Lesson Planning. What a crucial and yet excruciating topic. For some odd reason, I feel like I have already read and/or blogged about this chapter....but oh well.
First of all, can I say, I love the quote at the beginning at the chapter. It so rings true in lesson planning and makes me think a lot about backwards design in lesson planning, where you come up with your desired results from the lesson first and then plan your lesson from there.
I think that lesson planning can be a teacher's best friend but yet worst enemy. For a (somewhat) organized person like myself, I was very drawn to the idea of having a plan for what you want to achieve in your class period or unit, what have you, but the implementation always made me very nervous due to its organized fashion--I always feel as though if I deviate from the lesson plan or something goes wrong, I'd get all flustered and lose it completely. Maybe that's just me or maybe I wasn't taught lesson planning in a good way. I know that it gets more natural the longer you do it, but yeah, lesson planning isn't my favorite topic because it's so individualized and dependent upon your setting and many other factors.
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Monday, November 14, 2011
Assessment: Non-Traditional and Alternative
I like that this section brought up alternative assessment because we talked about alternative assessment briefly in our ESL Testing class last week. Normally I think of alternative assessment as a way to differentiate methods and allow the students' knowledge to be measured in ways other than multiple choice tests that can hinder them and not extract their true knowledge in a way that is meaningful for them. Chapter 33 echoes my idea: "Alternative assessment is different from traditional testing in that it actually asks students to show what they can do" (339). I know that many of my greatest learning experiences in high school and college were when I was given a choice of different ways of completing a project. I am naturally a very good writer and test-taker, but differentiated methods were very much appreciated. I think it is also important for teachers to implement alternative assessment because it keeps the class engaged and eager to learn. How much more fun does acting out a play or having a group discussion seem as a basis for an assessment rather than sitting down for an hour and silently taking a test? However, as the chapter notes, the reliability and validity of these alternative assessments are still necessary.
So, how can we got about deciding which forms of alternative or non-traditional assessment will be appropriate and useful for the classroom? Obviously, we have to consider the classroom setting and participants, but chapter 34 provides three issues that need to be considered in assessment: philosophical issues, public issues, and implementation issues. Although the text presents these three idea in order of importance, I would argue that implementation issues are the most important characteristic to be considered because it refers to how the particular form of assessment can be implemented daily in the classroom, which is a huge part of how successful the classroom is.
So, how can we got about deciding which forms of alternative or non-traditional assessment will be appropriate and useful for the classroom? Obviously, we have to consider the classroom setting and participants, but chapter 34 provides three issues that need to be considered in assessment: philosophical issues, public issues, and implementation issues. Although the text presents these three idea in order of importance, I would argue that implementation issues are the most important characteristic to be considered because it refers to how the particular form of assessment can be implemented daily in the classroom, which is a huge part of how successful the classroom is.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Cultural stereotypes & consciousness
It sadly comes as no surprise to me that even a profession that is so mindful and aware of cultural differences is not free from cultural stereotypes. Kuma's article, "Problematizing Cultural Stereotypes in TESOL" addresses in particular the stereotypes that are associates with students from Asia and debunks them using sound research. An interesting point that Kuma makes is that "nearly 3 billion people belonging to cultures and contrasting and conflicting as the Chinese, Indian, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, and many others" are grouped into the same cultured identity of 'Asian.' there is a stark difference between not only all of these cultures, but Indian and Chinese--to group these two extremely different cultures into one group is absolutely ludicrous.
What first struck me about this article was the mention of the first stereotype that is attributed to students from Asia: their obedience to authority. Surely is is a stereotype that we have all heard and believed, not interpreting it in an offensive way but nonetheless perpetuating something that Kuma showcases as being false. My mind went back to an article that we read in this very class: "Potential cultural resistance to pedagogical imports: The case of communicative language teaching in China." In this article, Hu explains the problems that teachers/classrooms trying to incorporate CLT may face. Here is an exceprt of what I said in my blog entry about the article:
"Finally, Chinese culture and customs play a big role in their unwillingness to use a communicative approach in the classroom. A communicative method, by definition, is opposed to teacher dominance--and education culture in China is not like that--they teachers are viewed as the supreme educator. "Students are expected to respect and not to challenge their teachers" (Hu 98)."
I find it interesting that in this class we were asked to read this article when we would later read another article that seems to blatantly negate and spurn the claims made. However, I do not think it so horrible: as Kuma mentions at the end of his article, "We as TESOL professionals largely deal with the unknown and unmanageable. In our attempt to deal with the complexity of our task, we fall for simple, sometimes simplistic, solutions" (Kuma 716). I do not find it hugely problematic that we have read conflicting research because it is important for us not only as TESOL professionals but as scholars of any kind to realize that there are conflicting views and research and be critical of each side.
(To be continued...)
What first struck me about this article was the mention of the first stereotype that is attributed to students from Asia: their obedience to authority. Surely is is a stereotype that we have all heard and believed, not interpreting it in an offensive way but nonetheless perpetuating something that Kuma showcases as being false. My mind went back to an article that we read in this very class: "Potential cultural resistance to pedagogical imports: The case of communicative language teaching in China." In this article, Hu explains the problems that teachers/classrooms trying to incorporate CLT may face. Here is an exceprt of what I said in my blog entry about the article:
"Finally, Chinese culture and customs play a big role in their unwillingness to use a communicative approach in the classroom. A communicative method, by definition, is opposed to teacher dominance--and education culture in China is not like that--they teachers are viewed as the supreme educator. "Students are expected to respect and not to challenge their teachers" (Hu 98)."
I find it interesting that in this class we were asked to read this article when we would later read another article that seems to blatantly negate and spurn the claims made. However, I do not think it so horrible: as Kuma mentions at the end of his article, "We as TESOL professionals largely deal with the unknown and unmanageable. In our attempt to deal with the complexity of our task, we fall for simple, sometimes simplistic, solutions" (Kuma 716). I do not find it hugely problematic that we have read conflicting research because it is important for us not only as TESOL professionals but as scholars of any kind to realize that there are conflicting views and research and be critical of each side.
(To be continued...)
