A Pause for Reflection

Now is the the perfect time to take a time-out and reflect.  We have just completed four modules of in-depth study of the four modalities of language (reading, writing, listening, and speaking).  During our exploration of each the modalities, we have been exposed to a significant amount of new information, ideas, and terminology.  A review at this point will most definitely be helpful as we synthesize and apply our new learning.

As we move forward through this course and the coming ones in this certificate program (and then into the classroom!), these four modules and the information they contain about the four language modalities will be a core from which we can work.  I thought I would take this reflection post to just touch on some highlights from each module:

Reading

We learned that there are 6 kinds of knowledge that can be used to make sense of text:

• syntactic knowledge
• morphological knowledge
• general world knowledge
• sociocultural knowledge
• topic knowledge
• genre knowledge

We also learned that it is important to help learners use schematic knowledge in pre-reading activities where they can make predictions.

Another thing we learned about reading was that specific language knowledge can be used during a reading activity to help learners decode the text.  This can include text cohesion, deletion, discourse signals, and vocabulary.

Finally, we learned how teachers can apply certain strategies to help learners decode different types of text.  They can assign extensive reading, choose text in such a way as to capitalize on learner's existing knowledge, and engage learners in analytical activities that draw attention to specific features of the text.

Writing

As for writing, we learned about the different stages of writing and the purposes of each.

• planning:  deciding what to say (purpose, audience, content structures)
• drafting: writing first and / or subsequent versions with the intention for future editing
• editing: reading through a composition for general meaning, overall structure, detailed features, and perhaps receiving comments and suggestions from others
• final version:  incorporating changes, comments, or suggestions into a final version for presentation to audience

We also performed a very informative comparison of the two productive skills, writing and speaking.  

We examined the different possible purposes of writing including academic, creative, professional, functional, and electronic.

We learned about the qualities of a well-written narrative text, including the following:

• text construction suitable to genre, topic and audience (or discourse community)
• text is cohesive both lexically and grammatically
• text is coherent (both the writer's purpose and line of thought are clear)
• text uses appropriate register (tone and vocabulary)

Finally, we explored the role of the teacher in the development of learners' writing skills.  Specifically, this will include things like raising learners' awareness of the importance of genre, topic, audience and tone, explicitly teaching how and when to use cohesive devices, and providing for a significant amount of reading with the opportunity to analyze texts, as well as the use of some texts as models or examples from which to parallel write.

Listening

When learning about listening, it was quite surprising to learn that little research has been done about its use in the language learning classroom and that it is perhaps the most neglected of the four modalities.  

We learned that there are four main purposes for listening:

• listening for gist
• listening for specific information
• listening for details
• inferential listening

As we did with the two productive skills, writing and speaking, we compared the two receptive skills, reading and listening.  This was very enlightening.

We learned that many types of factors influence the difficulty level of a listening task.  These factors can be categorized into four main groups:

• characteristics of the message itself
• characteristics of the delivery
• characteristics of the listener
• characteristics of the environment

We learned that schematic knowledge may be significantly helpful for listeners' comprehension since the language makes connections to learners' prior knowledge.

We read a stimulating debate about whether or not texts used for listening tasks should be limited to authentic or include scripted ones, as well.  It seems that both are beneficial for different reasons.

We also learned about the development of different types of listening skills through various types of activities.

Speaking   

As we began the module on speaking, we learned first about the characteristics of good speakers.  With a focus on what good speakers do, we learned that they

• conceptualize, formulate, and then articulate messages
• self-monitor and repair
• exhibit automaticity and fluency
• manage talk

We learned what discourse markers are and how they are used to send certain signals during conversations.  We learned a significant number of these.

We learned specific strategies that speakers use to manage talk, including:

• turn-taking
• discourse markers
• backchannel devices

We learned that certain types of knowledge make significant contributions to communicative competence.  Some are listed below.

• extralinguistic: topic / culture / context
• sociocultural: social values / norms of behavior (these may be both linguistic or extralinguistic)
• linguistic: grammar / vocab / genre
• discourse: organization / connection of utterances / markers
• pragmatic: language in context / speech acts / functions / co-operative principle / politeness / register

We learned about the importance of tone and register in speech and that learners need to be taught this specifically.

Finally, we learned about the promotion of fluency and accuracy in speech through error correction, explicit drills, role plays, and other task-based activities like information gap activities.

Putting it all together

The study of the four modalities has been extremely helpful.  It has included a comparison and contrast of several separate modalities.  Learning what competent learners in each of these skills can do and what knowledge they need in order to do it is essential for language teachers.  The information contained in these modules will help us create and perform more balanced, comprehensive assessments of our learners' needs.  It will also help us approach the learning in the classroom using a balanced application of the four modalities that will enable our learners to achieve a grammatical, functional, and sociocultural competence.

