Since discussing the paper proposal I have been able to refine what I would like to do for my paper. I am investigating the impact Communicative Language Teaching or CLT has had on different language learning contexts. My research question is; how does implementation of CLT in EFL classroom contexts with student/teacher perceptions affect language learning. Since the feedback I was given, I am going to look specifically, at how power comes into play. How CLT has been accepted in the western cultures, in the inner circle and how that has affected the rest of the world. I will be looking particularly at Kachru's concept when exploring this. I am interested in how CLT doesn't account for cultural differences that vary between language learning contexts. I am questioning it's authenticity, adaptability as well as it's acceptability for language learning contexts. I have a lot of information regarding what CLT encompasses and how it has been supported by researchers or questioned by others. Next, I am looking for more information about the inner and outer circles to discuss how power has influenced the adaption of CLT in classroom contexts around the world. A few of the articles I found regarding my paper topic include..
1. The Use of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT): Turkish EFL Teachers' Perceived Difficulties in Implementing CLT in Turkey by Zekariya Ozsevik. This article explores the effect implementing CLT has in Turkey.
2. Communicative Language Teaching: Teachers' Perception in Bangladesh (Secondary Level) by Mohammad Tofazzl Hossen. This article includes data regarding teachers' attitudes towards CLT in a Bangladesh secondary level school.
3. English for Speakers of Other Languages Students' Perceptions of a Communicative Curriculum in a Family English Class Sarah Price. This article looks at while many advocate the use of CLT, its effectiveness is called into question when it is applied to different cultural styles of learning.
Friday, November 2, 2012
Week 12
This weeks readings include Brown chapter 26, and Kumar chapters 11 and 12.
"Critical pedagogy" is something that perhaps at the beginning of this course, we were unsure of what it meant. Now I am sure this phrase means something different to each and every one of us. It encompasses what we believe about teaching within it's own context, based on our particular beliefs. What does your critical pedagogy mean?
This chapter discusses teaching being a subversive activity. This is something that is very important for our future classrooms. Teachers should not be passive agents that distribute information to our students, but instead, critical agents for change who work to instill these values in their students and as Brown states, help them become "crap detectors". We are not only language teachers, but we are also helping students develop and grow through critical pedagogy. They should be prepared for social, economic and political systems and become individual learners you think and behave for themselves and intellectually. Brown goes on in his chapter to discuss "hot topics" that may be adressed in our future classrooms which involve human rights, gender equality, nonviolence, racial/ethnic discrimination, political activism, health issues, environmental action and more. These are all very controversial topics which involve critical thinking. Because these topics can be very personal for students, Brown included a numer of ways we can deal with these controversial issues that make their way into our classroom. Before he even discusses these guidelines, he does state that teachers need to have social responsibility, which means they will fully resepect the values and beliefs of all students.
As we know our classrooms are not isolated from the rest of the world, instead they include political, social and economic factors. Kumar mentions this as well when he states that no classroom is an island unto itself. Instead, "It is influenced by and is a reflection of the larger society of which it is a part" (239). I have always supported creating a critical pedagogy in the classroom, but how can you do so while still being socially responsible? What is our role as a teacher? Brown discusses teachers being there to create first an atmosphere of respect for all students opinions, beliefs and ethnic or cultural dicersity. teachers are also responsible to include opportunities for students to learn about these topics, and have the opportunity to examine and analyze all sides of an issue. With doing this the teacher needs to maintain morality and ethics in the clasroom atmosphere. Today, teachers everywhere are involving global concerns and social responsibility in their classrooms. Why do you believe this is important? How will you do this in your own classroom? What are your concerns?
Brown also discusses five moral dilemmas that may be involved in our classroom of critical pedagogy. I believe these are very important to mention because if we are aware of them, we are more likely to consider them in our classroom atmosphere and the activities we do. We need to be aware of the cultural biasses of communicative approach, avoid adding to disempowerent, analyze our matierals, remain neutral and consider assessment standards which may have cultural and ocioeconomic bias.
"Critical pedagogy" is something that perhaps at the beginning of this course, we were unsure of what it meant. Now I am sure this phrase means something different to each and every one of us. It encompasses what we believe about teaching within it's own context, based on our particular beliefs. What does your critical pedagogy mean?