Monday, October 24, 2011
Anthology Chapters 13, 14, & 15: Teaching Grammar
This section of the anthology encompassing the three above chapters dealt with grammar. The teaching of grammar is obviously a very important topic to be considered and constantly though about when in charge of ESL students. I liked that the first chapter brought up a very basic but extremely important discussion on grammar: why should we teach it, and what are good and bad reasons to teach it? I am in a spelling and writing class right now and we constantly discuss the problem with how spelling is taught in schools, leading to many people have such a misunderstanding of English spelling and its rules, why things are the way they are, why there are so many "exceptions" (upon closer analysis you find that these are either not exceptions at all but elements of the language etymologically preserved from the past or carelessly deemed as exceptions by the lack of motivation to investigate further). I think it is so important for every student, especially ESL students in our context, to understand the RIGHT reasons why it is necessary to learn grammar and learn it well.
Chapter 14 dove deeper and addressed a concept that I thought was interesting: in moving from a grammar-based approach to a task-based, we tend to deemphasize the explicit teaching/spoon-feeding of grammar because we feel that skills learned should be done so more naturally or in a multi-modal way, similar to how they would be acquired in a communicative or task-based approach. Richards mentions that grammar-focused activities tend to "elicit a careful (monitored) speech style," and task-based activities "reflect natural language use" (Richards 155). Where is there room left from grammar incorporation in task-based teaching. It definitely requires thinking outside the box a little bit to create tasks that involve grammar that aren't simply gap filling exercises and drills. Richards states that "form will largely look after itself with incidental support from the teacher" and that "grammar has a mediating role" (Richards 156). I took this to mean that as students engage in these tasks that require more natural use of the language, their grammar will naturally improve along the way. Even if they are not focused on speaking with 100% accuracy during the tasks, when they are engaged and focusing on meaning-making, they will be less worried about committing errors. Richards states as they continuously carry out these tasks, "they engage in the process of negotiation of meaning" which may include comprehension checks and clarifications which gradually modifies their language output and allows the features to become more correct.
The third chapter of the section brought up some very thought-provoking ideas to consider when thinking about grammar: "According to Pienemann's teachability hypothesis, a structure cannot be successfully taught unless the learner is developmentally ready to acquire it" (Richards 170). This concept is, I believe, related to the idea of the acquisition of implicit knowledge, which involves three processes: noticing, comparing, and integrating. The third step, integration, takes place at a deeper level in the mind of which the learner is not generally or often aware.
Chapter 14 dove deeper and addressed a concept that I thought was interesting: in moving from a grammar-based approach to a task-based, we tend to deemphasize the explicit teaching/spoon-feeding of grammar because we feel that skills learned should be done so more naturally or in a multi-modal way, similar to how they would be acquired in a communicative or task-based approach. Richards mentions that grammar-focused activities tend to "elicit a careful (monitored) speech style," and task-based activities "reflect natural language use" (Richards 155). Where is there room left from grammar incorporation in task-based teaching. It definitely requires thinking outside the box a little bit to create tasks that involve grammar that aren't simply gap filling exercises and drills. Richards states that "form will largely look after itself with incidental support from the teacher" and that "grammar has a mediating role" (Richards 156). I took this to mean that as students engage in these tasks that require more natural use of the language, their grammar will naturally improve along the way. Even if they are not focused on speaking with 100% accuracy during the tasks, when they are engaged and focusing on meaning-making, they will be less worried about committing errors. Richards states as they continuously carry out these tasks, "they engage in the process of negotiation of meaning" which may include comprehension checks and clarifications which gradually modifies their language output and allows the features to become more correct.
The third chapter of the section brought up some very thought-provoking ideas to consider when thinking about grammar: "According to Pienemann's teachability hypothesis, a structure cannot be successfully taught unless the learner is developmentally ready to acquire it" (Richards 170). This concept is, I believe, related to the idea of the acquisition of implicit knowledge, which involves three processes: noticing, comparing, and integrating. The third step, integration, takes place at a deeper level in the mind of which the learner is not generally or often aware.
Saturday, October 15, 2011
Language Learning Strategies
Cary's second article focuses on the learning strategy introduction and integration in a teacher named Fiona's fifth grade classroom. I found this article extremely reader-friendly and encouraging in its discussion of learning strategies that the children employed. Ms. Chen's method of discussing the learning strategies that children are using with them seemed to instigate a lively discussion that worked well. However, at the postscript of the article it mentions that Fiona was "concerned with the lack of student "buy-in"; kids frequently groaned when she announced it was strategy time" (Cary 122). What was found to work best was when she focused on content and not skills or strategies. The content was the first thought, and the other two would follow.
The language learning strategies presented in the opening of chapter 11 (practicing song lyrics in the target language, reading newspapers and magazine in the target language, etc) are ones that I am extremely familiar with, have been suggested to me in the past, and have undertaken in order to strengthen my language skills. The chapter goes on to present a list of strategies that are essential for all good language learners to have. These are more general but technical as well and include being uninhibited about mistakes, taking advantage of all practice opportunities, and focusing on both form and meaning. Being aware of what strategies are being utilized in language learning leads to increased proficiency in the target language, and although research is not clear regarding whether or not less successful learners are aware of the strategies they use, they only use them sparingly and in desperation. The difference between the strategies of the two groups is that the higher-achieving learners use thoughtful and introspective strategies while the less-successful use desperate measures, if you will, such as translation and memorization, or ones that facilitate little fossilization.
Chapter 12 goes deeper into the idea of learning strategies and presents an action research study where the researcher intended "to see whether incorporating a learning strategy and self-monitoring dimension into the classroom would help" his students develop a self-reflective orientation (Anthology 133). His research questions centered around the sensitivity of the language learning process that may or may not have arisen, the possible formulation of realistic learning goals and development of learning skills, and the application of these skills beyond the classroom. Using a number of different categories that focused on topics such as strategies for dealing with pronunciation and grammar, dealing with the macroskills of reading, writing, and listening, and focusing on the content and environment of the learning process, and a number of tasks within these categories, the researcher came up with the conclusion that strategy training did lead to greater sensitivity to the learning process (over time). "Opportunities to reflect on the learning process and to develop new learning skills helped learners to identify and articulate differences between their school experiences and those encountered at university" (Anthology 143).
The language learning strategies presented in the opening of chapter 11 (practicing song lyrics in the target language, reading newspapers and magazine in the target language, etc) are ones that I am extremely familiar with, have been suggested to me in the past, and have undertaken in order to strengthen my language skills. The chapter goes on to present a list of strategies that are essential for all good language learners to have. These are more general but technical as well and include being uninhibited about mistakes, taking advantage of all practice opportunities, and focusing on both form and meaning. Being aware of what strategies are being utilized in language learning leads to increased proficiency in the target language, and although research is not clear regarding whether or not less successful learners are aware of the strategies they use, they only use them sparingly and in desperation. The difference between the strategies of the two groups is that the higher-achieving learners use thoughtful and introspective strategies while the less-successful use desperate measures, if you will, such as translation and memorization, or ones that facilitate little fossilization.
