Latest Event Updates
Interesting article by Scott Thornbury on the role of technology in the classroom. To summarise a brief article, his main thrust is that technology is only justified if it can do something better than a teacher. Thornbury then lists six key conditions needed for second language learning and asks, can these problems be solved by technology?
- data (i.e. useable information about the target language?)
Thornbury suggests that if technology is only justified if it can do something better than a teacher, then technology may have a role in providing solutions to the input and data problems, and possibly with motivation too.
It’s a very clear way of addressing the need for educational technology. Personally, I think technology is a wonderful one-on-one language learning tool, and I use my iPad a lot to help me learn Russian. Sure, I would be better off speaking to Russians in Russian in Russia, but when sat in a coffee shop or on public transport in downtown Bangkok it’s a pretty good substitute. As well as lots of input (such as in the form of websites and radio broadcasts) and data (in the form of information about the Russian language), I can use language learning tools such as Memrise and Italki. But in the classroom, with such ‘tools’ as a teacher and other students, the use of technology has to be critically assessed: for one thing, there is a risk that technology can reduce interaction, by inserting a layer between students and teachers, and between students and other students. However, they do provide access to a rich supply of input and I’d also suggest that they offer lots of opportunities for output, especially when an output task is done in collaboration with other students, thereby giving a more authentic reason for interaction. Of course, you can create output with a pencil and paper, but technology also offers opportunities to produce exciting (and highly motivating) videos, blogs, presentations, animations and comic books, among other things, all of which can displayed to a public audience on the Internet.
Used right, technology can provide solutions to output, interaction and motivation in an integrative way. But it does require a critical eye, and Scott Thornbury’s typically direct and clear views gives us a good framework to approach technology in the classroom.
I’ve put together an article on usage-based language learning theory, an interesting idea which claims that child first language language acquisition emerges from language use.
It’s a work in progress – I’m hoping to add what implications this might have for second language learning. Does second language acquisition also depend on using the second language?
I’ve written here a few key principles behind teaching EAL students. I’m sure (and I hope!) that people will disagree, and even add to the list, so please comment below. I’ve adapted this post from one I wrote two years earlier on a different blog of mine, and I’ve realised that in those 2 years my ideas have changed substantially as a result of my teaching experiences, the things I’ve read and the people I’ve talked to. Doubtless, in two years I’ll have to change what’s below too! But for now, here are 4 key principles, in no particular order.
1. Use Content and Language Outcomes
Lessons need to have both content and language outcomes. Something like:
- Content: students have written notes and drawn diagrams to show four ways that mountain ranges are formed; they can explain one of these ways to a partner
- Language: students can use passive verbs accurately (e.g. the land is pushed up); they can use lexis to describe mountain formation (e.g. tectonic plate, mountain range, push up)
2. Teach Language through Content
Teach language through content that is (hopefully!) interesting to pupils. Of course, this depends on how interesting your curriculum is, and the extent to which a teacher has the autonomy to make the content interesting. Preparing the students for a test on what they have learned is going to make for a somewhat less interesting lesson than one in which students have to create a project or a presentation or a video about what they have learned.
There is certainly a case for explicit language lessons. In schools that use the CLIL approach, most would advocate explicit language lessons, and many international schools operate pull-out language lessons. Explicit language lessons can have the effect of ‘priming’ students in a particular language feature, so that if they come across, say, the second conditional in a content-based lesson, they’ll have already been alerted to it. They also provide the opportunity for more personalised language learning. However, an alternative case can be made for simply slotting in an explicit focus on language within a content-based lesson. For example, the teacher notices that a few students are getting some aspect of language wrong, so the teacher stops the lesson for 5 minutes and goes over this language with the whole class, or even with a few students. Or before students are engaged in a particular activity, the teacher goes through a particular language feature that students will need to use. It’s a brief focus on language, sometimes referred to as a focus on form.
The key principle is that content should drive language; language shouldn’t exist in a vacuum.
3. Massive Input
Lots of reading and listening are essential for students in the early stages of learning English as an additional language. This can come from a huge range of sources: texts and videos are obvious, but the role of the teacher and other students should never be forgotten or underestimated. This is why collaborative group work is such a powerful language learning approach.
In an ideal world, language should be ‘just about’ comprehensible. This allows language to be taken in by EAL students. Some people make a case for only using authentic texts when learning languages and that eventually students will pick it up. In my ongoing attempts to learn Russian, I’ve tried authentic texts. I’ve listened to Russian radio and ‘read’ Pushkin; the language is just noise. It’s frustrating, it’s demotivating. Comprehensible language means, for example, that a written text is just difficult enough so that the language a student doesn’t know can be worked out using the context; in spoken text, fairly detailed meaning is clear even though a student might not know all the language it contains. In other words, meaning comes first.
Of course, we don’t live in an ideal world, and classrooms are probably not ideal places to learn languages, especially classrooms with more than, say, 12 students in them (i.e almost all classrooms!). Providing ALL students with comprehensible input is technically impossible for a teacher – it’s possible in theory, but given the limits to a teacher’s time, energy, motivation and resources, it’s not practically possible. So you have to employ a kind of scattergun approach: shower the class in enough language, at varying levels of difficulty, and you can be fairly sure that over time, all students will have received enough comprehensible input to make a significant difference to their learning.
But also bear in mind the vital role that motivation plays in language learning. If I’m really into a particular topic. I’ll want to read a text about it in Russian even if I understand no more than half the words. If I really want to get at the information a text contains, I’ll make damn sure I use all the language tools and language knowledge at my disposal to understand it. That’s why the kind of dull or abstract texts and dialogues found in many coursebooks are lousy: I don’t want to read about someone’s trip to the supermarket, even if the text is easy. In other words, if a student is interested in the topic, they’ll work harder to make it more comprehensible for themselves.
4. Language Output
Input is essential but not enough. Students need to use the language, because only language use forces students to think about the language they are using and only language use forces students to pay attention to language form (and to get feedback on it from someone else, such as a teacher or fellow student). So EAL students need opportunities to speak and write English. One good forum for this is through collaborative group work.
Informative and entertaining!
Fascinating short blog about Scott Thornbury’s attempts to ‘de-fossilize’ his Spanish over a period of 4 months and become a more fluent Spanish speaker. Some of the methods he uses to shake up his language include digital flashcards, a dictionary on his iPad, the classroom, one-to-one conversations over a glass of wine, and the goal of giving a presentation about language teaching…in Spanish. Very interesting read.
A more successful time with my adult elementary class. They made videos in which they created a weather forecast using a scripted speech that was produced by using a model text. A very focused activity. Perhaps this is they key – asking students to make a video about something in the book isn’t quite going to work.