I wish I...(had) had a good textbook!

[Duncan Powrie]

Hi everyone, I'm sure I saw a post about "wishes" somewhere, but I haven't been able to find it using the search function...so, I hope nobody minds me starting this new thread!

I was teaching a 1-2-1 student about wishes (using New Interchange 2 textbook and workbook, plus dictionaries etc) quite a while ago now; we went through the examples in the books and tried to think up "real" ones of our own.

I thought everything was going hunky-Dunky-dory until she came back the following week with some examples she'd done for homework, which included, among several good 'uns, this one:

I wish I moved to Y.

(In case you are in any doubt, she lived (and presumably still lives in X), but obviously was wishing she had moved to Y when she'd had the chance).

I recall making some notes/corrections such as the following on her paper: "You need to use 'Past Perfect" here", and/or "You could use 'lived' but not just 'moved' by itself here...", and writing out the suggestions in the form of full sentences, but I can't help feel I did a decidedly so-so job of explaining (all I really ultimately did was confuse with more examples). (I should add that I'd left it until near the end of the class to look at what she'd written, and that she joined a group class soon after that, to save money and/or make progress, now that the school felt she was "ready" to - they were the ones who'd "advised" her to take 1-2-1 in the first place, it seems. She didn't have a problem with me, honest! Anyway, I didn't really get a chance to "see how things were going" with her after that).

Was this student just careless/too ambitious (differing ways of looking at a half-full or empty glass), or are the semantics and attendant grammar of the vocabulary just too damn complex to anticipate in textbooks? Personally, I think any textbook really worth its salt should try to go through every possibility (or as many possibilities as possible!) in trying to anticipate learner overgeneralizations of mapping form onto (mistaken) "meaning", and this could well mean needing to put "more complex" forms in with "less complex" if we want to anticipate problems more and avoid having to explain things later (i.e. not anticipating would seem the less efficient option in the long run).

I recall the book had examples along the lines of "I wish I lived in Y" or "I wish I lived in/had a bigger apartment" (notice ONLY "lived"), it's almost like the student was in fact trying to be more "interesting" in going beyond, and not simply just "recycling", the vocabulary of the book, and could sense "moving" was notionally connected to living in Y rather than X, whereas the textbook writers hadn't thought of and anticipated that. Guess this says something about how sketchily vocab and lexicogrammar are treated, like it's up to students to meet "interesting" examples like "I wish I had lived in Roman times" to really understand the difference between "I wish I lived in Y" and "I wish I had moved to Y", even though the book could've and perhaps should've addressed "lived" versus "had moved", and spent more time filling out the contexts in which these sentences would occur, rather than leaving things patchy, hazy and generally too chit-chatty. (Or, if the writer's couldn't be assed to do a good job, maybe they should've skipped "lived" etc. entirely?).

Anyway, important and interesting as it is for students to have the opportunity to make mistakes (even an unimaginably wonderful book wouldn't ever be able to cover everything last thing we'd ever conceivably want to say), that the teacher can work with, that still left me with the problem of needing to explain things to her in language she would understand at her level.

So, how would you explain things to a student like this without totally losing them - or would you not even try? You might, for example, simply say that the contracted auxiliary had > 'd is hardly going to be missed in conversation ...but would this sort of "cop-out" be doing the student a favor?!

[Ed]

Hi Duncan,

First of all, I must say language is so complex we cannot expect a textbook to help all the time.
Next, to your student's example. If you change "I" to another person, say "she", what do you think? Is the sentence acceptable then?

I wish she moved.

Best,

Ed

[Duncan Powrie]

Well, we'd need to be a lot clearer about who this "other person" vs. "I" were (it would seem to totally change the context), so off the top of my head, I would say no, your example sentence is still "unacceptable" (in terms of not only being strange, but also in not being helpful in explaining much to the student). Sorry! NEXT!