Chapter 12 goes deeper into the idea of learning strategies and presents an action research study where the researcher intended "to see whether incorporating a learning strategy and self-monitoring dimension into the classroom would help" his students develop a self-reflective orientation (Anthology 133). His research questions centered around the sensitivity of the language learning process that may or may not have arisen, the possible formulation of realistic learning goals and development of learning skills, and the application of these skills beyond the classroom. Using a number of different categories that focused on topics such as strategies for dealing with pronunciation and grammar, dealing with the macroskills of reading, writing, and listening, and focusing on the content and environment of the learning process, and a number of tasks within these categories, the researcher came up with the conclusion that strategy training did lead to greater sensitivity to the learning process (over time). "Opportunities to reflect on the learning process and to develop new learning skills helped learners to identify and articulate differences between their school experiences and those encountered at university" (Anthology 143).
Monday, October 10, 2011
Teaching of Speaking and Listening
The article for this week brought up an excellent point that I myself sometimes ponder and I KNOW that many people ponder when thinking about ESL classes: "How do I support a student's first language when I don't speak the language?" My own mother always asked me how I was going to teach ESL in the future. "Don't you have to speak all of the different languages that they speak?" Well, luckily I will be able to use my Spanish occasionally in an ESL classroom as there are likely to be Spanish-speakers, but there will no doubt be many more languages that the students speak.
I loved the backdrop that the author presented of Dolores, the teacher in an ESL classroom of speakers of many different languages, including Vietnamese, Tagalog, Spanish, Khmer, and Lao. She describes a classroom "project," if you will, where each student is responsible for being the language teacher for a week and teaches the rest of the class three phrases. The students are encouraged to use the words they have learned throughout the year when interacting with others. "Please" and "Thank you" are the main phrases the children learn. I think this is a great way to communicate the value of other languages and a student's home language in the classroom. Because it is not obviously possible to vary your instruction and use each of the student's home languages, this is a happy medium where the students can be exposed to different languages and, in my opinion, feel that they are in a multicultural-appreciative environment when in the classroom. In my practicum experience, I am lucky enough to be able to see the teacher using student's home languages in instruction, but this is because (at the basic level) there are only three students in the class and they all speak Spanish. The teachers use Spanish occasionally to clarify directions or to chat about non-school-related things.
Chapters 18 and 20 of the anthology discussed how to build discussion skills and factors to consider when developing adult EFL students' speaking abilities. First of all, I liked that this chapter specifically focused on adult EFL students--much of the research I was looking at before, although excellent, did not specify a context or age group that the theory is supposed to take place in, and therefore confused me about the plausibility of the methods. (For example, is it really possible to apply a humanistic approach to language teaching when your group of students are six years old?) One point that chapter 18 brought up was that sociocultural factors can play a huge role in oral communication. The video we watched in class touched on this a bit, although it had more to do with writing: an Asian student, when writing a paper, did not incorporate outside sources into her paper because she was taught in her home country that deviating from what they had learned was not good. Cultural practices can affect speech to a very high degree as well--from the degree of imposing on another person that is felt to be allowed to the frequency and meaning of nonverbal gestures. In addition, the specificity of things may come off differently to different cultures: the chapter gives the example of a Chinese student, when being told by another student that they should get lunch sometime, trying to come up with an exact date that they could and receiving a puzzled look. This reminds me of the very American way of saying "Hi, how are you?" or something similar when talking to a person as a very informal communication--one doesn't actually intend to know how the person is doing, and an extended reply would surprise the questioner.
I loved the backdrop that the author presented of Dolores, the teacher in an ESL classroom of speakers of many different languages, including Vietnamese, Tagalog, Spanish, Khmer, and Lao. She describes a classroom "project," if you will, where each student is responsible for being the language teacher for a week and teaches the rest of the class three phrases. The students are encouraged to use the words they have learned throughout the year when interacting with others. "Please" and "Thank you" are the main phrases the children learn. I think this is a great way to communicate the value of other languages and a student's home language in the classroom. Because it is not obviously possible to vary your instruction and use each of the student's home languages, this is a happy medium where the students can be exposed to different languages and, in my opinion, feel that they are in a multicultural-appreciative environment when in the classroom. In my practicum experience, I am lucky enough to be able to see the teacher using student's home languages in instruction, but this is because (at the basic level) there are only three students in the class and they all speak Spanish. The teachers use Spanish occasionally to clarify directions or to chat about non-school-related things.
Chapters 18 and 20 of the anthology discussed how to build discussion skills and factors to consider when developing adult EFL students' speaking abilities. First of all, I liked that this chapter specifically focused on adult EFL students--much of the research I was looking at before, although excellent, did not specify a context or age group that the theory is supposed to take place in, and therefore confused me about the plausibility of the methods. (For example, is it really possible to apply a humanistic approach to language teaching when your group of students are six years old?) One point that chapter 18 brought up was that sociocultural factors can play a huge role in oral communication. The video we watched in class touched on this a bit, although it had more to do with writing: an Asian student, when writing a paper, did not incorporate outside sources into her paper because she was taught in her home country that deviating from what they had learned was not good. Cultural practices can affect speech to a very high degree as well--from the degree of imposing on another person that is felt to be allowed to the frequency and meaning of nonverbal gestures. In addition, the specificity of things may come off differently to different cultures: the chapter gives the example of a Chinese student, when being told by another student that they should get lunch sometime, trying to come up with an exact date that they could and receiving a puzzled look. This reminds me of the very American way of saying "Hi, how are you?" or something similar when talking to a person as a very informal communication--one doesn't actually intend to know how the person is doing, and an extended reply would surprise the questioner.
Monday, October 3, 2011
Teaching Reading and Writing: Heuristics
Chapter 8 of Kuma's Beyond Methods is titled Activating Intuitive Heuristics, and understandably focused on good teaching tasks for teachers to incorporate in order to strengthen students' skills of induction and deduction, among other things. Heuristics "refers to the process of self-discovery on the part of the learner." It can also refer to "a method of teaching allowing the students to learn by discovering things by themselves and learning from their own experiences rather than by telling them things" (Kuma 176). I am very familiar with and consider myself to promote this philosophy of teaching even though I did not previously know the technical term for it. I think that the application of the idea to the teaching of reading and writing is an interesting and practical use of heuristics.
