You have decided to teach the target sentence “I like apples” to a class of fifth and sixth grade elementary school students. Which of these teaching approaches are you most likely to take? Think carefully about how you teach your lessons. Be truthful.
a) Write “I like apples” on the board and tell students that it means ringo ga suki desu. Tell students to repeat the sentence four or five times in a choral drill giving feedback on the pronunciation. Tell two or three students to say “I like apples” and help them to pronounce it properly. Ask one student at the back to say what “I like apples” means. Tell students to talk to five of their friends and say “I like apples”. Ask four or five students to come to the front of the class and say, “I like apples”. Praise students for doing a good job.
b) Ask the students what “ringo ga suki desu” means? Praise the student for giving the correct answer and write it on the board. Have the class repeat the model sentence. Put up more pictures; bananas, oranges, kiwis, and pears and have students repeat the sentences exchanging the words. Ask the students to tell the person sitting next to them what they like. Tell the students to talk to ten people to find out what they like. Ask students to report their findings to the class. Praise students for doing a good job.
c) Put a picture of an apple on the board and ask the students what it is. Tell students to listen to a skit and report to you what they hear. Write their answers on the board. Repeat the skit until students come up with the target sentence. Listen and repeat the target sentence. Put more pictures on the board and get students to practice making sentences in their pairs. Give students a worksheet, which they must complete by asking their friends questions using the words on the board. Finish up by asking students to make their own original sentences about sports, animals, subjects… anything they want and report their sentences to their friends. Finish up by asking students what information they found out about their friends.
d) Put students in pairs and give them one minute to think of a list of ten fruits. Tell them to write them down. Monitor the students and help them with words they don’t know in English. Put students in lunch groups and share their answers with other group members. Encourage students to write down the fruit they don’t have. Next, tell the class what fruit you like and ask the students to talk in their groups to find out what fruit they like. Ask the students for useful language and write the sentences on the board. Tell them to find out the top three fruits in their group, using the useful language you have elicited, plus any language you think they might need. Ask each team to report their findings to the class. Praise the use of the target language. Ask students to make their own presentation about any topic they wish. Tell them for extra marks they can make their short presentations at the beginning of the next week’s classes if they wish. They can decide when they are ready.
So how did you do?
If you chose a, b, or c, your lessons are teacher centered. What does this mean? It means that the teacher decides the curriculum. She decides what to teach based on the needs of the school, administrators, or examination boards. The teacher is the active voice in the classroom, the bearer of knowledge. The students are in a passive receptacle role, the receivers of knowledge. This is the kind of teaching commonly found in Japanese schools. It is a necessary approach for teachers who have to cover certain topics on a curriculum so that all students to get a fair chance of passing examinations. However, what is covered in teacher centered courses is often irrelevant to students’ lives and can lead to a lack of motivation in the learner.
If you chose d your lessons have an entirely different focus. Example d is what is commonly referred to as student centered learning. What does this mean? Basically it means that the learning process is driven not by the needs of the teacher, the administrators or exam boards. On the contrary, this approach focuses on the needs abilities, interests, and learning styles of the students. The students take an active role, responsible role in their own learning. The teacher’s role turns to facilitator of learning. With the student’s voice being central to the classroom there can be a distinct rise in the level of learner motivation.
I would like to suggest that while approaches a, b, and c are necessary in Japanese junior high schools in order to satisfy administrators and examination boards, they are not necessary in elementary schools. Elementary school gaikoku katsudo lessons are not driven by external pressures to meet the requirements of examination boards. The only evaluation teachers are obliged to give is a positive comment on the students’ communicative competence.
Therefore, since the focus is on communicative competence (and not on second language acquisition—which indeed it can’t be because elementary school teachers are not language specialists) I would like to suggest that in order for students to communicate in a more meaningful and relevant way to them we ought to move away from activities that more often than not bear no relevance to their lives and move towards the kind task based child centered lesson I have delineated in example d.
What can I do to make a move in this direction?
Admittedly, it might be difficult for teachers to take the leap of faith and plunge into child centered classrooms immediately. For the students too, they need to learn how to participate in this kind of lesson. So, with this in mind I have outlined a list of ten specific things you can do in your classroom to begin to make the move in this direction. Try them for yourself and see how the motivation levels begin to increase. Don’t forget to let me know how it goes.
10 activities that work for me to make my classroom more student-centered.
1. Introduce a points system--a stamp card is a good idea--with a clear and achievable goal. Offer an incentive for the students who reach that goal.
2. Allow a couple of students to be in charge of giving the stamps each lesson. Tell them that they will decide how many points the other students will receive and during what activities stamps will be given. Remind them that this is a team effort and their classmates will be doing it for them in the future.
3. Encourage boys and girls to work together at all stages of the lesson. Offer incentives for good cooperation and teamwork.
