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)