Section 12, chapters 26, 27, and 28 also focused on teaching reading. Something that stuck out to me right away upon reading was the mention of "importance of developing sound-letter correspondences for beginning reading" (Richards 276). Although I am aware that as ESL teachers we will be teaching students very basic English dependent upon their level and will be working with students who do not speak a high level of English, it is important for us to teach spelling and phonics the correct way. Too often, we are taught how to spell based on how a words sounds. How many of you have ever heard the old adage 'Sound it out!" when asking someone how to spell a word? Obviously, we should not eliminate this method altogether, but there are many instances when it does not hold true and it can be extremely confusing to native English speakers, not to mention English language learners. I encountered something similar in my practicum experience; the teacher was reviewing a phonics lesson and a few of the examples given did not precisely correspond to the correct sound, so she simply told the students not to worry about them. It's such a hard thing to effectively teaching spelling to students. Hopefully the orthography class I am taking can leave me with a clear pedagogical focus when trying to teach spelling.
Anyway, back to the chapters. As i was reading through chapter 27, I really thought about the ideas and methods they were presenting on how to teach reading effectively, and I really found it hard to think critically about these ideas since it was such a long time ago that I learned to read and once we know how to do something second-nature, we tend to have trouble explaining it. However, many of the strategies discussed I have seen displayed in my practicum classroom. In the intermediate ESL class, the teacher reads aloud from the novel while the students follow along at their desks. She often stops to explain words or ask the students what they think the word means, ask questions, and make inferences. These behaviors show exemplary teacher modeling. I also found the discussion of extensive reading to be very relatable. My grade schools often took part in extensive reading, participating in stop, drop and read programs as well as another program where we recorded the number of minutes we read independently and then were given prizes for the total number.
Section 12, chapters 26, 27, and 28 also focused on teaching reading. Something that stuck out to me right away upon reading was the mention of "importance of developing sound-letter correspondences for beginning reading" (Richards 276). Although I am aware that as ESL teachers we will be teaching students very basic English dependent upon their level and will be working with students who do not speak a high level of English, it is important for us to teach spelling and phonics the correct way. Too often, we are taught how to spell based on how a words sounds. How many of you have ever heard the old adage 'Sound it out!" when asking someone how to spell a word? Obviously, we should not eliminate this method altogether, but there are many instances when it does not hold true and it can be extremely confusing to native English speakers, not to mention English language learners. I encountered something similar in my practicum experience; the teacher was reviewing a phonics lesson and a few of the examples given did not precisely correspond to the correct sound, so she simply told the students not to worry about them. It's such a hard thing to effectively teaching spelling to students. Hopefully the orthography class I am taking can leave me with a clear pedagogical focus when trying to teach spelling.
Anyway, back to the chapters. As i was reading through chapter 27, I really thought about the ideas and methods they were presenting on how to teach reading effectively, and I really found it hard to think critically about these ideas since it was such a long time ago that I learned to read and once we know how to do something second-nature, we tend to have trouble explaining it. However, many of the strategies discussed I have seen displayed in my practicum classroom. In the intermediate ESL class, the teacher reads aloud from the novel while the students follow along at their desks. She often stops to explain words or ask the students what they think the word means, ask questions, and make inferences. These behaviors show exemplary teacher modeling. I also found the discussion of extensive reading to be very relatable. My grade schools often took part in extensive reading, participating in stop, drop and read programs as well as another program where we recorded the number of minutes we read independently and then were given prizes for the total number.
Project Ideas/Proposal
Dr. Seloni and I briefly discussed some ideas for my final project today. I am eager to do something relating LGBT issues to the ESL classroom as I did a paper last semester on the history of LGBT issues' connection to the ESL classroom and I wanted to expand it to maybe discuss methods that take into account LGBT issues and promote awareness. Dr. Seloni came up with the idea for a workshop presented to the intermediate level students about the basic issues regarding the LGBT community, stories about children like them, slang words used in the community and those aimed at LGBT individuals, etc. I think that I have a lot more planning and brainstorming to do but I think this would really be an effective task for the students to participate in.
Does anyone have any feedback/ideas/comments?
Does anyone have any feedback/ideas/comments?
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Sheltered Instruction
Although the initial thought when many people think of sheltered instruction quickly jumps to special education, further scrutiny of the process involved proves that it should not be though of as special education, but a type of teaching that is individualized and geared toward the best interests of the learner. The article states that "The SI approach must not be viewed as simply a set of additional or replacement instructional techiniques that teachers implement in their classrooms. Indeed, the sheltered approach draws from an completements
Monday, September 19, 2011
Task-Based Language Teaching
The article by Skehan and section 5, chapter 9 of the anthology focus on the task-based method of language teaching. It is easy to infer the meaning of task-based learning: learning that is based on tasks completed. the anthology references Skehan on what constitutes a task and how it works in the classroom: "Skehan proposes that a task is an activity in which meaning is primary, there is a communication problem to solve, and the task is closely related to real-world activities" (Richards 100). Additionally, Richards states "A task is an activity which learners carry out using their available language resources and leading to a real outcome" (Richards 94). Larsen and Freeman mention that task-based learning has to do with context.
The anthology presents a scenario where an extended project was done in a speaking course with 340 students at a Japanese university.They worked in groups and made a questionnaire to determine opinions of a target group on a specific issue. This activity is an accurate representation of a proper task-based learning scenario because it compounds many specific tasks (making a formal presentation, videotaping and critiquing, interviewing, gathering data, etc.) and doesn't worry too much about errors that may be made by students.Two important components of task-based learning are the inclusion of pre-task activities and the negotiation of meaning. Including pre-task activities is necessary in order to clarify and make the students comfortable with the activity.
The third article helped me to understand how task-based learning could successfully be incorporated into the classroom and what it looked like. I viewed task-based learning as a combination of a communicative method and a systematic one, since attention is paid to detail and there is strong focus on form. The provided scenario discussed an activity that fit the goals on task-based learning by including a few different types of tasks such as the information gap activity and focuses on a number of pedagogic techniques such as scaffolding and inferencing. I think that I was somewhat right about my assumption, although I still am a little fuzzy on what truly constitutes the method of task-based learning.
The anthology presents a scenario where an extended project was done in a speaking course with 340 students at a Japanese university.They worked in groups and made a questionnaire to determine opinions of a target group on a specific issue. This activity is an accurate representation of a proper task-based learning scenario because it compounds many specific tasks (making a formal presentation, videotaping and critiquing, interviewing, gathering data, etc.) and doesn't worry too much about errors that may be made by students.Two important components of task-based learning are the inclusion of pre-task activities and the negotiation of meaning. Including pre-task activities is necessary in order to clarify and make the students comfortable with the activity.
