Kuma Chapter 13 and Anthology Chapter 3

Kuma Chapter 13: Monitoring Teaching Acts

We must help teachers be flexible with the ability to create their own theories for the situations they will encounter while teaching. We cannot teach them how to deal with all the situations they encounter. Instead we must teach them to become autonomous in that they can adapt to what they may find in the classroom.

Self-observation and analysis is very important in teaching and can help teachers become more efficient in their classrooms if it is done with as much of a lack of bias as possible.

Product-oriented models have their merit in teacher observation in that the teacher receives input and guidance from an outside source who is able to observe them as they teach and work with students. When an observation comes from a supervisor or teacher with more experience, the teacher being observed is able to consider what they can improve upon and what may help them teach more efficiently. I would find this kind of feedback particularly useful in my own teaching, especially as a new teacher. In my own teachings I’d like to be abroad and having the guidance of a teacher who has been a part of the culture longer than I have will help me adjust and work with the students in their comfort zone instead of only sticking to my own roots in teaching theory. With this in mind I think this model will be very useful for me.

The process-oriented model also has its merit in that it considers the inner workings of the teacher and students and how they process the teaching and learning their classroom. As Kuma notes, it is rather cumbersome and seems to mostly benefit “researchers, supervisors, and teacher educators” (288). I know it would be beneficial for my teaching to be able to analyze my own teaching processes while also receiving feedback from my students but I think that these models need to be combined, like Kuma does with his M & M model so that I can have all three points of observation to help me improve my teaching.

Kumas presentation of the M & M observational scheme seems to take data from both the product-oriented model and the process-oriented model and combines them to give the teacher a rounded out way to analyze their teaching. I especially find the videotaping of your teaching to be helpful. I think that watching yourself teach is much different from being in a teaching situation because you are able to go back and observe your processes and how the students reacted to said processes. As far as step 7 is concerned, when the observer and teacher meet with students to discuss their view of the teaching, I think this can be a good idea but with students, depending on the grade level, this could become very difficult. Students may not have the ability to describe processes or they may have no interest in the subject matter being taught. They may feel pressured to say something ‘nice’ in front of the teacher. I feel that in the case of students, anonymous questionnaires may be a better route because there is less pressure to be ‘nice’ or ‘polite’. There is no fear of bias towards grades when the teacher doesn’t know who said what in evaluations. The issue with anonymous evaluations becomes that many students don’t take them seriously. So it is a difficult thing to reconcile.

Anthology Chapter 3

Lesson planning is definitely an important part of the teaching process and I know it will play a key role in my own teachings because I want to teach abroad. The daily planning will become crucial with my students and how I teach because I am working with a new culture (for me anyway) and I know that lessons may take longer or shorter than I originally plan. That being said, planning is important but there are many things we cannot count on, thus we must have a flexible attitude towards our planning and lessons so we can adapt to our students learning processes.

Kuma 11 and Leki

Chapter 11: Ensuring Social Relevance

Standard variety is prestigious because of social, political, and economic factors.

Recognition of varieties of English is essential in the ESL classroom to help students.

It is interesting to me that the book talks about two situations, one in Britain and one in Sri Lanka, where the use of the L1 seems to be fairly heavy. I suppose it depends on the level of the learner but I think it would be fairly difficult to use the learners native tongue if you, as a teacher, don't know it or are not familiar with it. I liked the idea of a bilingual aid but that can become expensive for the school to pay another person to help in the classroom. I feel this could become difficult in terms of getting the school to hire a bilingual aid. They may say that you shouldn't be using students' L1 and that doesn't not include taking into account the different languages of students. This is especially true in Britain and the U.S. because you are dealing with a classroom which may have many different native languages present. It presents an interesting problem. Though I still believe that acknowledgement and use of the L1 can be extremely helpful when learning your L2.

Leki

Lekis' article makes an interesting point because we, as teachers, may believe that we are not included in those who look upon the ESL student as their ESOL representation but, as Leki states, “that would be missing the point.” I find myself in that boat as well. I don't think I would look upon students according to their representation in society and the media but, even if I think I don't, how do I address those issues in the classroom? There is always some kind of underlying bias due to our own social conditioning and this is also true for students in the classroom. Being in an open dialogue about this topic could become difficult if we are convinced that we do not hold these views about the ESOL student. It is an interesting dilemma, one that I'm not sure how to solve or work on.

Chapter 5 + 7 Kuma

Chapter 5: Facilitating Negotiated Interaction

Interaction with target language is key.