This chapter discusses teaching being a subversive activity. This is something that is very important for our future classrooms. Teachers should not be passive agents that distribute information to our students, but instead, critical agents for change who work to instill these values in their students and as Brown states, help them become "crap detectors". We are not only language teachers, but we are also helping students develop and grow through critical pedagogy. They should be prepared for social, economic and political systems and become individual learners you think and behave for themselves and intellectually. Brown goes on in his chapter to discuss "hot topics" that may be adressed in our future classrooms which involve human rights, gender equality, nonviolence, racial/ethnic discrimination, political activism, health issues, environmental action and more. These are all very controversial topics which involve critical thinking. Because these topics can be very personal for students, Brown included a numer of ways we can deal with these controversial issues that make their way into our classroom. Before he even discusses these guidelines, he does state that teachers need to have social responsibility, which means they will fully resepect the values and beliefs of all students.
As we know our classrooms are not isolated from the rest of the world, instead they include political, social and economic factors. Kumar mentions this as well when he states that no classroom is an island unto itself. Instead, "It is influenced by and is a reflection of the larger society of which it is a part" (239). I have always supported creating a critical pedagogy in the classroom, but how can you do so while still being socially responsible? What is our role as a teacher? Brown discusses teachers being there to create first an atmosphere of respect for all students opinions, beliefs and ethnic or cultural dicersity. teachers are also responsible to include opportunities for students to learn about these topics, and have the opportunity to examine and analyze all sides of an issue. With doing this the teacher needs to maintain morality and ethics in the clasroom atmosphere. Today, teachers everywhere are involving global concerns and social responsibility in their classrooms. Why do you believe this is important? How will you do this in your own classroom? What are your concerns?
Brown also discusses five moral dilemmas that may be involved in our classroom of critical pedagogy. I believe these are very important to mention because if we are aware of them, we are more likely to consider them in our classroom atmosphere and the activities we do. We need to be aware of the cultural biasses of communicative approach, avoid adding to disempowerent, analyze our matierals, remain neutral and consider assessment standards which may have cultural and ocioeconomic bias.
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Integrating Language Skills: Week 11
This weeks readings include Kumar chapters 9 and 10 and Brown chapter 22.
Kumar discussed how little sense language would make if it was removed from the context. The book states, language is something that not only invokes content but it also provides context. As we have discussed in class, language is not simply a collection of words but much more complex.The chapter goes onto discuss the various contexts including linguistic context and provided the example of the meaning of the word "table" across different contexts. Reading how different the meaning of table can be used in English made me reflect on verbs and vocabulary that were difficult for me to learn in Spanish. It was confusing for me to understand that words could be used in different contexts until I realized how often this occurs in my first language. I can understand how difficult the concept of linguistic context can be on second language learners. Another difficulty for many student is the extralinguistic context which includes prosodic signals like stress and intonation in an linguistic environment. When reading about this, I thought of the first grade students I work with in reading. The biggest area of focus in their development is reading fluency which accounts for intonation, tone etc. This is very difficult for students to do in their native language when reading, so I can only imagine how difficult this must be for second language learners. Understand how to use and using these extralinguistic features like stress and intonation is a very difficult for task. Kumar points out that this is difficult for even advanced L2 learners. While we learn how to appropriately use these features in language implicitly, students' background knowledge from their first language. I also thought Kumar's discussion on extrasituational context was interesting as it proved that there are not only context influences from the language itself, but there are also social, cultural, political and ideological contexts that influence particular speech events. This is something that has always been very interesting to me- how much culture affects our interaction with others and how difficult this can be on L2 learners. I have experienced this myself when communicating with someone very different from myself, and expect to experience this in January when I arrive in Spain. Kumar provided an excellent (and humorous) example of such about an cross-cultural interaction between an American and a woman from Zambia. While the woman from Zambia may tell another "How are you? Oh, I see you've put on weight"- which is a normal greeting for this woman, to an American with different cultural values and expectations, this may be very odd or even offending. It truly is interesting how differently we interpret the things we say and do, because of our own cultural values.
Not only is there such a connection between language and context but there is also a connection between the way we use "primary skills of language" including listening, speaking, reading and writing. Kumar discussed this along with language being context-embedded. He discussed the concept of separating primary skills of language how important it is to instead, integrate language skills as learning and using any one skill will i effect, trigger cognitive and communicative associations with the others. It's interesting as he mentioned, that so many universities teach courses specific to one skill. Haven't we learned how complex language is, and how important it is that all domains me used and developed to have an authentic learning experience of the language?