Tell me though, Ed, do you WISH textbooks were of more help in the ways I've implied they could be (even if that would make them appreciably bigger, more ambitious and obviously more expensive and time-consuming!)? Or do you prefer "teaching" short and sweet courses?! I mean, the notional area I was talking about is only one small, manageable and seemingly eminently "imaginable" piece of the overall puzzle...so why should it be left to a student to haphazardly (and purely by chance) "cover the bases"?

Actually, those questions are a bit silly, really, because it's the students who will ultimately decide just how much time and money they can afford to invest in learning English, and they seem to have less and less of both nowadays...but here's a thought: if textbook writers got ambitious, and I mean really ambitious, don't you think the students would be running, not just coming, back for more? I also like to imagine we would be having a much more interesting and fun time of it as teachers, too...

[revel]

Hey all!

If "they" are going to write and publish and sell textbooks like "they" have been doing for the past twenty or so years, I think I would rather they spend their money on something else.

Haven't more than five minutes, so will be short and sweet, maybe explaining tomorrow morning as the coffee makes its way through my body.

I don't think new textbooks are necessary. Rather, I would write a comprehensive teacher's guide and provide the students with the supplimentary material that they will need to participate in the class activity. The teacher would choose from hundreds of activities those that will be most appropriate for the class and the class would have a type of "workbook" with the pictures, charts, exercises etc. that they will need.

That's what I think, anyway!

peace,
revel.

[Ed]

I was in a hurry, Duncan. That is why I did not make myself clear.

As native speakers, we will normally encounter aspects of our language we cannot explain and we'll rely only on our intuitions to decide whether a certain sentence is acceptable or not. That is why I believe that before we can help a student, we need to analyze the language we are teaching. "Playing" with sentences and finding counterexamples, a method we used in our linguistics courses, proved to be very helpful when looking for correct descriptions and explanations. Therefore, I was trying to see why your student's example did not work. My answer was not intended as an explanation to give to your student...yet.
You did not accept the second sentence either, and since other cases with "lived" or "had" are fine, I guess the problem lies in the choice of verb. Can it be that wishes about the present only refer to present "states"?
Allow me to continue. What do you think of the following sentences?

(a) I wish I would move.
(b) I wish she would move.

As for textbooks, I agree with Revel.

Ed

[Duncan Powrie]

Obviously, Ed, wishes don't just have to be about things we or others didn't do (but wish HAD), they can also be about e.g. things others haven't yet done (but we wish WOULD); the whole area is thus very complex regarding the choices to be made in the first (finite), and subsequent (non-finite) verbs in the verb phrase (and, indeed, possible choices in the object slot), and I wouldn't expect learners to have the intuition of native speakers in this regard...which would seem to be an even greater reason for shaking up textbooks and getting the input into shape!

By the way, I am not quite sure where your examples and "discussion" is leading, but I will (try to! ) follow it with interest... Perhaps if you gave it to us in one go I for one would be better able to appreciate it!

Anyway, let's not get too distracted (if you don't mind me saying) from what I presumed were the important constants that were on show before you came along and set up your "bunko booth" (Roll up roll up, find yourself the Queen of Hearts!) : people talking about themselves, their own wishes, regarding either present (the book's focus) or, it necessarily seems (to avoid extending "simple" forms onto more "complex" meanings), past "unfulfillable" circumstances (of course there will be more contexts, meanings and forms as we think and come to further realizations). I am just trying to keep things functional is all...

Giving students only four or five verbs to work with is bad enough, but leaving potentially notionally-related but more complex meaning-forms until whenever-never-never land doesn't seem to me to be exhibiting much thoroughness at all. I was trying to make the point that for even a basic structure like "I wish + simple past verb", textbook writers don't seem to have gone through a list of verbs even once forging links between e.g. "lived" and "(had) moved" (if you agree and can see that there is a link), or even have thought that students could extend the form inappropriately in trying to express themselves using (potentially, to them) any number of the other verbs they might look up in their dictionaries (where there is never enough information, even though dictionaries, just by a simple comparison of their thickness relative to thin, flimsy, and as revel implies, "padded-out" textbooks, must have more to tell us than such textbooks).