I believe that since language involves these four modalities, it is only logical that we use them to teach language.  Even grammar, which may seem somehow separate or overly formulaic with a reliance on drilling, can be taught in a way that incorporates the four modalities.  In fact, it is probably best taught in such a way.  When the learners will have the opportunity to use all four language modalities to explore a structure or form, it is possible that they will actually be better equipped to use it outside the classroom.

Within each module, we learned about implications for the teaching and learning process.  If we apply these to our practice, it is more likely that our students' language competence will improve.  It remains our challenge to keep this detailed, complex information at our fingertips in order to empower us to provide the most effective, efficient and beneficial learning environment for our students.

Listening and Language Learning

Listening is an essential part of language learning.  Although a lack of research exists surrounding listening and its value, an increase in recent studies about listening suggests that, as in the development of first languages, the acquisition of second languages also begins with listening.

It would be wise for language teachers to devote time in their class for focused study on listening skills.  Exposing learners to dialogues, whether authentic, scripted, authentic-based, or semi-scripted, exposes them to the target language.  This exposure provides opportunity for, as Krashen called it, comprehensible input.  Through this input, learners can expect to be exposed to discourse markers, vocabulary, and target grammar.  Exposure to this input also provides for incidental vocabulary learning wherein learners may more effectively retain certain words because of their own personal interest in the topic.  All the elements of this input makes it possible for learners to add new language.

Using more listening experiences in the classroom can also have other important effects on language learners.  First, it can provide a model.  If teachers choose listening texts well, the dialogues learners listen to and process can serve as a model for their future live interactions, either inside or outside the classroom.    This modeling helps learners feel more comfortable, more likely to take risks, and gives them a base from which to copy language chunks and use them in their own personal situations.

A second way that using listening texts in the classroom improves learning and encourages learners is that it builds confidence.  By giving the learners the opportunity to listen and respond to specific authentic situations inside the classroom, the teacher reduces fear and builds courage to try out the language in situations outside the classroom.

Finally, while working with listening texts, just like writing, reading, and speaking, teachers will have the opportunity to guide learners' attention to strategies.  By directly teaching specific strategies to improve listening skills, teachers give language learners the tools they need to continue increasing their listening skills in any situation in which they are exposed to new language.

By developing learners' language, providing models for behavior, teaching strategies, and building confidence, teachers not only help students strengthen one language modality, they also help learners become more independent.

Learning Styles and Strategies: To Assess or Not to Assess?

In Module 7 of our Theory course, we have been learning about learning styles and learning strategies.

So, what is a learning style?
   A learning style is a preference or a tendency to use a particular learning pattern (or method) when learning something.

And how does one distinguish a learning style from a learning strategy?
    A learning strategy is a series of steps or behaviors employed in a specific situation to assist in the acquisition, storage, retention, recall and use of new information.

Is it valuable for students to be assessed for learning style and strategy?  Why or why not?

Yes, because....

• Students will become more aware of their own preferences and those preferences ascribed to by others, which will in turn help enable them to be better equipped as learners.  They can become more effective and efficient by experimenting with different strategies or even expand their preferences to include others and thus improve their capability to learn in different situations.
• When students' learning preferences and styles are assessed, teachers can more effectively attempt to plan learning activities that meet students' preferences and needs in a more efficient way.

But, no, because....

• Many instruments used to assess learning styles in particular have not been found to be reliable or accurate.  Great care must be taken when using them.
• Much more research about the different learning style models needs to be implemented in order to establish a more informed theory surrounding the models.
• Sometimes the styles are misused as labels and can affect learners' impressions of themselves or teachers' impressions of them.  In practice, the styles cannot yet be viewed to be entirely stable, or restrictive.  There has been some evidence that the styles are flexible and can expand and change over time and with new and varied experience. 

Although I have written more cons than pros for assessment, I do believe that a heightened awareness among learners about how they learn is a very valuable tool.  If the assessments are used with caution and explained in detail so as not to be misunderstood or misused, I believe their use can have significant positive impact on a learner's capability to improve their learning skills.  

Writing Right in the 21st Century

As technology has developed, communication has evolved.  Consider the following quote:

"Language is constantly evolving, and so we must begin to accept - and even teach – the shortened forms of communication that are used with technology. This language may contain abbreviations, symbols (emoticons) and even untraditional grammar and punctuation, which would be considered “errors” in many classrooms. We accept different forms of oral communication without penalty … we should do the same with written communication."


It's true that language is constantly evolving.  Even Harmer acknowledges this evolution when discussing how text messages and emoticons are now common ways of communicating in certain discourse communities.  I believe the author of the above quote has a very valid point for a number of reasons.