4. Tell the students they are in control of their own learning. Ask for a different student to volunteer to do the daily greetings each lesson. Allow them the chance to be creative.
5. Set easily achievable tasks, such as a 30 second presentation on their favorite things, and tell the students that they will give a presentation during the coming week. Tell them they must decide when to give their presentation. Allow a few minutes at the beginning of each class for a number of students to complete their task.
6. When introducing new language give a short presentation and tell the students to listen and make notes. Then allow them discussion time in pairs and groups to review what was said.
7. If you are using songs in the classroom with gestures, (this is particularly in elementary school), have students volunteer to lead the song/gestures. If 5th and 6th grade elementary students are reluctant, tell them it is their class and if they want to have music they ought to take responsibility.
8. Give each group of students a different task to complete so they can show their findings to their classmates. For example have students learn numbers from different countries and then have them prepare and present the numbers and a game to the class. Let them be the teachers!
9. When doing group centered games/activities give students a very basic idea and have them develop it themselves, for example let them decide their own rules to the game, or even what game they are going to play to practice a language point.
10. Have students decide what the next topic will be.
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Thursday, May 6, 2010
The Pronunciation Police
I heard an English man tell his Japanese wife,
“Don’t speak English to our son. The pronunciation is wrong and I don’t want him growing up with strange pronunciation.”
What a complete Nazi!
What gives him the right to say what is right when his own English is merely a single dialect of the many English dialects that exist in the world.
People who say these things are the source of what is wrong with English Education in Japan. Millions of kids grow up under the misapprehension that they are no good because they can’t speak like a native.
And who is perpetrating this myth of Perfect Pronunciation?
It is a native speaker of English, who thinks he has the right to dictate how a word ought to be pronounced. Oh! You don’t pronounce that right, Kazuki! R not L, Kumi chan.
I guess it’s the result of the English Conversation Industry that boomed in the eighties and nineties (and now seems to be coming to an end), whereby native speakers were revered not for their teaching expertise, but for their ability to be, er, native in the English Language.
But really, who can blame them? For were they not protecting their very right to be in the country?
However, it was an imperial attitude, that was doomed from the start. English is not a country to be ruled but a world language that native speakers no longer have the right to own. Therefore native speakers, me included I remind myself every day, no longer have the right to dictate how it is spoken.
Pronunciation dictators, like nazi dictators, are not fun. They instill fear in the learner. How can a learner thrive in an environment of fear?
Where is the fun in fear?
That is why I am FOR teachers of English who are not native speakers. Because first and foremost they are teachers. They rely on their skill—not their nativeness.
Let’s enjoy English without being on the lookout for mistakes.
“Don’t speak English to our son. The pronunciation is wrong and I don’t want him growing up with strange pronunciation.”
What a complete Nazi!
What gives him the right to say what is right when his own English is merely a single dialect of the many English dialects that exist in the world.
People who say these things are the source of what is wrong with English Education in Japan. Millions of kids grow up under the misapprehension that they are no good because they can’t speak like a native.
And who is perpetrating this myth of Perfect Pronunciation?
It is a native speaker of English, who thinks he has the right to dictate how a word ought to be pronounced. Oh! You don’t pronounce that right, Kazuki! R not L, Kumi chan.
I guess it’s the result of the English Conversation Industry that boomed in the eighties and nineties (and now seems to be coming to an end), whereby native speakers were revered not for their teaching expertise, but for their ability to be, er, native in the English Language.
But really, who can blame them? For were they not protecting their very right to be in the country?
However, it was an imperial attitude, that was doomed from the start. English is not a country to be ruled but a world language that native speakers no longer have the right to own. Therefore native speakers, me included I remind myself every day, no longer have the right to dictate how it is spoken.
Pronunciation dictators, like nazi dictators, are not fun. They instill fear in the learner. How can a learner thrive in an environment of fear?
Where is the fun in fear?
That is why I am FOR teachers of English who are not native speakers. Because first and foremost they are teachers. They rely on their skill—not their nativeness.
Let’s enjoy English without being on the lookout for mistakes.
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Show Don't Tell
It is a well known in fiction writing circles that showing is better than telling. Tell the reader that Harry is a magician and the reader will raise his eyebrows and move onto the next book. Show Harry turning water into wine and let the reader say, "Is he a magician or the new Messiah?" I want to read on, I want to know more! In short, let the reader figure out for themselves and they have more invested in the story. The same applies in the EFL classroom. Tell the students that you use "going to" to talk about future plans and their eyes might glaze over. Show the students the meaning of "going to" by pretending to be a palm reader who can see their future and the'll no doubt be hooked.
I was recently asked to give a self introduction lesson at a junior high school. Junior high students in Japan can be very unforgiving of a lesson burdened with dry facts about a country that was half way around the world and to which they would very likely never visit. I could not imagine standing in front of 40 kids for 50 minutes saying "I'm from England. In England we drink tea. This is a picture of the Queen…yada, yada, yada…" The students would be asleep within minutes. I had to show them something interesting to draw their attention and then make it interactive to give them something to do.
