|
ESL Forum:
Techniques and methods
in Language Teaching
Games, activities
and teaching ideas
Grammar and
Linguistics
Teaching material
Concerning
worksheets
Concerning
powerpoints
Concerning online
exercises
Make suggestions,
report errors
Ask for help
Message board
|
ESL forum >
Techniques and methods in Language Teaching > The way English is taught
The way English is taught
|
JudyHalevi
|
The way English is taught
|
|
I have my own English language school. I have my own method of teaching, which is loved by my students and their parents alike.
I teach English in a very natural way. Speaking, listening, watching English TV, DVD �s, etc. Unfortunately, I also have to teach grammar, because the kids need it for school.
Today, I was teaching a boy who is in 11th grade. We have had very successful lesson on Reading Comprehension, and he has gone from not understanding any English to actually spending the whole lesson speaking to me in English. Today, I decided that I was going to teach him "Reported Speech". I began to teach him, and I used the sentence. "Tomorrow, I am going to Haifa." She said that she was going to Haifa the next day. He asked me about the "was going" To make a long story short, I landed up going back to teaching him the present, past and future progressive tenses.
If one looks at a baby learning to talk. One doesn �t first teach him to read and write, then teach him grammar. We just allow him to talk naturally. Here is a boy who speaks English, but when it comes to filling in the exercises of grammar has a hard time doing it, because English is taught as grammar, not as a language.
I apologize for my tirade, but I am so frustrated with this way of teaching.
 from Israel
Judy |
3 Nov 2009
|
|
|
|
dufffy
|
|
A lot of people agree with you and I am the first to be fustrated.You are in a private school but the biggest problem is the exams the students have to pass. It would be perfect if we could all have classes of 10 -15 students and then oral teaching methods would be possible. The students don �t have the time to get bored and participate regularly during the lesson. We have time and energy for these small groups . The biggest problem is in Governement run schools where they don �t have enough money. S tudents are up to 35 - 38 in a class!!!! You have to keep them busy and a conversation with so many people is very hard. They also have National exams which are written with questions on the grammar. Oral exams cost a lot of money and take up a lot of time. Can you imagine 800 students + 20 mins per student (that �s in a small school). In any language even our own you have to eventually understand some of the grammar. I think the important thing is to only talk about it when they are motivated and want to go further! |
3 Nov 2009
|
|
|
ARaquelSP
|
I understand you both so well, Judy and Duffy. I teach adults at a bank and unfortunately some of them attach so much to grammar rules that when you want to apply another method, they automatically give up. Recently I �ve had a problem too with a woman who just wants grammar rules and has already told me that she NEEDS them or she won �t make it. I always try to teach the most natural way possible (reading, doing some vocabulary exercises, listening, etc) and refer to grammar only as a guideline. Ex: some people tend to write �cheapper � and I tell them that when they have 1syllabe word where there is a vowel between 2 consonants (I call it the CVC rule  ) So, in case of doubt, they can think of this rule.
Anyway, it annoys me that they are too dependent on grammar, and it annoys me more that they don �t seem to accept that learning a language by memorising grammar rules simply WON �T work in the long-term. Nobody translated Portuguese into womb language or explained Portuguese grammar rules top them, so why should English be any different?
Another problem is the tests they have to attend throughout the year. Unfortunateloy my school bases the tests on grammar and we end up teaching more grammar then we should because of the tests. :-( Then, we only have 60h to teach lower levels and 90h to teach upper levels. You cannot learn a language only in 60h. Think when you were little children. It took me 3 or 4 years to be able to speak somehow fluently in my own mother-tongue!
I hate that they are so attached to grammar. Grammar should only work as a guideline when you really are not sure about something. It shouldn �t be some kind of Bible in the lessons.
Best of luck for you!
|
3 Nov 2009
|
|
|
maoopa
|
|
My very own point is that, from a neurological point of view, we lose our ability to learn a language in a natural way. I think that the trade should be focused on finding a good balance between any of the communicative approaches (there are way too many) and the good use of grammar.
Unfortunately, our learners need to learn English for some purposes; most of them will never need to express their feelings to their moms in English simply because it �s not those ladies � first language.
I do like natural, communicative; but also have my serious concerns about being too naturalistic.
Sincerely,
Mauro
|
3 Nov 2009
|
|
|
JudyHalevi
|
|
I am sorry Maoopa, I cannot agree with you. I have adult students, who come for lessons 3 times a week. I NEVER teach grammar. We just talk. I correct, write on the board the correct way to say it. Pronounce it carefully for the students and after 3 months they are able to express themselves in English. (very often with my accent - lol). We use "losing the ability to learn without grammar" as an excuse. The best way to learn is by listening, listening and listening. It all starts from there.
Hugs
Judy |
3 Nov 2009
|
|
|
Zora
|
I agree with Mauro. People lose the real ability to learn a language in a "natural way" after a certain age - it �s a proven fact whether you believe it or not. A child learn 75% (or more) before the age of 8 and their mother language �s sounds are anchored in their brain by the time they are 3... that is why some people like the Chinese have trouble with certain sounds in English - it is because in their own language they don �t exist so they have a hard time emulating it...
Also, take a look at Cambridge Exams or TOEFL - they have grammar as well as vocabulary. Are they wrong? I think not.
I also run a school and I like to touch on grammar so students can understand what they are reading and why things are said or done in a certain way. I give them TONS of vocabulary and go over it regularly getting them to use it as often as they can...
You need grammar, it is the basis of any language and to speak or do things confidently people need to understand how things work.
|
3 Nov 2009
|
|
|
Lana.
|
|
Natural way is probably a good way, or at least some of its aspects adapted during class, however the method VERY much depends on
- the age of the learner (teaching children is different from teaching adults),
- the purpose of the English course and
- the learning style of the student.
Natural as you call it method is good, I agree, but I don �t think it suits in each and every situation. There must be harmony and balance between methods, teaching dry grammar only is yet another extreme.  |
3 Nov 2009
|
|
|
Malvine
|
|
You can �t compare teaching a FOREIGN language to learning one �s mother tongue - when kids start learning their mother tongue their "hard disk" is completely empty and it would accept just anything! When an adult starts learning ANOTHER language, his/her "hard disk" constantly compares everything with the mother tongue and keeps protesting: "Why do they so so? It �s nonsense! WE don �t say so!" And then you have to explain - or at least try to explain - why they say so. I had an adult student who had learnt English only by USING it (= listening & speaking) in her professional courses - you should have heard her! And we were not able to get rid of all those terrible mistakes even in 3 years... In spite of hundreds of drills, listening, speaking and doing thousands of exercises she still kept saing "He eating a salad", "She running" etc. (and that �s just one example). I �m sure it wouldn �t have happened if at the very beginning somebody had explained to her some GRAMMAR structures. |
3 Nov 2009
|
|
|