Types of interactional activity:
    •    Textual Activity makes use of Krashens Monitor Model and i + 1 as a means of teaching students. The best way for them to learn their L2 is to receive comprehensible input.

I think that students can learn how to understand and speak a language (at a young age) just by listening and interacting with the language in that way but they will not be able to write or read the language with any sort of proficiency and that can be very detrimental to the students’ academic career. Because there is no active participation by the learner there seems to be a lack of learner autonomy in this kind of activity.

    •    Interpersonal Activity includes specific types of interaction in which the negotiation of meaning is involved (Prevent or repair communication breakdowns).

Being able to converse with native speakers and being able to adjust your own speaking can be extremely helpful in learning a L2. This kind of interaction allows the learner to take some control of their learning, instead of just being spoken at. There may be more use of mental facilities and a focus on correct grammar when speaking to become comprehensible. The learner may be able to notice further their own mistakes when they are corrected by those with a higher proficiency.

Comprehensible output is actually, in my opinion, a very important piece to learning a language. In my own language learning for Spanish the best ways that I’ve learned and gained further fluency is to 1) hear the language spoken to me by native speakers and 2) to be able to respond and sound out my own output of the language. With this kind of method I find that I learn from the native speaker and their use of grammar and I also learn from my own mistakes as I speak and correct as I go along in the conversation. So I consider output to be a key part of learning an L2.

    •    Ideational Activity pits ZPD (Zone of Proximal Development) against i + 1 and how one follows a meaningful interaction model while the other merely suggests input at the learners’ level and one step higher with no emphasis on interaction.
This method is focused on interaction and the learner but it also takes into account sociocultural factors and the effect they have on L2 development.

Chapter 7: Fostering Language Awareness

Language Awareness Movements:
    •    The British Movement: 1975 report of the Bullock Committee to go into “the teaching to reading and other uses of English” Promotion of linguistic tolerance began and a few educational reform proposals began. A new desire arose to create curiosity in students concerning language and its uses in everyday life and how it changes our lives.

    •    The American Movement: The Whole Language Movement  ~1975. This is the introduction of language into all aspects of classwork and disciplines. It looks to enrich the experience of the students with language. A new recognition of diverse linguistic resources that learners bring to class.

This idea of using language and acknowledging language in all aspects of the curriculum, in math classes and whatnot, reminds me of changes made to curriculum that require the use of math across the curriculum which was implemented when I was in junior high and high school. It seems to be used as a way to create more linguistic awareness, just like the use of math in all courses was used to improve the math scores/knowledge for students.

Language Awareness of Language Teachers
In my 241 English class this semester we have talked quite extensively about the issues of teaching and how problematic it can be when teachers themselves do not understand the language they are teaching which is why knowing the languages’ history is so important. Teachers must have language awareness so that we are not leaving our students with answers like the one on page 161. Having no answer at all, or saying something happens just because it does, can cause serious confusion for students who are trying to learn English as their L2.

Section 7: Chapter 13, 14, & 15

7 bad reasons - these reasons are justified as bad reasons to teach grammar. Most of them seem to fall under the category of ease for the teacher.

2 good reasons - these are both very important reasons to understand grammar to some degree. I think comprehensibility is number 1 though because grammar helps students make sense of what they are hearing while also have the ability to help others understand what they are trying to say. It also helps with reading and writing ability which are essential in the adult world of jobs and academia.

Grammar-focused teaching making way for Task-focused instruction - I find a few things here that I disagree with, though the author of the article may do so as well. It seems to met that the ideal is placed on the Communicative Language Teaching approach with positives ranging from speaking fluency to use of implicit knowledge to vernacular speech style; yet there can be no communicative teaching without some basis in grammar and vocabulary. As student cannot merely speak the language without some background knowledge and this means that early classes for ESL students just starting to learn English need to consider their needs as well. They have reason to learn, for the vast majority of the class, grammar and vocabulary so that they can move on to communicative situations. Until they have that base of knowledge they won't be able to communicate in the first place.

This is noted later in the article as they take a second look at task based learning. The students are unable to fully communicate without the grammatical knowledge nor can they speak well without knowledge of the vocabulary they need to describe the situation.

Now, the article calls for addressing accuracy prior to the task, which can be helpful, but this is in the context of teaching grammar that may be used in the task and teaching before the task is completed. I'm still not sure I agree with this methodology because, though it gives the students a key as to the grammatically correct answer, it does not help them retain this information. I view grammar as something that needs to be practiced, more than once, more than just before the task. It's very similar to studying for a test, at least, it is for me.

