Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Innovations in second and foreign language teaching

11/14
by

Chen Te-Hai

on 14 November 2012

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Innovations in second and foreign language teaching

Nothing endures but change.
(Heraclitus, fifth century B.C.E) Striving to better, oft we mar what's well. Example 1: The British Council's
International development work English Language Teaching Officers (ELTO) program funded by Overseas
Development Administration (ODA) ELTO personnel: specialists in
curriculum design, materials
development, teaching training,
or evaluation
operate in underdeveloped countries ELTO personnel's job:
train counterparts (local teachers & administrators)
--> take over from the ELTOs once they leave Transform imported pedagogical ideas into appropriate solution to local problem. They hope:
counterparts will influence their local
colleagues to change their educational
practices & values. The Challenge:
1.change how local teachers think &
behave in the classroom 2. create managerial infrastructures for the development & implementation of innovations
that are self-sustaining in the long term What can we learn from these
cross-cultural development? ELTO projects represent classic loci for the
cross-cultural development of educational innovations. If the problems of implementing change are
similar in different cultural contexts, then all
lg teaching professionals have much to learn
from these projects. Aid does not promote development (Phillipson 1992) it perpetuates the dependence of underdeveloped
countries on developed countries by implementing
a "center-periphery" model of development Reason 1:
Most aid assumes that host country personnel
are unable to organize language education
in their own countries. Reason 2:
Most aid assumes that what succeeds in Britain
or the United States is supposed to succeed in
underdeveloped countries. It took me a long time to understand
the complexity of the lg situation in the
country and how this situation affected
English instruction within the situation
(Markee 1986a) Time's an issue By the time I was beginning to understand how
local cultural and other constraints affected English
instruction in the Sudan, it was time for me to move on. (Markee 1993b) Some implications for educational change 1. An emphasis on teacher development in no way contradicts the importance of learner-centered instruction 2. Accept that the problems of implementing change are similar (across different cultural contexts)--> learn much from the failures of aid projects 1.A center-periphery model is fundamentally ethnocentric because it is based on unequal
economic and political relationship. 2.If change is imposed on teachers anywhere,
they will likely to resist it. 3. All educational organizations are transient institutions;
Students graduate, and teachers and administrators move
on to other jobs. Consequently, any curriculum development project
is bound to be affected by a constant turnover in staff. Example 2: The notional-functional syllabus recognized that monolingualism was
fast becoming a problem for
Europeans, esp for adults who had already completed their education The council sponsored the Modern Languages Project, which sought to develop new syllabuses to meet these learners' lg needs. The result was the
notional-functional syllabus. (one of the first syllabuses to be theoretically based on a learner-centered, communication-oriented approach) 1. It was based on a systematic behavioral analysis
of learners' pragmatic lg learning needs. The notional-functional syllabus
was innovative in 2 respects 2. The notional-functional syllabus was claimed
to be "analytic" rather than a "synthetic" syllabus
(Wilkins 1976). Wilkins argued that this syllabus represented an
analytic approach, pointing out that notions (such as
expressing time or spatial relationships) & functions (such as asking and granting permission) were meaning- based units of analysis. VS Nonetheless, notions & functions are still linguistic
units of analysis. Using preselected linguistic units &
linguistic criteria to select, grade, and sequence pedagogical content leads us back to synthetic syllabus design solutions. For this reason, applied linguists have rejected Wilkin's claims that notional-functional syllabus was an analytic construct (Long & Crookes 1992,1993) Discussion question 1: Will you consider the notional-functional syllabus as a synthetic or
analytic construct? What's your rationale
behind your conclusion? The success raises 2 related questions: Q2: What qualities or attributes did it have
that contributed to its widespread adoption? Q1: How was this syllabus diffused? developed by applied linguists who had the expertise to develop a new syllabus materials writers translate it into pedagogically useful categories the task of implementing these new materials by teachers solid intellectual credentials
international publishing houses
(commercial interests)
advantages of high quality
attractive packaging Difference with Example 1. It is not based on unequal economic
or political relationship b/t developers &