The third article helped me to understand how task-based learning could successfully be incorporated into the classroom and what it looked like. I viewed task-based learning as a combination of a communicative method and a systematic one, since attention is paid to detail and there is strong focus on form. The provided scenario discussed an activity that fit the goals on task-based learning by including a few different types of tasks such as the information gap activity and focuses on a number of pedagogic techniques such as scaffolding and inferencing. I think that I was somewhat right about my assumption, although I still am a little fuzzy on what truly constitutes the method of task-based learning.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Contrasting Views on CLT
In the previous class, we read about and discussed the Communicative Language Theory, known in short as CLT, which emphasizes real-life communication experiences and activities that give the English language learner a well-rounded experience in learning the language by not only being able to master the linguistic forms, but being competent in the area of communication and pragmatics. The two assigned readings today presented some perspectives on the shortcomings and problems that are associated with the Communicative Language Teaching theory. The first article (Bax) begins by giving numerous scenarios worldwide in which language programs that lack CLT as a method are considered 'backwards'. This seems a very harsh designation to attribute to any program employing other methods than CLT. Although I agree that Communicative Language Teaching seems a very useful and integrative method, it is not the only one worth incorporating and surely one who relies on another methods should not be considered 'backward'. One can reflect on this by comparing the notion of Gardner's multiple intelligences. As learners, we each possess different learn styles and predominant intelligences that work best for us. It would not be a good teaching practice to only cater to one learning style or type of intelligence in our classrooms, so we must vary our instruction. The same must be true for teaching methods for English language teaching.
Bax's article brings into light the alternate method of a context-based teaching method. Depending on the context the learning or communication situation takes place in, a Communicative Language Teaching approach may not always be maximally successful, nor may be a focus on language teaching methodologies at all, which surprised me. As a pre-service teacher in both English and Spanish, the content of our instruction is always 'methods, methods, methods' and trying to come to a consensus on 'best methods'. "By contrast, a context approach insists that while methodology is important, it is just one factor in successful language learning...it may be that the ability to learn a second language is an inherent human characteristic, but it is becoming clearer that contextual factors such as affect (Arnold 1999) hugely influence that ability" (Bax 282). I am slightly confused why there is so much argument about the best theory that should be used in a language classroom. Surely incorporating multiple theories into the classroom could prove to be harmonious and useful in instruction. I believe the article mentions something similar, asking the reader to reflect on why another approach is necessary, and Bax (1999) states the affirmative, since the lack of an explicit focus on context will make it secondary to everything else.
The second article, by Hu, discusses cultural reasons why Communicative Language Teaching is somewhat of a controversial teaching method in the People's Republic of China. For years, many educators have wanted and attempted to reform English Language teaching in China but it simply did not prove to be effective. The form of language teaching in China tends to be very systematic, commonly employing methods like audiolingualism and grammar translation. Thus, a communication-centered approach was not desireable. Also, there were additional inhibiting factors including lack of proficiency in the teachers (this makes me wonder if the language teachers were Chinese or other English-speaking nationalities), limited instructional time, and big class size. Finally, Chinese culture and customs play a big role in their unwillingness to use a communicative approach in the classroom. A communicative method, by definition, is opposed to teacher dominance--and education culture in China is not like that--they teachers are viewed as the supreme educator. "Students are expected to respect and not to challenge their teachers" (Hu 98). Additionally, "'the Chinese tend to associate games and communicative activities in class with entertainment exclusively and are skeptical of their use as learning tools' (Rao, 1996: 476)" (Hu 97).
Bax's article brings into light the alternate method of a context-based teaching method. Depending on the context the learning or communication situation takes place in, a Communicative Language Teaching approach may not always be maximally successful, nor may be a focus on language teaching methodologies at all, which surprised me. As a pre-service teacher in both English and Spanish, the content of our instruction is always 'methods, methods, methods' and trying to come to a consensus on 'best methods'. "By contrast, a context approach insists that while methodology is important, it is just one factor in successful language learning...it may be that the ability to learn a second language is an inherent human characteristic, but it is becoming clearer that contextual factors such as affect (Arnold 1999) hugely influence that ability" (Bax 282). I am slightly confused why there is so much argument about the best theory that should be used in a language classroom. Surely incorporating multiple theories into the classroom could prove to be harmonious and useful in instruction. I believe the article mentions something similar, asking the reader to reflect on why another approach is necessary, and Bax (1999) states the affirmative, since the lack of an explicit focus on context will make it secondary to everything else.
The second article, by Hu, discusses cultural reasons why Communicative Language Teaching is somewhat of a controversial teaching method in the People's Republic of China. For years, many educators have wanted and attempted to reform English Language teaching in China but it simply did not prove to be effective. The form of language teaching in China tends to be very systematic, commonly employing methods like audiolingualism and grammar translation. Thus, a communication-centered approach was not desireable. Also, there were additional inhibiting factors including lack of proficiency in the teachers (this makes me wonder if the language teachers were Chinese or other English-speaking nationalities), limited instructional time, and big class size. Finally, Chinese culture and customs play a big role in their unwillingness to use a communicative approach in the classroom. A communicative method, by definition, is opposed to teacher dominance--and education culture in China is not like that--they teachers are viewed as the supreme educator. "Students are expected to respect and not to challenge their teachers" (Hu 98). Additionally, "'the Chinese tend to associate games and communicative activities in class with entertainment exclusively and are skeptical of their use as learning tools' (Rao, 1996: 476)" (Hu 97).
Monday, September 12, 2011
Communicative Language Teaching
Although I have previously studied the Communicative Language Theory (CLT) before, I still find it to be an interesting and useful method. Instead of solely focusing on linguistic competence, or being able to master linguistic structure, CLT incorporates both linguistic competence as well as communicative competence (in layman's terms, "knowing when and how to say what to whom" (Larsen-Freeman 123).) I think that a CLT focus is extremely necessary in an ESL classroom: students are not only learning English for academic purposes but for a eneral communication purpose as well, thus it is essential to have a grasp of pragmatics and other areas that CLT focuses on.