When I'm studying for a test, many times. I will prepare for the test, memorize the information temporarily, go to the test, do well on the test, and then promptly forget most of what I had 'memorized' for the test because there is no reason to hold onto that information. Now I realize this makes me a bad student in some ways and I don't do it all the time but it happens and I could see a lot of students using this method when not being given explicit grammar instruction.

That does not mean I'm against communicative language teaching because I actually find it to be quite useful, for more intermediate to advanced learners.

Anyway, that is where I shall rest for this blog post.

Kuma 6

The educational goal is to create autonomous individuals who are willing and able to think independently and act responsibly (p.131).
Learner autonomy has a strong connection with learner motivation.
Related terms: self-instruction, self-direction, self-access learning, and individualized instruction.

Self-instruction is difficult to come by in any classroom situation because learners don’t always know what they want or need to learn thus the teacher takes the lead. There is some self-instruction in research projects in which the student must present what he/she learns to the class but it seems rather difficult, in many classroom situations to follow a self-instruction model entirely.

Narrow view: learn to learn
    -equipping learners with tools necessary to learn on their own.
    -training them to use appropriate strategies for attaining their learning goals.
    -Processes: planning, monitoring, problem solving, and evaluating.

These methods can be effective but I feel L2 learners must have a higher proficiency in order to understand how to use these strategies because they will have to understand the vocabulary and concepts of the strategies in order to utilize them. This can pose a problem for first time learners of an L2, or early learners, who are still working on the basics of the language. This can also pose a problem for teachers who may not speak the languages of all their students in their class and thus cannot necessarily give the students these strategies in their L1. Is there a way to teach these early students these strategies without confusing them in their learning of the L2?

    -Allows learners the choice to be autonomous or not.
    -Academic autonomy.
    -Critics: can create successful language learners but not truly autonomous individuals.

Broad view: learn to liberate
    -Learning a language as a means to an end, learning to liberate.
    -Liberatory autonomy.
    -Empowers learners to become critical thinkers in order to realize their human potential (141).
    -Allowing the learner a way to connect with social, political, and cultural aspects of L2 learning and  its consequences.

Liberatory autonomy makes for an interesting idea if we do not consider the administrative policies in place in the classroom/teaching environment. Talking about and using social, political, and cultural aspects of L2 learning in the classroom can be an extreme challenge for teachers to navigate with all the red tape of what must be learned in the given amount of time and what teachers can and cannot do in their classrooms. This does not mean that we, as teachers, should give up addressing these topics and ideas but it does mean that helping students form their own liberated, autonomous identity can become an extremely difficult task which may not happen in the time allotted.

(Reflection 6.4) I see these autonomies as a continuum, not as opposites or as separate things. I believe each can be used in the classroom setting at any given time depending on the task at hand and what the teacher (or students) feel best fits the situation. I think that, even day to day, the classroom can go from academic autonomy to liberatory autonomy and anywhere in between.

Learner autonomy is double sided and must be a joint effort between teachers and students in which the teacher must decide how much they are willing to let go and how much students are willing to take hold of their learning. In many classrooms teachers may find no desire in the students to take hold of their own learning whereas in others there may be an overwhelming desire from learners to be autonomous or, at least, have a willingness to become autonomous.

October 11th Post

Chapter 18 (Anthology)

This chapter is a basic discussion on what adult ESL learners need to become proficient in a second language. The article discussed quite a range of points but each one seemed fairly similar to things we've discussed before, though maybe for younger students. As important as it is to review these things I think that this chapter is repetitive in that it doesn't give me information I didn't already know.

We, as TESOL students are aware of the complexities of learning a second language and (many of us having been learning our L2's as well) we are aware of the difficulties of speaking a L2. This chapter basically sums up what a teacher for adult ESL classes can do in order to make the learning process smoother for the learner and help them learn in a systematic and efficient way.

Chapter 20 (Anthology)

I don't like the idea of using an entirely structured format in any discussion activity because the students have no way insert there own opinions into something of that nature. They cannot, as learners, bring their own knowledge into the topic because of the structure. I think this also takes away, extremely so, from student creativity. So, though it may be viable, I find it to be ridgid.

This chapter, article, makes a great point that this guided approach (as I said before) may be viable but the article shows us a more student centered, yet controlled, environment in which the students have a say and a voice and an opinion.

I suppose the charts (on pages 228 and 229) to keep track of the discussion and help it move along could be useful but I feel they should not be taken too seriously because, if a teacher should only be focused on charts and the questions they should ask, they may miss important learning opportunities for their students throughout the discussion.