adopters. Similarity The developers of the notional-functional syllabus were also using an expert-driven, top-down model
of change (White 1988) Example 3: The process syllabus Subsequently, it has also been used in general English situations in Europe & migrants in Australia. This syllabus evolved at: it was initially used with ESP learners
(Candlin et al. 1981; Hutchinson and Waters 1987) 1. a radically analytic syllabus: it does not preselect the linguistic content of instruction;
instead, it uses problem-solving tasks 2.The process syllabus is situated within
a curricular approach to organizing lg instruction. "syllabus" refers to the content or subject matter
of an individual subject "curriculum" refers to the totality of content to be
taught and aims to be realized within one school
or educational system (White 1988:4) 3.The strong form of the process syllabus content, materials, methodology, and types
of assessment are not predetermined negotiated between the instructor &
the learners throughout the course The strong form of the process syllabus is unlikely
to be widely adopted, esp in teacher-centered educational cultures. some implications for educational change A weaker version potentially has
considerable relevance for teachers,
ss, and entire projects in educational change. ask learners to keep journals 1.record their impressions of class activities 2.solicit questions from learners to make sure
that they understood 3.solicit feedback on how useful class activities were Spot the difference the process syllabus relies on bottom-up
decision-making processes not only tolerates but encourages the
participation of "lay" clients Monitor theory consists five hypotheses: Example 4: The natural approach the acquisition-learning hypothesis the monitor hypothesis the input hypothesis the natural order hypothesis the affective filter hypothesis Some implications for educational change Krashen & Terrell's argument that the Natural Approach is actually traditional a variation of the
old saw that there is nothing new in education. Example 5: The procedural syllabus emerged out of the Bangalore Project an experimental English lg teaching
project from 1979 to 1984 focused on 8 classes on primary & secondary
schools in southern India The project was initiated because of dissatisfaction
with the status quo (structural syllabus+Audiolingual methodology) (Prabhu 1987) Or a form of grammar-translation (Tickoo, 1996) To remedy this situation, Prabhu & his associates developed the procedural syllabus (Prabhu 1984, 1984, 1987) This analytic syllabus was innovative
in at least 3 respects: 1. a syllabus with a content that was not
linguistically based using tasks as the principal carrier
of lg content 2. a meaning-focused methodology in which
students learned lg by communicating 3. avoid using form-focused activities
in classroom (i.e., explicit grammar
teaching or error correction) Beretta (1990, 1992a) distinguished among 3 levels of implementation in the Bangalore Project: level 1: orientation level 2: routine level 3: renewal not well informed about the methodology,
not fully understand how to use it confident enough of their mastery of project principles that they were ready to modify its
basic precepts 40% 47% 13% 3 reasons why the project's methodology
may be culturally inappropriate 1.a cultural gap exists b/t applied
linguists & teachers 2. individual teachers' openness to change 3.at least 2 project participants felt that the project had imported unacceptably radical foreign ideas into India Example 6: Task-based
language learning most tasks display the basic characteristic of posing a problem, the solution of which entails learners communicating in the target lg 2 types of tasks frequent found in
task-based lg teaching 1. the idea that communication occurs when some participants do not have access to information that is available to others, such as information gap 2. how communication occurs when information is transferred from one medium to another, like ss translate graphically represented information into speech and then back into graphic form Potential issues: the size of the class Task-based teaching is not necessarily tied to
using ss-centered classroom procedures and it
is possible to develop teacher-centered varieties. Group work is particularly appropriate with large classes. (Holliday and Cooke 1982) Group work would allow ss far more opportunities
to use the target lg during the same period of time,
and the quality of learners' interaction would be
far more varied (Long et al 1976). Discussion question 2: What's your opinion on large classes when incorporating task-based lg teaching and would you consider it beneficial or harmful to the success of the program? Other potential issues 1. How feasible it is for teachers to use task-based
lg teaching if they cannot communicate themselves
in the foreign lg for extended periods of time. 2. If their ss' only identifiable need for the target lg
is to pass a matriculation exam that emphasizes proficiency in translation skills or a passive knowledge of the grammatical structure. Ch2. Innovation in second and
foreign language teaching a prezi presentation by
TED
Full transcript