The article suggested and showed examples of many successful CLT ideas. From real-world issues and events ("The teacher distributes a handout that has a copy of a sports column from a recent newspaper") to easy ways of incorporating the target language into everyday instruction ("The teacher gives the students directions for an activity in the target language"), there are many ways to easily incorporate CLT into the classroom. Today, in only my first day of my practicum experience in a TESOL classroom, I noticed that teacher utilizing a lot of CLT methods such as giving directions in the target language and practicing speaking to one another with the new grammar lesson learned. I think that it is a very successful method for students of all ages, because it can vary in its difficulty. In the class I observed this morning, it was kept basic because the students were at a basic level, but in the examples from ther article, the tasks were more advanced, involving predictions.
Chapter 3 of Beyond Methods focused om maximizing learner opportunities by discussing many different methods that most likely fall into the category of Communicative Language Teaching, although it is not explicitly stated. Some of the topics that Kuma discusses relating to maximizing learner opportunities include learner involvement, teacher questioning ("..ask the right type of questions that will trigger meaningful interaction" (Kuma 49). These include choice, product, process and metaprocess questions), and connecting with the local and global communities. Chapter 3 also features many scenarios that emphasize communication as a main activity taking place. A few short interactions are provided and then a long list of suggestions of microstrategies are also provided. Kuma makes an important point at the end of chapter in reference to the idea that students and teachers must collaborate for effective, maximized learning opportunities: "Considering their collaborative role in the classroom, "we can no longer see teachers simply as teachers and learners simply as learners, because both are, for good or ill, managers of learning" (Allwright, 1984, p. 156)."" (Kuma 76).
The article suggested and showed examples of many successful CLT ideas. From real-world issues and events ("The teacher distributes a handout that has a copy of a sports column from a recent newspaper") to easy ways of incorporating the target language into everyday instruction ("The teacher gives the students directions for an activity in the target language"), there are many ways to easily incorporate CLT into the classroom. Today, in only my first day of my practicum experience in a TESOL classroom, I noticed that teacher utilizing a lot of CLT methods such as giving directions in the target language and practicing speaking to one another with the new grammar lesson learned. I think that it is a very successful method for students of all ages, because it can vary in its difficulty. In the class I observed this morning, it was kept basic because the students were at a basic level, but in the examples from ther article, the tasks were more advanced, involving predictions.
Chapter 3 of Beyond Methods focused om maximizing learner opportunities by discussing many different methods that most likely fall into the category of Communicative Language Teaching, although it is not explicitly stated. Some of the topics that Kuma discusses relating to maximizing learner opportunities include learner involvement, teacher questioning ("..ask the right type of questions that will trigger meaningful interaction" (Kuma 49). These include choice, product, process and metaprocess questions), and connecting with the local and global communities. Chapter 3 also features many scenarios that emphasize communication as a main activity taking place. A few short interactions are provided and then a long list of suggestions of microstrategies are also provided. Kuma makes an important point at the end of chapter in reference to the idea that students and teachers must collaborate for effective, maximized learning opportunities: "Considering their collaborative role in the classroom, "we can no longer see teachers simply as teachers and learners simply as learners, because both are, for good or ill, managers of learning" (Allwright, 1984, p. 156)."" (Kuma 76).
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Transformative Pedagogy: an Immigrant Women's ESL Class
On Thursday in class, we took a detailed look at scenarios in ESL and how they successfully incorporated transformative pedagogy, pedagogy of engagement and learner autonomy. My group focused on the article "Participatory Education as a Critical Framework for an Immigrant Women's ESL Class" by Dana Frye. Frye's article takes place during her time as a volunteer ESL teacher at a community center in the Washington, D.C metropolitan area who developed an ESL classroom for the women.
Frye sought to find answers to the following questions: Would an awareness of social inequities or a recognition of personal strength lead to empowerment? Would the students acquire the power to step outside the classroom and make their lives better? (Frye 505). By keeping a journal of observations of oral and written interactions in the classroom (the students took part in the journaling as well). Frye used a dialogic approach, or one based in dialogue, by utilizing personal stories and journals.
Frye's findings led her to the conclusion that it is necessary to teach language that relates to the lives of the participants and helps strengthen their concepts of self and community. By utilizing the dialogic method of journaling, Frye was able to get a personal, narrated story from each of the participants and access their everyday lives.
The ESL class showed any instances of transformative pedagogy, pedagogy of engagement, and learner autonomy. Frye states that one of the main goals of her ESL class was to provide a characteristic of transformative pedagogy: "A major goal of my class was to use a problem posing approach to literacy to offer and alternative to the narrow scope of women's programs" (Frye 501). This aim of Frye's teaching follows Friere's notions of transformative pedagogy as one that is rooted in outside factors and critical thinking methods such as the problem-posing that Frye employs. She also relies of Freire's idea of literacy as ""an act of knowing, through which a person is able to look critically at the culture which has shaped him [or her] and move toward reflection and positive action upon his [or her] world" (p. 205)" (Frye 504). By drawing strength from their personal victories and focusing on their journeys and personal histories, the women defined the changes that they wanted to see women make outside of the classroom. They used this connection between their own lives and what they saw going on in the outside world to become pedagogically engaged. Finally, the women demonstrated learner autonomy by creating and working successfully in the small, safe space of their ESL classroom "that helps them strengthen their concepts of self and community and confront the oppressive forces in their lives" (Frye 511).
Frye sought to find answers to the following questions: Would an awareness of social inequities or a recognition of personal strength lead to empowerment? Would the students acquire the power to step outside the classroom and make their lives better? (Frye 505). By keeping a journal of observations of oral and written interactions in the classroom (the students took part in the journaling as well). Frye used a dialogic approach, or one based in dialogue, by utilizing personal stories and journals.
Frye's findings led her to the conclusion that it is necessary to teach language that relates to the lives of the participants and helps strengthen their concepts of self and community. By utilizing the dialogic method of journaling, Frye was able to get a personal, narrated story from each of the participants and access their everyday lives.
The ESL class showed any instances of transformative pedagogy, pedagogy of engagement, and learner autonomy. Frye states that one of the main goals of her ESL class was to provide a characteristic of transformative pedagogy: "A major goal of my class was to use a problem posing approach to literacy to offer and alternative to the narrow scope of women's programs" (Frye 501). This aim of Frye's teaching follows Friere's notions of transformative pedagogy as one that is rooted in outside factors and critical thinking methods such as the problem-posing that Frye employs. She also relies of Freire's idea of literacy as ""an act of knowing, through which a person is able to look critically at the culture which has shaped him [or her] and move toward reflection and positive action upon his [or her] world" (p. 205)" (Frye 504). By drawing strength from their personal victories and focusing on their journeys and personal histories, the women defined the changes that they wanted to see women make outside of the classroom. They used this connection between their own lives and what they saw going on in the outside world to become pedagogically engaged. Finally, the women demonstrated learner autonomy by creating and working successfully in the small, safe space of their ESL classroom "that helps them strengthen their concepts of self and community and confront the oppressive forces in their lives" (Frye 511).