Also, a teacher may find natural breaks in the discussion and the questions in Figure 2 are fairly self explanatory so I don't believe they need to be followed to the 't'. They just need to be ready to be used by the teacher in the discussion as the need arises.

Anthology Chapters 30, 31, and 32; Ferris article

Starting with Ferris's article on the Myth of Error Correction for ESL students I have to say I fully agree with Ferris in that an ESL student cannot be expected to have 100% accurate and error-free papers. I would be very impressed if any student, native speakers included, could procure a completely error free paper on the first few tries. I find this kind of a standard to be ridiculous as I know even I struggle to produce error free writing. It is human to err and applies to all groups, ESL and not. Thus Ferris brings up valid points in giving students the chance to self-edit and really work with their own writing, with the teachers guidance, to be able to better edit their papers. I think this is an important strategy in helping students recognize their own errors.

At the same time I find that working individually with students, not just in writing but in all classes, can become a very difficult task because of the overcrowding of schools and lack of funding to hire more ESL teachers. Individual work with the students can become impossible in some situations which can be detrimental for the students when they don't receive the feedback they need. I see this as an opportunity to come up with a strategy for just such cases. How can a teacher reach their students if they are teaching large classes of ESL learners? Or how can they reach ESL learners in large classes of native speakers in those school who do not have extensive ESL programs?

I think these are two very important questions to consider with this kind of instruction for writing.

As far as the Anthology chapters were concerned I felt they were very straight forward on how to teach ESL students different skills for academic language and academic learning they will have to partake in for their day to day classes. The chapters brought up important steps on how to work with the students to help them obtain theses skills.

Finally, I need to note here what kind of a project I will be partaking in for the semester. I will be writing a research paper on CLT and how this method needs to be changed in terms of how teachers use it, or when they choose to use it.

Making Content Comprehensible (SIOP)

The article, as a chapter from a book on ELL learners, had a lot to say on a new method they call SIOP (Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol). The layout of what they want to do to create greater learning environments for ELL's is an admirable one but, as they point out in their chapter, it is a difficult to make happen because so many teachers, whether a part of ESL or not, are not qualified to teach in this manner, or have not learned how to teach in this manner.

I suppose this explains then why we are learning these methods now, seeing as they are important to our future roles as teachers but there is another issue that was brought up which I see as the biggest obstacle in implementing any kind of method for helping ELL students. This obstacle is comprised of two things, overcrowding and underfunding of school programs for ESL students. This problem moves beyond what any teacher can do and moves to a state and federal level of how we fund the education in this country and how budget cuts and lack of funding can create lackluster or non existent programs for ESL students.This obstacle goes beyond what we can do as teachers and hands over the fate of these students to the politicians (which is a whole other issue entirely).

So although I find their method admirable, I see it as difficult to implement, not only with educating teachers on this method but also with the way our school systems are set up concerning funding and overcrowding.

Then there is the Anthology chapter, which I don't really have much to say on. It outlined the idea of project based learning, which I think can be useful in any classroom and can definitely be implemented in content based learning approaches. It is a good idea to be used sparingly depending on the class level and the students in the classroom.

peace & grace,
Kiersten

Bax and Hu

Bax-
Just as a recap on what Bax sees many teachers doing in the field:
1 Assume and insist that CLT is the whole and complete solution to language learning;
2 Assume that no other method could be any good;
3 Ignore people’s own views of who they are and what they want;
4 Neglect and ignore all aspects of the local context as being irrelevant.

I feel this is a bit harsh as far as CLT because it creates another generalization about teachers of CLT and the way they view other methods. This issue does have some truth to it for some teachers, as shown in the examples but he is generalizing just the way CLT might in saying that a large group of teachers do this with CLT.

“The Communicative Approach is the way to do it, no matter where you are, no matter what the context.”  (281) – this quote is taken from what he feels the CLT message is but I'm not sure I agree, though I have a strong opinion on the contextual importance of teaching, which I feel many teachers are aware of. I don't really agree with him because he is proposing a new method or approach that could be better implicated when teachers are learning to be teachers (have them learn all methods and then explain to them that it is important to consider the context they are teaching in before choosing any one method.)

*Bax seems to be entirely biased against CLT in a way that makes it look like the villain. This may be recent but in our classes we have given consideration to all methods, showing that each has there merit in the classroom in certain ways and this includes CLT. The entire article feels more like a very strong opinion and also seems overly favorable towards the context approach which is exactly what he argues against concerning CLT.

