While reading chapter 9 in Beyond Methods, I began to think of how difficult it is to teach elements of language such as cohesion in discourse and stress/intonation patterns (especially in English). When you also consider the situational context that may be necessary for language to make meaning, the waters get even murkier. That's a lot to ask of a teacher, and may even be near impossible in the EFL context. I started to think of ways in which a teacher could feasibly cover all these topics, which I believe are essential to mastery of the language. I kept hitting this wall in which I thought, "Yeah, all that stuff is important and necessary, but you need to learn the basics first before you can begin to cover topics such as cohesion or cultural implications and interpretations." As if he were reading my mind, Kuma introduced the three classes of drills, from mechanical, to meaningful, to communicative (214). Of course, he went on later to criticize this model, but to me, it still makes sense. I think a student must be taught the the basics before they can understand simplified language and the cultural context. I have seen this many times while tutoring Spanish, but the same ideas can be applied to English as well.
For example, if we're discussing direct and indirect objects and their pronouns, you must scaffold the learner by breaking this knowledge and simplification process into steps.
1: Did you give the report to Jonathon?
2:a: Yes, I gave the report to Jonathon.
b:Yes, I gave it to Jonathon.
c: Yes, I gave it to him.
There are many transformations taking place in this example, and I think the best way to have the student understand them is to take it one step at a time. Only then can they apply it in their speech as an instantaneous process.
I also liked some of the microstrategies presented near the end of the chapter. I thought the timeline activity, in particular, could be used for comprehensive learning and culmination of previously learned concepts such as the past tense, future tense, and any vocabulary that was presented in and outside of the class. Normally, I disregard anything that has "Cloze" in the title, but the activity Kuma shows on page 219 was adapted to test only grammatically categories, and thus, I think it can form part of the "mechanical" step of learning grammar.
Chapter 10 deals with the integration of traditionally 'isolated' language skills (e.g. speaking, listening, writing, reading). However, from our class discussions regarding strategies, as well as from ENG 346 and assessment techniques, I think we have come to realize they are rarely separate. However, I think most people would still hold tight to the active-passive separation, because it seems so inherent to us (227). The truth is that, by modeling strategies and techniques, teachers can attempt to break this assumption. For instance, while performing a "passive" activity such as reading, the students can also perform "Think Alouds" and share their immediate thoughts with a partner, and then discuss the passage. Thus, the activity because "active" and multiple modalities are engaged simultaneously.
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Monday, October 17, 2011
Week 9 Response
Can I just say how excited I was to read this section? Since I began working as a Spanish tutor at the Visor Center here on campus, I have constantly been reminded of the importance of learning strategies in the foreign (or second) language classroom. When reading extended passages or writing compositions, I always begin by asking my tutees what strategies or tools they use to complete the task. Oftentimes I am left with blank stares. Strategies were something so engrained into my learning experience that it was easy to forget some students never acquired them. Tutoring made me more aware of the lack of learning strategy use, especially in the language classroom. Without a solid foundation in L1 learning strategies, how can our students hope to transfer such knowledge to their L2? This personal control over one's learning (122) can be tied to last week's article about the importance of utilizing and supporting the native language of our students. So first, we must provide an atmosphere where the native language is embraced. Then we must explicitly instruct (126) and model to our students language learning strategies (122) so that they may be internalized and utilized independently by the learner (125).
One quote I found particularly interesting was, "Investigators have found a statistical link between students' L2 learning strategies and their underlying learning styles. These styles are often directly related to culturally inculcated values" (127). Undoubtedly, these are important issues to confront in the ESL classroom. As with most things that are worthwhile in teaching and learning, learning strategy instruction will likely be met with resistance at first--or at least, discomfort. Students--especially students from a wide variety of cultures and countries--bring particular preferences and attitudes about learning to the ESL classroom. The truth of the matter, though, is that language learning requires both analytic and more holistic approaches to learning; many times students will gravitate toward one aspect over the other. Thus, it is our job to start incorporating both types of learning strategies into our instruction consistently and from an early age.