Thursday, September 8, 2011
Pennycook- Critical Approaches
I really liked how Pennycook attempted to critically and thoroughly discuss critical approaches to TESOL in his article. Although he makes the disclaimer that his ideas and their organization are to be very broad, I nonetheless found it very informative and necessary for a pre-service teacher in TESOL to read and become familiar with.
Pennycook first mentions the differing domains that a critical perspective of TESOL may appear in. These include class, race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, as well as power relations and social and structural inequality (Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed comes to mind here). By incorporating all of these domains into the critical examination, "This reorientation seeks to explore multiple ways in which power may operate in social life; and it shifts the focus away from considering only material conditions of inequality in order to show how culture or discourse may play crucial roles in perpetuating the ways difference is understood, reproduced, or changed" (Pennycook 331-2)
Pennycook first mentions the differing domains that a critical perspective of TESOL may appear in. These include class, race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, as well as power relations and social and structural inequality (Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed comes to mind here). By incorporating all of these domains into the critical examination, "This reorientation seeks to explore multiple ways in which power may operate in social life; and it shifts the focus away from considering only material conditions of inequality in order to show how culture or discourse may play crucial roles in perpetuating the ways difference is understood, reproduced, or changed" (Pennycook 331-2)
Monday, September 5, 2011
Theory, Practice, & Method
Chapters 1 and 2 of Kumaravadivelu's Beyond Methods book were a useful read for me at this point in time because we are touching on methods in my 346 class as well. Chapter 1 began by discussing the various roles that a teacher may occupy throughout his or her career as a precursor to the theories of language learning discussed in the chapters. Some of the roles include scientist, manager, psychologist, and counselor. "Each of them captures the teacher's role partially but none of them fully" (Kuma 7). I believe this statement is applicable to the ideas presented in the first two chapters: there are many theories out there for language teaching and the role of the teacher, none of them works in isolation every single time, but instead need to be used in conjunction and altered according to circumstance and need.
Chapter one presents three different theories for the role of the teacher: teachers as passive technicians (which, when I read, couldn't believe), teachers as reflective practitioners, and teachers as transformative intellectuals. The theory of teachers as reflective practitioners takes into account a good point: even with the successful use of the five roles espousing the theory, "Learning to teach does not end with obtaining a diploma or a degree in teacher education but is an ongoing process throughout one's teaching career" (Kuma 11). I have always thought this idea central to my personal teaching philosophy, viewing teachers more as educators. Teachers as transformative intellectuals are committed to social action and world-making. The principles of Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed, which I have encountered numerous times in my study of language teaching and education, come strongly into play here.
Something interesting that I encountered in this chapter while thinking about how teachers can successfully be able to manage and keep in mind their differing roles as educators was this quote: "It has been suggested that there is no substantial difference between common sense and theory, particularly in the field of education" (Kuma 17). I took this to mean that through the extensive training that pre-service teachers receive, the theory is so ingrained in them that it is almost second-nature. Kuma gives an example of this idea, stating that "common sense is different from theory only by the degree of formality and self-consciousness with which it is invoked" (Kuma 17).
In chapter two, Kuma again responds to a question I had been pondering while reading and throughout my time studying methods in language education: With so much to deal with in the classroom, standards to meet, circumstances to weather, etc., how can we as teachers effectively manage different methods successfully? Kuma states that "No idealized method can visualize all the variables in advance in order to provide situation-specific suggestions" (Kuma 28). He also acknowledges that the eleven common methods of language teaching often overlap to the degree that they are really composed of a lot of the same elements and therefore may not truly be different methods at all, and suggests grouping them into three categories: language-centered methods, learner-centered methods, and learning-centered methods.
Finally, Kuma presents another theory about methods (ironic, no?) that provides the worried pre-service teacher with solace when finding language teaching methods somewhat daunting: postmethod pedagogy. This, he states, "allows us to go beyond, and overcome the limitations of, method-based pedagogy" (Kuma 34). By using three parameters (particularity, practicality, and possibility), which are characteristically blurred, they look at methods three-dimensionally, can facilitate the advancement of context-sensitive pedagogy, enable and encourage teachers to theorize from their practice and practice what they theorize, and use it as a quest for identity formation and social transformation.
Chapter one presents three different theories for the role of the teacher: teachers as passive technicians (which, when I read, couldn't believe), teachers as reflective practitioners, and teachers as transformative intellectuals. The theory of teachers as reflective practitioners takes into account a good point: even with the successful use of the five roles espousing the theory, "Learning to teach does not end with obtaining a diploma or a degree in teacher education but is an ongoing process throughout one's teaching career" (Kuma 11). I have always thought this idea central to my personal teaching philosophy, viewing teachers more as educators. Teachers as transformative intellectuals are committed to social action and world-making. The principles of Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed, which I have encountered numerous times in my study of language teaching and education, come strongly into play here.
Something interesting that I encountered in this chapter while thinking about how teachers can successfully be able to manage and keep in mind their differing roles as educators was this quote: "It has been suggested that there is no substantial difference between common sense and theory, particularly in the field of education" (Kuma 17). I took this to mean that through the extensive training that pre-service teachers receive, the theory is so ingrained in them that it is almost second-nature. Kuma gives an example of this idea, stating that "common sense is different from theory only by the degree of formality and self-consciousness with which it is invoked" (Kuma 17).
In chapter two, Kuma again responds to a question I had been pondering while reading and throughout my time studying methods in language education: With so much to deal with in the classroom, standards to meet, circumstances to weather, etc., how can we as teachers effectively manage different methods successfully? Kuma states that "No idealized method can visualize all the variables in advance in order to provide situation-specific suggestions" (Kuma 28). He also acknowledges that the eleven common methods of language teaching often overlap to the degree that they are really composed of a lot of the same elements and therefore may not truly be different methods at all, and suggests grouping them into three categories: language-centered methods, learner-centered methods, and learning-centered methods.
Finally, Kuma presents another theory about methods (ironic, no?) that provides the worried pre-service teacher with solace when finding language teaching methods somewhat daunting: postmethod pedagogy. This, he states, "allows us to go beyond, and overcome the limitations of, method-based pedagogy" (Kuma 34). By using three parameters (particularity, practicality, and possibility), which are characteristically blurred, they look at methods three-dimensionally, can facilitate the advancement of context-sensitive pedagogy, enable and encourage teachers to theorize from their practice and practice what they theorize, and use it as a quest for identity formation and social transformation.