What do junior high school kids like? What did I like at the age of thirteen? TV. Music. TV. TV, TV, TV and more TV.
"That's it!" I thought. "I'll show the kids some classic British TV and then ask them to show me some classic Japanese TV. Cultural exchange at its very best.
Here was my lesson plan:
And here was the worksheet:
The lesson was generally student centered and focused on fluency rather than accuracy. I taught the natural responses in the box first to make sure the communicative aspect was a two way street from the outset, since it is often a problem in mini speeches like this for the listener to be passive.
For students who had "no idea " about a topic to discuss I added some pictures of famous people on the reverse of the worksheet to give them a helping hand, but students were encouraged to offer their own ideas.
It was a success and I had a large number of students wanting to present their own ideas to the class. I will be using this idea as a model for future lessons.
Friday, April 16, 2010
To be taught and confused: the prescriptive approach to teaching grammar
English is for everyone. Or so I thought.
I have just read yet another article in one of the mainstream Japanese newspapers, which made the hair on the back of my neck bristle. The article is supposedly written to enlighten Japanese speakers of English on the subtlties of the English Language.
The writer, who didn’t have the nerve to put her name to the column, claimed that in English you cannot describe a face as “scary”. The words “scary” and “face” do not naturally collocate; they have been forced together by Japanese English learners. She (or he) went on to claim that the sentence “Frankenstein has a scary face” is unnatural and therefore incorrect.
My first reaction was to throw up my arms in horror! As a native speaker of English, and as a teacher of English as a Foreign Language in Japan, I can think of numerous times when I have described someone’s face as a scary and I see no problem with this particular collocation of words. I wondered what made the writer of this deluded article come to the conclusion that I, and possibly thousands upon thousands of other speakers of English (google "scary face and you'll see how many use it), were wrong in saying that Frankenstein, Dracula, and even my mother-in-law have scary faces.
The writer went on to say that she had searched a corpus database of American newspapers and the collocation “scary face” did not appear once, whereas “grim face” made a number of appearances. From this she reasoned out a reckless rule that “scary face” is wrong and “grim face” is right.
Okay, this only tells me one thing; that in a certain number of newspapers “scary face” did not appear. It is not logical to make the jump and say that because “scary face” does not appear in this newspaper, it is therefore incorrect usage. I only need to listen in on any Halloween party in any suburban household on October 31st to falsify this outlandish proposition. I can only conclude that it is the writer’s inexperience with language that forced her to make up such an outrageous universal rule.
This is not about the collocation "scary face." What I take offence to is this kind of teaching; Prescriptive teaching. The kind of teaching that sets out a list of rules about what should be said and how it should be said and woe betide the person who does it any different. prescriptive approaches to teaching not only confuses English language learners, it mystifies language to such an extent that the prescribed language takes on the appearance of inaccessibility. Prescriptive approaches focus on persnickety, and might I say non-existent rules that are created by idiotic pedagogues and wannabe grammarians who misuse corpuses and misunderstand the function of the English language in the world today.
And what is the function?
To communicate. To communicate thoughts, feelings, truths, ideas and ideals, and even to communicate falsehoods and lies, because language should be flexible and therefore free. Free for everyone to use as she sees fit, whether it be to make friends, for international business, or just getting your meaning across to a person from another culture.
English is no longer owned by the universities--in fact it never was. It is the language of the people of the world. It is a world language that ought to be free from prescriptive judgements. Free to allow the creative exchange of ideas between people. Free from the chains that have bound generations of young Japanese people go through school unable to grasp the truth of what language is really about and believing that the Emperor is wearing clothes.
Curse-ye-ha-me-ha: the Prescriptive Grammarians who claim that you own the English language and that some things can be done with it, but that other things cannot
Curse-ye-ha-me-ha; the pedants who spend your lives inventing rules and adding to the illusion that there is something wrong with the way we say things?
Curse-ye-ha-me-ha; the men and women of words who claim that if it is not said as a rule it should not be said at all?
There has to be something terribly wrong when millions of children come out of school disenchanted and confused by the sheer volume of rules that govern the language that the Prescriptive Grammarians teach. No wonder the children of Japan grow up to either despise English or despise themselves for being no good at English!
Let's take a chance, leave the rules in the shoebox at the door and run barefoot in the fields of fluency. Let's not waste any more classroom time on the finer points of prescriptive grammar that attempts to stifle the character of a nation. Revel in past mistakes no longer and leave it to the linguists to describe how we did it in the future.
If we don't it will be like saying that I own all the water in the world and that it should only be used for making tea.