*This may have a valuable point concerning short training courses when there is not time to teach all methods and discuss them. In these cases CLT may be over emphasized no matter what the context thus leaving teachers fairly unable to teach to context without learning through trial and error.

*Then goes on to claim that he is not saying that context approach is entirely new and is backtracking to say that many good teachers and writers already use it. These statements seem fairly hypocritical of previous statements that many teachers are CLT based only. Seems like a minority to me as far as teachers who are so CLT based they cannot fathom using anything else.

*Goes on to note that context is still secondary and that he holds to the opinion that it needs to become the first thought before any methodology is chosen – an opinion which I agree with to an extent. I still feel that he fairly overzealous about this.

Thus his argument:  (285)
a we are in the middle of a shift towards an emphasis on context in language teaching;
b this is an important step in the move to more effective teaching;
c this will only be fully effective if the CLT paradigm is broken down; and therefore
d the profession should adopt a Context Approach, or equivalent, for the sake of teachers, and ultimately of learners throughout the world.

*Sketching Out a Context Approach – why does it need to be an approach? I feel this could be taught in ‘tesol’ classrooms for Teachers as a general rule of thumb concerning all teachings and work just as well as creating an entirely new method just to cope with a few ignorant or CLT based fanatics. It has some merit but I feel that it takes the issues of CLT too far and uplifts contextual approach as the god send answer.

Hu-
*Asks for an understanding of sociocultural differences and how this affects learning in the classroom (China specifically). Concerning CLT and why it doesn’t work with the classroom culture in China.

*Previous method was a cross of Grammar-Translation and Audiolingualism – yet did not create communicative competence for millions of Chinese learners of English.

“By the term 'Chinese culture of learning' is meant a whole set of expectations, attitudes, beliefs, values, perceptions, preferences, experiences, and behaviors that are characteristic of Chinese society with regard to teaching and learning.” (96)

*Similar to Bax article in saying that CLT is not for everyone except Hu uses a specific culture and examples as to why it doesn’t work based on Chinese culture and values.

I see Hu's article almost like an extension of Bax's article, giving a specific example as to why CLT doesn't work in all contexts, which I (overall) agree with. What I struggle with is creating an entirely 'new approach' (or not so new) just to show teachers that they should consider context when teaching with any given method. I feel that this kind of thing should be basic knowledge and should be taught in teacher classrooms as a rule of thumb making the need for an approach unnecessary since I consider this common knowledge for teachers (at least it should be)

Communicative Language Teaching

This is going to be fairly repetitive but this article sums up what we've been talking about for the past week or two so it seems fairly basic to me. It creates a classroom experience in which CLT is used successfully in most situations. It answers some basic questions about how CLT helps the students as far as accuracy and fluency are concerned.

I see CLT as a useful method to take into consideration but I also think that it has it's limits, as with every method we've studied. It may work in an American classroom with our culture and norms, or with students who have lived here for some time, but I think there are a lot of students from around the world who come from different backgrounds and social rules that would find this uncomfortable and unlearnable as far as a method. This could be because of the construction of their own educational systems but it is important to note that this method is quite like the others in that it will work for some and not work for others.

Though it may be difficult, we as teachers have to also consider our environment and how our students learn best. Thus teaching abroad may be a bit more of complicated matter (and the reason I bring this up is because that is what I want to do) and should be treated as such when coming from a culture such as ours. There is a need to get to know and learn about the culture before we assume we can use our own methods and gain the same results we may have in the United States.

That's what this article made me think of.

peace & grace.

Pennycook

To start Pennycook describes the critical approaches to tesol and the questions that go along with that. According to Pennycook there are 3:

1.the domain or area of interest. to what extent do particular domains define a critical approach?
2.a transformative pedagogy. how does the particular approach to education hope to change things?
3.a self-reflexive stance on critical theory. to what extent does the work constantly question common assumptions, including it's own?

In this particular article there is a lot of discussion on how to connect the classroom, students, and teachers to the outside world; to social, political, and racial issues which also include sexuality and ethnicity. This is what Pennycook calls critical domain.

Penneycook notes that it not only has to do with political and social aspects but how these aspects affect power relations in the life of the teachers, students, parents, and community. All these factors play a role in how a student learns in the classroom.