I don't own any books from the New Interchange series, and can't remember the exact sequencing in them, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if "wish+had moved" doesn't get a look in wherever the writers felt it appropriate to deal with past perfect and/or "wish" in its more complex manifestations (if indeed they do deal with its more complex ones). (There are support pages for teachers on CUP's website, but I can't be arsed to look ).

My apologies if I have confused things by asking almost two questions in one (one, about textbooks, and one about how to explain the point in question), but to me the two issues are related, and I don't appreciate having to explain things just because the textbooks don't do a better job.

[Duncan Powrie]

Incidentally, I said in my original post that more complex forms might need to be taught at the same time as less complex, but that might not seem a good idea to some if not many of you (and the notional links I waffled on about are tenuous at best).

What I should rather say is that, if the verbs that can appear in "wish+past simple" and/or "wish+past perfect" (to name just two possible structures) are fully investigated, accounted for and properly sorted, then concerns over grammatical sequencing can assume much less urgency, because the grammar will be being taken care of to a much greater degree alongside with the vocabulary (constituting, in effect, the "lexicogrammar" we have been hearing so much about in recent years). The only thing we would then need to think about is how far apart we should place our "easier" and "harder" items.

[revel]

Good morning all.

Anyone remember the first line of this one?:

If.....were....we'd.....(all take a ride?)
If wishes were fishes we'd all have some fried.

The only thing that comes to mind is "horses" in the second space, but what rhyms with "horses"?

Naturally, in my teachers' guide to ESL class, in Appendix III, there would be just that list that Duncan asks for, in nice, clear, alphabetical order with the word wish printed like that at the header. There would be a reference number to the section on specific practice activities, where the teacher would find at least three different exercises that would be useful for the practice of those combinations. Each explanation would be from a different point of view, for example, one exercise in the style of Grant Taylor's Practicing American English, another that is role play pair work, another that is something students can jot down on the "rules" page of their materials packet.

The teacher would then choose the exercise and practice it, repeat it, vary it, expand on it, improve it, discard it, etc....

So, I guess my "imaginary" book would have at least a section of appendii (is that how it's spelled? ), a section on teaching activities, I suppose a general grammar with simple, direct explanations, an expanded investigation section (with exercises specifically meant to draw out those other examples that may be perfectly useful or may simply be variations that ought to be brought to light--I think you would like this section, Duncan). And other sections. I think the teachers' book would be a one-time publication, useful for all level curriculums that administrators hang over our heads, while the students' workbook would be scaled or graduated over several years of study, without putting numbers on the levels, but rather addressing specific needs (another section on classroom diagnosis and evaluation) with a complete resourse for the teacher to back up the work.

What a dynamic teacher one would have to be to use such a text. It would take a couple of years of active use to get used to the presentation, learn to plan classes, mark objectives, reach goals and actually see students learn in a pleasant manner. Once the book is known, once we can turn to the list of games rapidly and find just which one we needed to prepare, we might just find what each of us teaches best and take advantage of that talent and not wade about too much in murky waters where we are not sure of what we are doing.

Does that make sense to any of you?

peace,
revel.

[Duncan Powrie]

Hey Ed, where'd you go? I was hoping to maybe win some money off you trying to "Find the Queen of Hearts"! Don't tell me you've packed up your booth and left!

Revel, I am off to the shops (have to eat at some point), but I'll be back soon to reply to your post.

[Andrew Patterson]

Before anyone gets too enthusiastic about throwing away textbooks, one advantage that rarely seems to be brought up is that filing is a very disciplined task, most students will file handouts badly. That's not meant to be a dig at students, I'm only saying that the task is too disciplined for most people to do well.

