need to be somewhat hard on the students in private acadamies. It's true, what they learn in the school is boring. It is true that their parents send them to private schools with the hope that they will, through their contact with native teachers, get past the text book and get on with speaking and understanding. And in my experience, it is also true that non-native teachers in the school system don't care for the native teachers in private schools (they relish in telling the kids that something a native teacher knows is incorrect is simply correct and that's it!)

I agree with the idea that each situation has to be taken in context. I have seen non-Spanish teachers with little communicative talent insist that English Only is the only way, and then have seen their students walk out of the classroom because they simply didn't understand a word being said to them, and were not understood when they voiced their doubts in Spanish.

I like the "wear a different sweater" idea. I use a "No Spanish, No Catalan, No Japanese" traffic prohibition sign when the activity demands a no L1 atmosphere. I think the key is classroom economy and meeting the needs of the particular group. I do use Spanish in all my classes, as a teaching tool, I don't need the practice anymore, but I would not dogmatically refuse to use a dictionary, for example, it's another tool. Just have to make sure you are using the right tool for the right job.

peace,
revel.

[revel]

Hey Andrew

Perhaps you might try to find a copy (I believe these books are now out of print, a pity) of Grant Taylor's Learning American English or Mastering American English. Besides offering a wealth of exercises (without delving too deeply into vocabulary development), the tables of contents offer a "logical and simplified presentation of grammar and structure" (Taylor's preface). I would assume (ass out of you and me) that this presentation is based on Mr Taylor's work and research as well as that of his co-linguists. In any case, though there may not be cognitive relationship between how we learn language and this presentation, I have found it totally appropriate in the ESL classroom. Oh! How many times have I had to explain manipulation of modal verbs (questions, negatives, affirmations) to kids who don't know the seven personal pronouns or how to manipulate "be"! These books make sure that that basic stuff is down pat before getting into complications. Been using them for 20 years with total satisfaction (though at times the ideas are a little dated "Many people wear hats." the book was published in the late '50s)

Hope that info will be useful. If you can't find the books, let us know, I could gradually type up the contents for you here or send you a mail.

peace,
revel.

[woodcutter]

As a learner, it's fine and helpful to hear an amount of L1.

But it is my mission in life to put over the opinion of the waffly-ESL hating method firebrands, of which I am not one, because most teachers think that these monsters do not have a point at all.

When you use L1, it can very quickly get over-used. (I think in my classes, it is either over-used or not used). When the method makes you use only L2, all must struggle hard to adapt to the method. Students in such classes are really making an effort to understand, and communicate in the target language, and they aren't going to criticize the teacher for making them exert themselves, and say the teacher is difficult and boring, as they may in schools with a free atmosphere, where there is some pressure to provide "enfotainment" and show videos as the person next door is doing.

If you use L1, you've got to be strict with it, and let's acknowledge that this is one more of a long list of difficult things to do. May not get done.

[Duncan Powrie]

Hiya guys, this discussion seems to be a case of everyone throwing in their random thoughts (interesting to see where it is leading), so hope nobody minds me butting in with mine!

We can all probably remember being exhorted to use as much L2, and as little L1 as possible during training (especially if we trained in native-speaking countries, to which a multitude of nationalities come to learn English in multilingual classes - it seemed to be assumed that we'd remain in that country to look for work).

And often, what this meant was that the trainers were looking for copious amounts of "classroom English" - clear instructions, directions, questioning, pacing etc in English. It was never made explicit that "maximizing L2" could mean really trying to use target items straight from the start, in imaginative ways that blurred the classroom setting and made it melt away somewhat, until it was like I was just a native speaker and the students my friends, and we were actually speaking much like such people would OUTSIDE the classroom. (But such a view would entail a fair bit of research as to how language was actually used outside the classroom, wouldn't it!)

But if you interpret use of L2 in this way, and seriously try to make interaction resemble whatever speech genre, you will probably end up even now as being viewed as too laid-back a teacher, one who is not sufficiently prepared and who is "confusing" the students. However, I think such an approach could end up clarifying things for, rather than confusing students.

The analogy that I have thought of that might make what I am trying to say most clear is this: imagine the students who come to hear you are avid lovers of classical music. Initially at least, the performances will probably consist of solo pieces (chamber music, encores) performed by the orchestra's leader, the teacher. Now, to not get straight what exactly it is you are going to play - and to break off whenever into "warm-ups" - will make it very difficult for the students to discern the line, and certainly the beauty of the piece you are "playing".

To me, using L2 ALL the time is like punctuating the performance with a lot of bum notes. Some might insist that all English gives students a chance to acquire more, but I think a lot of it will be the repetitive, anti-humanistic and patronizing/condescending kind of classroom English many so-called "communicative" trainers would have us spout ad nauseum, without imagination or real knowledge ever coming to bear.

I think more thought should be given to making the use of the English that matters as communicative and realistic as possible, and that there has to be a way of making it stand out from the refuse-strewn "sea of English" in which many students are expected to sink or swim. Using the student's L1 (when teaching in THEIR countrY especially) for the mundane matters of classroom management would seem one way of putting things into sharper relief.

I suppose I could sum up all of the above by saying we should seek to "maximize the quality of the input" - but that we also need to give very serious thought to how that input is itself input! Surely it would be best if it were left to "speak for itself" as far as possible, which means we need to "fight and cut off the flab" as part of the calorie-"controlled", optimally NUTRITIOUS "diet" we are planning for the students! Runaway analogies ahoy!!

A penny for your tuppences (=thoughts)?