A quote that stood out to me is as follows:
"It is not enough to connect TESOL to the world - it must connect to struggles of power, inequality, discrimination, resistance, and struggle." (5)


Generally I think these ideas of connecting, not only to the students, but to the power struggles they endure everyday, has been discussed many times in our TESOL classes and in the articles we've read, what Pennycook brought up which came across as somewhat new to me, is the idea of violence towards 'otherness' and how this violence affects the learning environment. We see, everyday, in the media and on the streets the outcome of hatred towards 'otherness' and how it affects the world but, as a future teacher, I had yet to consider how such factors, how such violence and struggle in the world, may change the way a classroom environment is created and used. Students may find themselves uncomfortable or afraid to speak out due to outside sources of what they see and hear everyday which changes the way they learn in the class, if they are able to learn at all.


This plays into the idea of English and how the language itself is a global power and can have a profoundly negative affect on how students view their own native language on top of how they may learn English in the classroom and how they use it in a public context. All of these issues have a profound affect on the students ability to learn and our own theories on teaching and teaching methods cannot always accommodate such a wide diversity in a classroom.

This leaves us with the question, once again nagging, is there a point to finding a 'one method fits all' ideal when there is such diversity that it may not be possible?

Either way there is an importance to our theorizing TESOL because it can open our eyes to new issues which come up in the world outside of the classroom, giving us a chance, as teachers, to address them with our students in the best method possible for each class or each student.

peace & grace

Kuma Chapters 1 + 2

Kuma's first chapter, I think, was important in learning about the different ways we categorize ourselves as teachers and how that plays a role in our teaching ability. It's interesting to look how theory differs from practice and how we, as teachers, come to recognize this in our own teaching. What I focused on further was the Table 1.1, which was a chart summarizing the different roles of a teacher and comparing their different approaches to decide which may be better as far as what's needed in the classroom. The outcome is fairly obvious but I still think this chart holds valuable information on what is important in teaching and how each role is used when teaching.
The second chapter for Kuma discussed the transition to post method pedagogy, which goes back to the article we read about a week ago which Kuma also wrote about the three transitions concerning this idea. What Kuma delves into here is the ways in which we can create a post method pedagogy that will benefit students and teachers in the classroom. Kuma gives us a valuable tool to start creating a more rounded and useful way of teaching which will further help a more diverse group of students and teachers.

Kuma and Murcia

Alright, let's just start with the first article I read, the Celce-Murcia article, which was an overview of methods and how each method compares, or is in reaction to, previous method.

The first thing that caught my eye was on page 3 of the article where they discuss the differences between approach, method, and technique. I thought this was important because all three sound so similar and to define each gives us a better understanding of how each idea works within teaching. That was fairly confusing for me at the beginning, differentiating between the three and a working definition which separates the three is definitely helpful.


I also thought it was helpful that the authors summarized their ideas about choosing methodology by creating three rules by which to choose and use a method. Their rules were based off of valid criteria, such as classroom size, student diversity in learning, time constraint, etc. Though these 'rules' may not help in all cases, they bring up an important guideline for those who may be searching for a good method for their teaching.


And finally, on a more random note, I liked the quote they placed at the end, on page 8:
Adapt; don't adopt -Clifford Prator
I feel it holds a certain significance in how we should teach and how sometimes in teaching, or many times, we have to learn to think on our feet and adapt to the situations we find in the classroom where methodology won't give us all the answers. This idea of adapting, and knowing how to adapt, is important than for teaching because adopting a method won't always be the answer while teaching.

Second article I'll briefly touch on is the article by Kuma. The article mainly discussed three transitions which teaching has undergone:

    1. communicative language teaching to task based language teaching
    2. method based pedagogy to post method pedagogy
    3. systemic discovery to critical discourse




The article made it clear that the advances made in the study of teaching and method has transitioned us to change the way we feel about using any one method at all. Instead Kuma sees the method changing into Task Based learning, which in many instances covers a multitude of methods, giving the classroom and teacher a more rounded way of teaching.

I see this as important as an observation because it means we, as teachers, no longer have to confine ourselves to choosing one method over another, and instead we can teach to students of many backgrounds and learning proficiencies. (Not that we couldn't do this before, this article merely shows a more broad acceptance of this kind of teaching).

Not Sure What to Say

This particular book, our reading chapter 1 and 2, will not be happening for me since I have yet to receive my book. I will post on those chapters when I receive the book. Sorry guys.

peace & grace,
Kiersten

Who Speaks English Today?

This particular article talked a lot about different models that were used to portray the spread of English and how each model worked well or didn't work well in that goal. I'm sure there have been discussions of the spread of English in my TESOL classes before but this article struck me as particularly in depth on the subject, going so far as to point out discrepancies with each model and how those models were subsequently changed to try and better them. I don't believe that there can ever be a perfect model on the spread of English because there are so many components to that kind of history. As the article mentions, the spread of English can be geographical, economical, cultural, international, etc. and each of these components play a key role in how the language spread thus making it difficult to portray it on paper or in a drawing.