I am not advocating getting rid of handouts, however. Handouts should suppliment a good textbook because they are difficult to file and using current technology impossible to produce cost-effectively in colour. When electronic paper becomes established it'll be another matter.

One handout that I wish I never had to produce is the tapescript. Why do they keep putting them in the teacher's book?

The back of the book is bad enough. Ideally, they should be in a separate booklet in the back of the student book so that they can be read next to the relevent exercise.

[Andrew Patterson]

message deleted

[Lorikeet]

Before anyone gets too enthusiastic about throwing away textbooks, one advantage that rarely seems to be brought up is that filing is a very disciplined task, most students will file handouts badly. That's not meant to be a dig at students, I'm only saying that the task is too disciplined for most people to do well.

I am not advocating getting rid of handouts, however. Handouts should suppliment a good textbook because they are difficult to file and using current technology impossible to produce cost-effectively in colour. When electronic paper becomes established it'll be another matter.

I don't use a book any more. It has its good and bad points. I guess the bad point is that I've spent all summer preparing for next semester and still have only 7 weeks totally completed for one class that will last 17 weeks (but at least I've got pieces done to the end,and the second class is just about done.) On the other hand, I don't have to follow someone else's ideas, I don't have to answer the "but the book says" questions, I can order things my own way, I can change the plan, and I don't have to skip things I don't like and have students ask why.

I don't see why handouts would be difficult to file. A three-hole punch and a binder handle a lot of it. I tell my students they need a binder for my class. It's a cheap class because they don't buy a book, so they can spend for the binder

[Duncan Powrie]

Hi revel, Andrew and Lorikeet, this thread could well be hotting up now as it evolves...

The keywords, if you'll allow me to interpret/translate/summarize what you've all said, seem to be "whopper of a teacher guide/appendices/lists", "(range of differing styles of) practice activities", "componential course" (revel), "supplementary handouts" (Andrew) and "autonomy" (Lorikeet), all of which point clearly to FLEXIBILITY.

Obviously any printed textbook, no matter how good, is going to have to ultimately plot a more or less linear line (although amazing cross-referencing would help increase the range of learning opportunities and options), and not every teacher (or student!) will be able to see or be willing to walk that line through to completion.

I still think, however, that giving up on trying to bring and tie things together in more sophisticated ways than structural syllabuses do is not going to help the students see the woods for the trees - "more" will not be "MORE" unless it is organized in such a way as to be actually likely to bring about the kind of improved, accelerated understanding, development and learning we all dream of for our students.

I ultimately see the way forward as being in (teachers making use of more) "teach yourself" kind of courses that present a lot in direct, no-nonsense ways (with the help of L1) and give the students lots of guidance, direction and SPACE (literally on the paper, or in electronic form) to branch out and expand upon as well as keep revisiting/reorganizing/reformulating things into an ever broader network (study skills I guess we could call it); and such a course would make it very clear what was learnable at home, and what would make more sense to share or work through together and build upon, explore, practise etc in class (under real-time constraints, with "testing" variables introduced etc). It might even be possible one day for all the student notes etc to be uploaded regularly to the teacher - just think of the options that being able to see all that would open up! I'd also like to see CD-ROMs with every concievable extra laid on too so that students could open up menus and plot their own courses within the course - whilst always still being able to click back to a single heading/entry menu entitled simply "course". (If you want to get a better "feel" for and understanding of things, I still think you can't beat poring over a good book, however).

So, at the heart of all this would be a very robust and healthy tree with a stout trunk and clearly discernible limbs and twigs amongst the foliage, that everyone would be poring over and tracing in open-eyed wonder more or less "together" (i.e. the majority of users would come to a similar appreciation of how English works through using the course)....about as far as you can get from the present "three blind men and an elephant plus failed elephant tamer-c*m-three blind men's care worker/babysitter/bingo master etc etc etc" situation as you can imagine (no disrespect intended by the analogies there )!