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Kuma & Celce-Murcia
Kuma's article mentions the shifts that TESOL theories have undergone in the past few decades. One of the important points he makes is that critical pedagogy theories have been a strong focus which prompts new ways of looking at classroom practices.Kuma makes note of a 1999 article by Canagarajah, where he communicates an importance of a "reflexivity on the strategies and discourses that students bring with them" as well as "productively exploiting students own cultural and linguistic resources" (Kuma 70). Lin (1999) also mentions importance of connecting with students to help them transform their attitudes, disposition, skills, and self-image. The focus on the learner made me think of the article we read last semester and discussed last class, and indeed the same article by Bonny Norton is quoted in this article. Exploring the local realities and backgrounds that students implant into their language learning experience can help an English language instructor provide the best methods for the students and enable them to make their vision of their L2 identity clearer.
In the second article, which discusses methods for language teaching that are no surprise to me, the humanistic-affective approach stuck out to me due to its focus on the learner and making meaningful connections through self-actualization, respect, and a nurturing class atmosphere. I feel it is related to the idea of working to help students create meaningful identities and attitudes in L2 learning. Something else that also stuck out to me was the mention of semantic identity being emphasized through the communicative approach rather than simply the linguistic skills.
In the second article, which discusses methods for language teaching that are no surprise to me, the humanistic-affective approach stuck out to me due to its focus on the learner and making meaningful connections through self-actualization, respect, and a nurturing class atmosphere. I feel it is related to the idea of working to help students create meaningful identities and attitudes in L2 learning. Something else that also stuck out to me was the mention of semantic identity being emphasized through the communicative approach rather than simply the linguistic skills.
Monday, August 29, 2011
Anthology Chapters 1 & 2
I liked how in-depth these first two chapters went into choosing and construction effective pedagogical practices. I was able to visualize examples of them not only thinking about an ESL classroom but another foreign language classroom, such as Spanish, as well. Something that stuck out to me was Edward Anthony's (1963) idea that a method was actually a piece of a three-part hierarchy of sorts, beginning with the approach, followed by the method, and ending in the technique in which the method is executed (9). However, Richards and Rogers (1986) believe that a method is more of an umbrella term, encompassing approaches and procedures. I think that both of these definitions are valid. Both of these ideas present a method as either a part of a multi-step process or grouped together with multiple other actions. I believe that they are truly variable due to the fact that they are always changing, both in historical pedagogy and a teacher's usage of them, and the fact that "an approach to language pedagogy is not just a set of static principles "set in stone"" (11).
As I mentioned before, I like the fact that this text mentions a number of principles, meaning that these are the so-called rules that many effective language learning and teaching methods follow. Some that I found most interesting included automaticity (a timely control of the language forms, similar to fluency in my opinion), intrinsic motivation, and strategic investment. A successful teacher can inspire her students to have a high intrinsic motivation, or a motivation within themselves to succeed and a strong reason for investing in the language.
As I mentioned before, I like the fact that this text mentions a number of principles, meaning that these are the so-called rules that many effective language learning and teaching methods follow. Some that I found most interesting included automaticity (a timely control of the language forms, similar to fluency in my opinion), intrinsic motivation, and strategic investment. A successful teacher can inspire her students to have a high intrinsic motivation, or a motivation within themselves to succeed and a strong reason for investing in the language.
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
World Englishes and Culture
Although the two articles I read were very different in topic (Jenkins' discussed the concept of 'World Englishes' in great deal and was very language-oriented and ESL themed; the writing by Diaz-Rico and Weed provided a historical framework and discussion for the cultural background we may likely see in our ESL classes.) I believe that these readings are useful to the ESL educator not only independently but taken in conjunction with one another as well. By learning a basis of the history of the region and culture transported due to immigration, whether elected or forced, from which these World Englishes come, we can better understand the students in our classroom of the same origin.
I found Jenkins' article regarding World Englishes to be extremely fascinating, mainly in part due to the different graphs and charts created by theorists and linguists included. I found Strevens model of Englishes, which laid them out and connected them geographically, to be extremely cool and useful for thinking about the geographical travel that so many languages in our history experienced and how that affected the linguistic patterns and culture. Kachru, McArthur, and Gorlach, all created circle models, although these differed on their measurement and coding. Kachru has a three-circle model of World Englishes in which different Englishes are categorized as outer circle, inner circle, or expanding circle. McArthur's is called the Circle of World English, and attempts to break it down in a chart-like feature but in a circle shape. Finally, although Gorlach's model is not pictured in the article, it sounds to me to be very similar to McArthur's. Jenkins also mentions in this article not only changes that have occurred recently, but a list of McArthur's provisos regarding the problems with the common three-group categorization of "the spread of English around the world" (Jenkins 15)--ESL (English as a Second Language), EFL (English as a Foreign Language), and ENL (English as a Native Language). One example of McArthur's provisos is as such: "ENL is not a single variety of English, but differs markedly from one territory to another (e.g. the US and UK), and even from one region with a given territory to another. In addition, the version of English accepted as 'standard' differs from one ENL territory to another." (Jenkins 16)
I found Jenkins' article regarding World Englishes to be extremely fascinating, mainly in part due to the different graphs and charts created by theorists and linguists included. I found Strevens model of Englishes, which laid them out and connected them geographically, to be extremely cool and useful for thinking about the geographical travel that so many languages in our history experienced and how that affected the linguistic patterns and culture. Kachru, McArthur, and Gorlach, all created circle models, although these differed on their measurement and coding. Kachru has a three-circle model of World Englishes in which different Englishes are categorized as outer circle, inner circle, or expanding circle. McArthur's is called the Circle of World English, and attempts to break it down in a chart-like feature but in a circle shape. Finally, although Gorlach's model is not pictured in the article, it sounds to me to be very similar to McArthur's. Jenkins also mentions in this article not only changes that have occurred recently, but a list of McArthur's provisos regarding the problems with the common three-group categorization of "the spread of English around the world" (Jenkins 15)--ESL (English as a Second Language), EFL (English as a Foreign Language), and ENL (English as a Native Language). One example of McArthur's provisos is as such: "ENL is not a single variety of English, but differs markedly from one territory to another (e.g. the US and UK), and even from one region with a given territory to another. In addition, the version of English accepted as 'standard' differs from one ENL territory to another." (Jenkins 16)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)