This becomes further complicated, as the article states, by the different assumptions made by the models' author and how some of the models placed a higher significance, or power, in the hands of the native speaker. This can be controversial because there are many non native speakers who may be as proficient or at a higher level of proficiency then that of the native speaker. English can no longer be placed in small boxes, neatly organized in it's specific categories. There are too many speakers of English, since it is a lingua franca, for it to be confined to such a small organizational strategy.

I see that as the importance of this article because it has an at length discussion on the fact that English is so wide spread that the models we have previously used to show it's spread are now holding us back from fully understanding just how English has been used and continues to be used nationally and internationally. Thus I think the title of the article itself gives us a lot of insight, 'Who Speaks English Today?' is a valid and important question in how we create and use models to explain that use of the language.

And now I've lost my train of thought but I hope it makes sense from what I've written that I find this article to be very enlightening and, i think, extremely important when considering just how unorganized the use of English is and how all the different factors of the language use change the way we view the spread of English.

Transitioning

Hello all,
A quick announcement:

Since I used this blog for my TESOL class last year it will now be transitioning to be used in my next TESOL class, Eng 345. This is a space where I will be reflecting upon the different theories and controversies in TESOL. Hope you enjoy!

peace &grace,
Kiersten

Simple Put... really?

Lightbown & Spada Chapter 7

I want to start off by saying that this chapter was interesting but simple. It basically summed up the book and discussed how each theory and idea plays out in the real world but here is how I stand on this particular chapter: Isn't this what we've been doing all semester? We have been discussing all of these theories and ideas in our own view and now we are given the views of Lightbown & Spada. This may be relevant to our studies but in my opinion what they are telling us we have already discussed in length in the classroom and in our blogs.

That being said... I have to agree with most of what they talked about. They seem to understand, just as we do, that most theories have some kind of validity to the individual learner depending on how the learner learns (that sounds funny). Though there are some that are less valid than others, it is hard to say that any specific theory wouldn't work because each individual learns so very differently and with that we have to accept that a learning theory that may not work for us may work perfectly for them.

Canagarajah

As far as this article is concerned (watch as I knock down another one) I felt pretty much the same way as I did about Lightbown & Spada Chapter 7 and the end of the article, after all the discussion of certain issues and current topics, as of 2006, was "inconclusive"...

What out article writer seems to be discussing is the evolution of any issue/pedagogy/idea, in this case being TESOL, and he is basically giving us the 411 on how the issues have grown, which we have also been discussing in class (sort of).

On that note, it's not like he doesn't make some good points about the growth of TESOL and how we are continuing along certain trends and laying aside others for new information in the field of teaching speakers of other languages, it just seems to be telling me that "hey, we've progressed". Well, I suppose that is what would be expected.

Maybe I'm being too harsh or not getting what is supposed to be gained but in my mind our reading just summed our course work from two different sources.

Saville-Troike and Lightbown & Spada

Saville-Troike
Our reading this week was something I, surprisingly, hadn't thought much about in my TESOL classes. We discuss the SLA theories and the different methods of teaching but, what really stuck out to me in this chapter is the discussion on how to teach an L2.

What do I mean by that? Well, it's not a discussion on strategies or games to play or academic exercises for teachers to use. It's a discussion on the different items L2 learners need to have academic competence and/or interpersonal competence. My initial thoughts on teaching have been vague at best. I suppose we all have those feelings of going out into the teaching world and having these great students that are so enthusiastic to learn and knowing exactly what to do to teach them well. Well, either way, that's how I've generally viewed things, through a thoroughly unrealistic lens. I never really thought about what these kids would actually need to learn and I didn't think much about where I would have to start to get them to the point of communicative competence.

This chapter has changed a few things for me in that respect because I am starting to see that I cannot just go into a classroom and know exactly what to do and how to teach. There are so many basic things in English that I take for granted that I never would have thought to teach. Maybe this makes me a bad teachers or way too optimistic but this chapter blew all that out of the water. See, what I find in this chapter is that it's not all about the theories we learn or the ways to create a fair and safe classroom. That's only the half of it. Outside of those things, we as teachers have to understand what our students need to be competent when they try to communicate outside of the classroom or we haven't done our jobs correctly.