1. Membership in a Discourse Community
Probably no teachers of English as another language would disagree that if learners of English as another language want to be able to read, understand, and write for English-speaking audiences, they will need to gain membership in the discourse community on some level.  They will need to understand conventions they may read and they will need to use those conventions to communicate their own messages through text as well.

2.  Changes within the Discourse Community

Most teachers of English as another language will also agree that while there are constraints guiding the comprehension and production of most genres and sub-genres, in response to new technology, new forms (genres of their own?) have developed.  This is apparent in the micro-blogging world of Twitter:  140 characters to share important news, ideas, and some fun.

While it's possible that some teachers may disregard the importance of Twitter and other forms of technology, but in I my opinion, it would be to the detriment of the learners.  These environments now are serious places for interaction with possible business clients, professional colleagues, future employers, fellow students, and practicers of common interests.

3.  Changes within Language Conventions
Because of the change in the discourse community, it would be logical to assume that changes within our language conventions would result.  It is important for a learner who will use Twitter, LinkedIn or even text messaging to understand what lol means or what c u @ 2 might mean.  If we are seriously committed to helping our students gain competence and schematic knowledge, we will need to help them understand and use these new conventions.

Having said all of that, here is a qualifier:

At the beginning of Chapter 2, Harmer himself says "different purposes provoke different kinds of writing".  Being able to communicate a piece of news around the world a half hour before the international stories are published is one way Twitter makes its name for itself.  But that's Twitter.  There are also many other purposes for which our learners will be writing.  They will also need to comprehend and be fluent in the use of the conventions for other genres of writing.  We should not neglect one for the other.

I would hold that it is a valuable investment of time to learn the conventions of both more traditional genres and those that are developing today.  Learners should become competent in both, and know when to use which accordingly.  I'm not sure I would go as far as our original quote and say "We accept different forms of oral communication without penalty".  Rather, I would say that we should help learners understand the complexities of the genres and the conventions and decide when it is appropriate to use any of these newer conventions.  It would be hard for me to imagine any employer accepting an application that closed with the text.... c u l8r

It is this sensitivity that we can teach and for which we should hold our learners accountable.

Presenting Grammar

Given your comfort with teaching, which strategy would you be more inclined to use to present grammar? How could you encourage yourself to be more comfortable with the other strategy?
When grammar is taught deductively, the teacher:

1. Explains the rule clearly to the students
2. Does not necessarily provide content or communicative function for the grammar
3. Focuses on the form and then the meaning
4. Creates drills and repetition for students to learn the desired structure
5. Takes all responsibility for students’ learning

When grammar is taught inductively, the teacher:

1. Presents students with many examples of the target language
2. Helps the learner to induce the rule
3. Provides students with a context for the language and a purpose for its use
4. Focuses on the meaning and then the form
5. Provides opportunities for meaningful communication through which students can discover the rule
6. Empowers the students to problem-solve

Although I may have had extensive experience in the classroom, I must admit I have not had extensive experience teaching grammar.  As I read over the disadvantages and advantages of inductive and deductive approaches as put forward by Thornbury, it seems that a less-experienced educator would probably feel most comfortable using a deductive approach.  This may be true for several reasons.  First, it is a straight-forward approach that gets straight to the point of explanation of a rule.  It allows the teacher some freedom to deal with grammar points as they arise, rather than anticipating them in advance.  It also can be quick and provide time for lots of practice.  It seems that not having significant experience with the teaching of grammar structures, I would probably feel more secure in this traditional, succinct approach. 

On the other hand, the benefits for the learners in the inductive approach appear to be exceptional.  When teachers challenge learners to infer the rules of form and usage from a group of carefully chosen examples, they invite them to spend mental energy recognizing and hypothesizing rules.  This cognitive effort may make the rules more memorable and encourages learners to depend on themselves.  Such benefits can be reaped in the event that educators have spent significant effort preparing relevant, meaningful examples and / or situations. This approach seems to be more taxing on educators in a variety of ways even though it provides specific benefits to learners.  

I believe that in order to feel more comfortable with an inductive approach, I will need to feel more confident in general as a teacher of grammar.  I will need to better familiarize myself with language rules, structures and forms, their intricate interplays and exceptions.  I will need to build a better repertoire of grammar-teaching resources, including textbooks, and the use of software like corpora or concordancing programming.    

As we have been discussing, it is probably most beneficial for learners to be exposed to both approaches so that they are given communicative contexts within which to practice communication at the same time they are guided with identification and reproduction of particular patterns and structures.  It seems to be a delicate balance that challenges teachers to develop skills in both inductive and deductive strategies.