It will be like saying that I own all the air in the world and that it must not by any means be breathed in countries that are not members of the European Union.
It will be like saying that I own all the fire in the world and it must not be used for anything other than burning books.
It will be like saying that I own the earth and it must not be walked upon by people of a different race from me.
Prescriptionist Grammarians are Nazis, who want to take control of language, throw it in a gas chamber and force it to die of asphyxiation before it has a chance to go out into the world and live a little, develop a lot, and be used by people of all races, cultures and creeds to do with what they wish. Whether the person communicating would create bonds and friendships; or whether they would sever ties and cause wars. English is for everyone. Make it so.
I have just read yet another article in one of the mainstream Japanese newspapers, which made the hair on the back of my neck bristle. The article is supposedly written to enlighten Japanese speakers of English on the subtlties of the English Language.
The writer, who didn’t have the nerve to put her name to the column, claimed that in English you cannot describe a face as “scary”. The words “scary” and “face” do not naturally collocate; they have been forced together by Japanese English learners. She (or he) went on to claim that the sentence “Frankenstein has a scary face” is unnatural and therefore incorrect.
My first reaction was to throw up my arms in horror! As a native speaker of English, and as a teacher of English as a Foreign Language in Japan, I can think of numerous times when I have described someone’s face as a scary and I see no problem with this particular collocation of words. I wondered what made the writer of this deluded article come to the conclusion that I, and possibly thousands upon thousands of other speakers of English (google "scary face and you'll see how many use it), were wrong in saying that Frankenstein, Dracula, and even my mother-in-law have scary faces.
The writer went on to say that she had searched a corpus database of American newspapers and the collocation “scary face” did not appear once, whereas “grim face” made a number of appearances. From this she reasoned out a reckless rule that “scary face” is wrong and “grim face” is right.
Okay, this only tells me one thing; that in a certain number of newspapers “scary face” did not appear. It is not logical to make the jump and say that because “scary face” does not appear in this newspaper, it is therefore incorrect usage. I only need to listen in on any Halloween party in any suburban household on October 31st to falsify this outlandish proposition. I can only conclude that it is the writer’s inexperience with language that forced her to make up such an outrageous universal rule.
This is not about the collocation "scary face." What I take offence to is this kind of teaching; Prescriptive teaching. The kind of teaching that sets out a list of rules about what should be said and how it should be said and woe betide the person who does it any different. prescriptive approaches to teaching not only confuses English language learners, it mystifies language to such an extent that the prescribed language takes on the appearance of inaccessibility. Prescriptive approaches focus on persnickety, and might I say non-existent rules that are created by idiotic pedagogues and wannabe grammarians who misuse corpuses and misunderstand the function of the English language in the world today.
And what is the function?
To communicate. To communicate thoughts, feelings, truths, ideas and ideals, and even to communicate falsehoods and lies, because language should be flexible and therefore free. Free for everyone to use as she sees fit, whether it be to make friends, for international business, or just getting your meaning across to a person from another culture.
English is no longer owned by the universities--in fact it never was. It is the language of the people of the world. It is a world language that ought to be free from prescriptive judgements. Free to allow the creative exchange of ideas between people. Free from the chains that have bound generations of young Japanese people go through school unable to grasp the truth of what language is really about and believing that the Emperor is wearing clothes.
Curse-ye-ha-me-ha: the Prescriptive Grammarians who claim that you own the English language and that some things can be done with it, but that other things cannot
Curse-ye-ha-me-ha; the pedants who spend your lives inventing rules and adding to the illusion that there is something wrong with the way we say things?
Curse-ye-ha-me-ha; the men and women of words who claim that if it is not said as a rule it should not be said at all?
There has to be something terribly wrong when millions of children come out of school disenchanted and confused by the sheer volume of rules that govern the language that the Prescriptive Grammarians teach. No wonder the children of Japan grow up to either despise English or despise themselves for being no good at English!
Let's take a chance, leave the rules in the shoebox at the door and run barefoot in the fields of fluency. Let's not waste any more classroom time on the finer points of prescriptive grammar that attempts to stifle the character of a nation. Revel in past mistakes no longer and leave it to the linguists to describe how we did it in the future.
If we don't it will be like saying that I own all the water in the world and that it should only be used for making tea.
It will be like saying that I own all the air in the world and that it must not by any means be breathed in countries that are not members of the European Union.
It will be like saying that I own all the fire in the world and it must not be used for anything other than burning books.
It will be like saying that I own the earth and it must not be walked upon by people of a different race from me.
Prescriptionist Grammarians are Nazis, who want to take control of language, throw it in a gas chamber and force it to die of asphyxiation before it has a chance to go out into the world and live a little, develop a lot, and be used by people of all races, cultures and creeds to do with what they wish. Whether the person communicating would create bonds and friendships; or whether they would sever ties and cause wars. English is for everyone. Make it so.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)