[revel]

Good morning all. Sun's shining again! Gonna be another scorcher here!

Way back when I was still a little confused about what my vocation might be, I took a class in micro-biology. I had taken prerequisite courses and thought it would be interesting. It was not. The teacher read, seated behind a huge desk on an elevated platform, from a massive tome, experiments and results of the same, while we took notes. These note-taking sessions would last four or five classes, then we would have to reproduce the experiements from our notes. We all found out what the instructor wanted from us one day, when he lifted into the air as if it were the baby Kunta Kinta (or is the Lion King a better, more contemporary image?) one student's notebook and proclaimed that this was the way one should take notes. Naturally, that notebook was impressive and naturally, that student always got the experiments to work the first time he did them, and naturally, note-taking is extremely important in experiemental micro-biology. Though I only got an average grade in that class, though that class rapidly helped me choose another branch of learning in the persuit of my life work, that lesson in note taking stuck.

This past year, our boss implimented a program called "day without photocopies". One day a week, rotating throughout the month, we were not allowed to use the photocopy machine for handouts. Though the purpose was to get lazier teachers to use other resourses in class, it was clear that too many photocopies were being made for classes that already had text books. In my opinion, too many one-use photocopies were being made (newspaper articles, for example, that were read, analysed and then discarded, never taken out again). These handouts would end up stuffed into the course book and forgotten, well, they would only be needed for one class.

My students call me a hippy because I talk about saving trees. One mother got excited and angry because the paper I use for quizes is always used on one side (why can't my daughter have a clean piece of paper for her quizes?!?) My hand-outs are multi-use, we will take that copy out again in the future, we will repeat those exercises, and the student is expected to use the copy in his/her home study. And that's where Andrew's comment on filing comes in.

It is a disciplined task. If I say "Exercise 245, please" I can be sure to have two students with the exercise in front of their noses at once, two who take a moment to find it, and two who have to look at every single piece of paper they have brought in a disorderly fashion until they find that exercise. More recent exercises show up more rapidly, but if the exercise is older, some don't even find it. Soooo....

At some point or another, with the kids it's early on, my students need to get it into their heads that English is a structured language and that structuring their notes correctly from class they can help themselves get a handle on the structure of English. For adults, for example, we give them a ringed binder with dividers, each marked with a linguistic title, where all handouts can be conveniently filed. So much of the work will have already been organized for the student, I think the careful care of a student's own notes is an important part of study. If they don't know how or why they should organize their notes, they probably don't ever come to class with a working pen either. Study is not a matter of absorbing material like sponges, it's more an exposure to material and then the repeated exposure of that same material. A text book makes you think you have to keep moving on to the next chapter, unit, grammar point. Often one moves on without having had enough exposure to previous material. A handout is like a special exercise that helps to practice a special point and that can be used again and again to consolidate that point.

Funny, I'm defending handouts, when my wonderful teachers' guide doesn't use them, since the learners have a study book with the materials already printed up for them to use. My mother studied and became a literate person, using slate and chalk in the classroom. She walked miles in waste deep snow to get to the little one-room school house, with a hot potato in her pocket so her fingers would not freeze. She never saw a ditto or a photocopy during her twelve years in school. And trees lived longer lives back in the first half of the 20th century....

peace,
revel.

[woodcutter]

Dear All,
I am not that fond of comprehensive textbooks, from a teaching point of view. A nice mix of book information and real life human being information gives the class a bit of variety. As people have said, handouts can fill the gaping gaps that a book may have as a piece of reference material, though it's nice to have some time off from work now and again, don't you think? New interchange is unpopular among the staff here by the way, for me this is a book which is very difficult for the teacher to bend to their own designs, because it is full of difficult, colloquial conversations which are not worth going into.
For the student, a comprehensive textbook is helpful for self-study. If only more people would do enough of that. Then it would all be so easy.