Least Appealing Teaching Methods

So far this week, throughout our discussions together, the members of our class have pointed out and discussed reasons they dislike the Grammar-Translation Method and the Audio-Lingual Approach in particular.

Since we certainly don't want the guy in this image to be the result of our grammar lesson, a reflective discussion of these methods and why they are disliked is warranted.

Grammar-Translation:
Some of my colleagues and I wrote about the grammar-translation method and how it lacks an attention to the development of language skills for the purpose of authentic communication.  The method focuses on reading and some writing, but mainly neglects speaking and listening.

Several of the discussion participants brought up excellent points that this method is well-known in the world of language learning and teaching and may be THE expectation for learners about how they will be learning language.  They may think other approaches are incorrect or will not properly prepare them for the use of the language.  Of course, we should always take a learner's background and preferred learning styles into consideration when planning our lessons, in order to meet their needs and wants.

Audio-Lingual:
My colleagues expressed several reasons for their dislike of the audio-lingual approach.  Restrictions on students, level of teacher control, and the use of boring, repetitive drills were main reasons mentioned.

However, as was in the case of the grammar-translation method, some participants shared positive results they themselves experienced or results they observed from other learners.  The use of songs, rhymes, and chants played a particular role in this success.

It is probably not wise to label an approach or method as entirely lacking value for learners.  It seems that each approach has some benefit to contribute in some situation for some learner.  It is essential, then, that we adequately assess and endeavor to know learners' needs and preferred learning styles.  The results will help guide us as we plan successful, engaging lessons for our learners. That means we will probably be using the Grammar-Translation and Audio-Lingual approaches in one way or another in our classrooms - no matter how much we may dislike them.  The key is for us to know each one well, focus on the benefits of each and use them when appropriate. As was written in our reading, the key is to 'adapt, not adopt'.

Get grammar lessons 'flow'ing...

As a reminder, there are 9 elements that contribute to flow (read more about flow here):

1. clear goals every step of the way
2. immediate feedback for one's actions
3. balance between challenges and skills
4. action and awareness are merged
5. distractions are excluded from consciousness
6. no worry of failure
7. self-consciousness disappears
8. sense of time becomes distorted
9. activity becomes 'autotelic' (an end in itself)

How can we write lesson plans that apply these principles?  

When we use clear goals in our lesson plans, they help us create a focused, concentrated sequence of activities that will start from the assessed learner's needs and gradually build on their skills and knowledge to ensure that new content is learned one concept at a time with increasing levels of independence. This makes it possible for learners to gain confidence with new material in an environment that balances skill with challenge in such a way as to produce the feeling of flow, which will be discussed in a following point.

What does this look like in practice?  Goals will be specific and focused.  They will be few.  Activities in the lesson will be gradually building confidence.  First, the topic will be presented, learners will practice first in a 'safer' environment among peers with activities that involve group or peer work.  Learners at this point will correct themselves or others.  By doing so, adequate feedback is given, learners are less self-conscious and they are interacting and using the language, so they are aware.  Then, learners may practice independently with yet a more advanced activity that will increase the level of challenge since skill and knowledge have also increased.  

In fact, is essential that challenge and skill are well balanced if we want to achieve a sense of flow.  If activities planned in our lessons are too easy or have already been mastered by our learners, they will either be too relaxed, bored, or basically indifferent.  At the same time, if we have planned lessons that are too difficult, disregard gaps in learner skills and / or knowledge, or require learners to independently perform activities they are not yet prepared to perform in a small group or pair, we have misjudged our learners' readiness.  In this case, learners may feel frustrated, anxious, or worried.  

Whether it is indifference or anxiety, such feelings will not contribute to learning and will not result in flow.  Lessons with a good balance of challenge and skill do not throw learners into the sea without first teaching them to swim - or at least giving them a life jacket.  Rather, learners are well prepared for the challenges presented to them throughout the lesson (by the teaching of specific skills and knowledge necessary to effectively achieve the goal of the lesson).  Because he or she has mastered the required tools for the challenge, the learner does not fear it and will apply themselves and the newly acquired tools (skills and knowledge) to the challenge with joy.

A good balance of challenge and skill also keeps learners involved and on task.  As Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi describes in his video about flow, the brain can handle only so much stimulation at a time.  Thus, when learners are adequately challenged and have the right skills required by the activity, they will be busy, focused on the application of their skills, their awareness will be heightened and the activity will become autotelic or an 'end to itself'. 

What does this look like in practice?  It appears as a progression from perception (through presentation) to recognition and comprehension (through focused practice) to use (independent free use).  Activities will be planned in such a way as to reflect this progression, moving gradually from one stage to another, providing adequate feedback and confidence along the way.

If we want our learners to be 'in a state of flow' as they are learning language, it is essential that we apply these techniques to our lesson planning.