What also struck me as I was reading was that all the things the students need to learn, need to be taught in a way that they can process it and use it to their advantage. I cannot, for example, teach a class of 2nd graders about the morphological differences between their native tongue and English in those terms. Each of these points of knowledge has to be morphed into something that can process at their age, grade, and level of proficiency.

This may seem like a 'oh, well, duh. How could you not have realized that' moment but, in my case, I honestly never viewed it that way. Even through my own years of learning Spanish from the bottom-up processing method, I didn't look back and wonder how I'd gotten to where I am now with the language. Moving on, since I seem to be rambling.

The final part of this chapter that I felt hit home for me was the separation that needs to be done in catering to students. What they learn depends on how they will be using the language in their future and based on what they need the language for changes everything about what they learn. For example, the different vocabulary that goes along with academic competence in comparison with interpersonal competence. Second language learners have so much variety in their needs as far as learning goes but if they have the motivation for it then so can we.

Lightbown & Spada

This chapter then delved into the different theories on how to teach in the ESL classroom and what works effectively and what doesn't. There were six different approaches, each studied and analyzed.

1. Get it right from the beginning
2. Just listen... and read
3. Let's talk
4. Two for one
5. Teach what is teachable
6. Get it right in the end

Their discussion is based on what is the most effective between the six but in my opinion I see each as having their own merit. I would say that each should be used at some point in the classroom because each gives the student something different whether that's repetition, conversation, or reading activities; each holds it own value in the classroom. Generally, what they found was that communicative approaches worked best in effectiveness, which I agree with concerning my own L2 learning of Spanish and how much I learned being abroad, but the grammar and repetition done before I left for study abroad had it's own uses concerning my precision within the language which helped make me more comfortable when I was finally placed in a setting where English was just not an option.

That is generally how i feel about that. Super long post.. oops.

Perspective

In general the two articles we read were very reactionary. One lead to the other. The idea in the articles was interesting but nothing superbly new to us, though it may have been new to readers who are not in TESOL classes. The idea was that SLA doesn't necessarily have to be a individualistic learning process.

The articles talk about the idea of multilingualism and how that can be accomplished by working in groups, by practicing the target language, and by supporting learners by teaching them in a dialogic manner.

I think this is an extremely important point to make because teaching SLA on individual terms and using methods such as memorization and grammar practice, thought useful, is not the only way an individual can learn a language effectively. We need to practice and become more comfortable with the language or not matter how much grammar we understand, we will be stuck stumbling over our words in embarrassment of messing up something as we speak. Believe me, I know how that works. Learning Spanish has gone about the same way for me. I was taught Spanish from the time I was in elementary school and I attended the Spanish club there but through all those years I was still extremely uncomfortable speaking the language, even though I loved it so much.

What got me out of that fear was traveling and being forced to finally practice the language with some one who couldn't, or refused to, speak English with me. It changed everything. This practice I received made me okay with the mistakes I made, even learning from them as I went along. I see this as an extremely important part of SLA and should be treated as such. Practice and working with others, as these articles point out, makes for a stronger language learner.

Wong Chapter 5

For Wong in chapter 5 there was an important emphasis on the idea of double consciousness and collective memory and how we as teachers must be aware of these things as we teach. What I found most interesting in the chapter was the branch titled "We're in America, Mama, Speak English!" This constant fight between the immigrant generation and the 1.5 generation and second generation is extremely important in how we view language. So many children of immigrants are taught that English is the power language, that it is 'better' than their native tongue. We as teachers need to be able to teach that their native tongue is just as important and beautiful as the English language while still giving them the tools needed to learn English to succeed in the world of jobs and social situations they will encounter as they grow up.

For me it is hard to hear that a child refuses to speak their native tongue because English is 'better' or they are embarrassed about being different. I know, being born in the United States, I am privileged but when I started learning Spanish in 6th grade I spent all my time wishing I knew more Spanish so I could speak it all the time. I still feel that way. Spanish is one of most beautiful languages in my opinion and I wish it had been my native tongue so when I hear that a child refuses to learn something so beautiful it makes me sad, not only for them but for their futures as they give up on the advantages that being bilingual can bring to their lives.

They are also losing the cultural aspect to their native tongue when they refuse to speak it all because our educational system brainwashes them into thinking that their language is somehow unimportant or useless. I think this chapter then is extremely important for future teachers to understand that their students should be able to speak and love their native language, that just because their native tongue is different doesn't mean it's bad or worse than any other language.

That is what I find to be so important, is that message, so that we can change the way ESL students see their native tongue before it's too late.