As I stated earlier, my experience at the Visor Center has repeatedly made me think about learning strategies. In fact, I am currently trying to create a Language Learning Skills Workship series that will be offered to ISU students. The chapters gave me a lot of ideas for the content and presentation of this material. You could imagine, then, how disappointed I was to see the warning,"do not separate it as a minicourse on language learning strategies" (128). Why not? I understand the benefit or integration into classroom instruction, but isn't some external instruction better than nothing at all? Can't there will special circumstances in which a minicourse would be acceptable? This was the most disappointing aspect of the readings for me, but I still hope to continue on with my research and hopefully pilot the series in the spring.
One quote I found particularly interesting was, "Investigators have found a statistical link between students' L2 learning strategies and their underlying learning styles. These styles are often directly related to culturally inculcated values" (127). Undoubtedly, these are important issues to confront in the ESL classroom. As with most things that are worthwhile in teaching and learning, learning strategy instruction will likely be met with resistance at first--or at least, discomfort. Students--especially students from a wide variety of cultures and countries--bring particular preferences and attitudes about learning to the ESL classroom. The truth of the matter, though, is that language learning requires both analytic and more holistic approaches to learning; many times students will gravitate toward one aspect over the other. Thus, it is our job to start incorporating both types of learning strategies into our instruction consistently and from an early age.
As I stated earlier, my experience at the Visor Center has repeatedly made me think about learning strategies. In fact, I am currently trying to create a Language Learning Skills Workship series that will be offered to ISU students. The chapters gave me a lot of ideas for the content and presentation of this material. You could imagine, then, how disappointed I was to see the warning,"do not separate it as a minicourse on language learning strategies" (128). Why not? I understand the benefit or integration into classroom instruction, but isn't some external instruction better than nothing at all? Can't there will special circumstances in which a minicourse would be acceptable? This was the most disappointing aspect of the readings for me, but I still hope to continue on with my research and hopefully pilot the series in the spring.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Week 8 Reponse
Listening comprehension is often underestimated in L2 learning, and I have seen the effects of such a mentality in my own experiences as a student, teacher, and tutor. Most recently, one of my students at the ELI expressed to me her concerns about her listening comprehension; chapter 21 really made me ponder what this ability entails. She explained how she often got the gist or idea of what was being said, but did not know every word that was spoken. Many times this happens to me in English, my first language... but for different reasons. So then, I thought, is that entirely bad? She is using context and previous knowledge to formulate a notion of what the speaker is saying (239). This reflects the dichotomy we often create of bottom-up or top-down listening processes.
I like that the authors offer strategies to help students listen better--the foundation for the production of speech itself. Chapter 23 explores this topic more by teaching students to recognize native speaker's devices within their own speech: pause fillers, transitions, and "stock phrases" that are all readibly at their disposal (249). It's important for listeners to be aware of these items and, furthermore, to incorporate them in their own speech. This also helps the students realize that speaking is improvised (for the most part) and thus, contains errors and imperfect structure or argumentation. As the book states, it is not the same as the written language, but we often create or use activities that are more akin to the language found in writing samples (250).
Lastly, another aspect of the reading I found enlightening was its demand for authentic materials for listening activities. We must not "water down" language or overstructure it thinking such tactics will help the learner transition and improve their listening comprehension. Instead, the book proposes an exposure to native speech samples from the onset of language learning accompanied by the student's prior knowledge that they will not understand everything (244). I think this is important, because this is what happens in the real world for L2 learners at different stages of proficiency.
I like that the authors offer strategies to help students listen better--the foundation for the production of speech itself. Chapter 23 explores this topic more by teaching students to recognize native speaker's devices within their own speech: pause fillers, transitions, and "stock phrases" that are all readibly at their disposal (249). It's important for listeners to be aware of these items and, furthermore, to incorporate them in their own speech. This also helps the students realize that speaking is improvised (for the most part) and thus, contains errors and imperfect structure or argumentation. As the book states, it is not the same as the written language, but we often create or use activities that are more akin to the language found in writing samples (250).
Lastly, another aspect of the reading I found enlightening was its demand for authentic materials for listening activities. We must not "water down" language or overstructure it thinking such tactics will help the learner transition and improve their listening comprehension. Instead, the book proposes an exposure to native speech samples from the onset of language learning accompanied by the student's prior knowledge that they will not understand everything (244). I think this is important, because this is what happens in the real world for L2 learners at different stages of proficiency.
Sunday, October 2, 2011
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)