Brown's chapter also gave us a better understanding of integrating language skills, as it discussed form-focused instruction. While not all theorists have agreed on what role form should take in the classroom, many researchers today support some form-focused instruction in the communicative framework. I learned Spanish with explicit instruction of grammar, and little time for communicative or authentic communicative tasks. While the idea of "form-focused instruction" originally came with a negative attitude, I do agree that there needs to be some focus on form of the language including organizational components for language and systemic rules that govern the structure. There seemed to a push for more of a natural approach to language teaching and a push away exclusive attention of grammar and vocabulary. We went from too much focus on form, to the opposite end of the spectrum- barely any. Now attention to language forms was also ineffective but now it is understood that there needs to be attention to what brown calls the "basic bits and pieces of a language" provided in an interactive curriculum.
Brown did an excellent job discussing the different ways grammar can be taught and the effects it may have. Did his argument change your own ideas of teaching? What are you concerned about the most? Teaching seems to be a balancing act of some sorts, and while it may difficult to balance a focus on form, and focus on communication purposes, hopefully in time we will be able to do so to meet our students individual needs. Brown's examples of grammar techniques were especially helpful, would you consider using these in your own classroom?
Kumar discussed how little sense language would make if it was removed from the context. The book states, language is something that not only invokes content but it also provides context. As we have discussed in class, language is not simply a collection of words but much more complex.The chapter goes onto discuss the various contexts including linguistic context and provided the example of the meaning of the word "table" across different contexts. Reading how different the meaning of table can be used in English made me reflect on verbs and vocabulary that were difficult for me to learn in Spanish. It was confusing for me to understand that words could be used in different contexts until I realized how often this occurs in my first language. I can understand how difficult the concept of linguistic context can be on second language learners. Another difficulty for many student is the extralinguistic context which includes prosodic signals like stress and intonation in an linguistic environment. When reading about this, I thought of the first grade students I work with in reading. The biggest area of focus in their development is reading fluency which accounts for intonation, tone etc. This is very difficult for students to do in their native language when reading, so I can only imagine how difficult this must be for second language learners. Understand how to use and using these extralinguistic features like stress and intonation is a very difficult for task. Kumar points out that this is difficult for even advanced L2 learners. While we learn how to appropriately use these features in language implicitly, students' background knowledge from their first language. I also thought Kumar's discussion on extrasituational context was interesting as it proved that there are not only context influences from the language itself, but there are also social, cultural, political and ideological contexts that influence particular speech events. This is something that has always been very interesting to me- how much culture affects our interaction with others and how difficult this can be on L2 learners. I have experienced this myself when communicating with someone very different from myself, and expect to experience this in January when I arrive in Spain. Kumar provided an excellent (and humorous) example of such about an cross-cultural interaction between an American and a woman from Zambia. While the woman from Zambia may tell another "How are you? Oh, I see you've put on weight"- which is a normal greeting for this woman, to an American with different cultural values and expectations, this may be very odd or even offending. It truly is interesting how differently we interpret the things we say and do, because of our own cultural values.
Not only is there such a connection between language and context but there is also a connection between the way we use "primary skills of language" including listening, speaking, reading and writing. Kumar discussed this along with language being context-embedded. He discussed the concept of separating primary skills of language how important it is to instead, integrate language skills as learning and using any one skill will i effect, trigger cognitive and communicative associations with the others. It's interesting as he mentioned, that so many universities teach courses specific to one skill. Haven't we learned how complex language is, and how important it is that all domains me used and developed to have an authentic learning experience of the language?
Brown's chapter also gave us a better understanding of integrating language skills, as it discussed form-focused instruction. While not all theorists have agreed on what role form should take in the classroom, many researchers today support some form-focused instruction in the communicative framework. I learned Spanish with explicit instruction of grammar, and little time for communicative or authentic communicative tasks. While the idea of "form-focused instruction" originally came with a negative attitude, I do agree that there needs to be some focus on form of the language including organizational components for language and systemic rules that govern the structure. There seemed to a push for more of a natural approach to language teaching and a push away exclusive attention of grammar and vocabulary. We went from too much focus on form, to the opposite end of the spectrum- barely any. Now attention to language forms was also ineffective but now it is understood that there needs to be attention to what brown calls the "basic bits and pieces of a language" provided in an interactive curriculum.
Brown did an excellent job discussing the different ways grammar can be taught and the effects it may have. Did his argument change your own ideas of teaching? What are you concerned about the most? Teaching seems to be a balancing act of some sorts, and while it may difficult to balance a focus on form, and focus on communication purposes, hopefully in time we will be able to do so to meet our students individual needs. Brown's examples of grammar techniques were especially helpful, would you consider using these in your own classroom?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)