Check out this book review of Paul Nation's, "Learning Vocabulary in Another Language" for some background information, or better yet, just read the book.
In my own studies of Korean and teaching English, here in Korea I've become increasingly convinced that it's all about vocabulary. The number that gets tossed around frequently is 2000. That is, if you know the 2000 most common words in a language, you can get by with basic conversation and daily life stuff. And of course, this makes sense, because you can know all the grammar but if you don't know the vocab of what you're hearing or reading, you can't make any sense of it. And for writing or speaking, if you don't want to look/sound like a 3 year old, you probably need to know a few more words than they do.
So these days, I've been really into studying vocab, as my form of studying Korean. And now that I know a lot more vocab, grammar is intuitively working itself into my brain as I see and hear the vocab being used around me in the correct grammatical way. I think the best way to learn new vocab is to write out the words on flashcards, with Korean on one side and English on the other. Then start out learning the Korean-English and once you're proficient at that, switch to the harder one, having to reproduce the words in a language that's not your own. Of course, mix up the cards each time you go through them so you don't start to rely on patterns.
And for teaching? I really don't teach vocab in my classes because I'm kind of at a loss as to how to do it. Some stuff comes up in the book each unit, but it's not substantial. And how to test it as well? But I see the importance of it and would like to start. Please help with any ideas!
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Oh, how right you are, my Chinese Students...
Yesterday I took my advanced conversation class, that I've been meeting 4 days/week for the past 10 weeks out to dinner because it was their last class. The Koreans students sat on one side, and I sat on the other with the Chinese students and we were talking about life in Korea as foreigners and learning English.
They were telling me that they all started out taking my class as well as a TOEIC class (grammar for a test basically) but that they all quit the TOEIC thing after a week or so. They said that it was a waste of time, because the teachers either spoke in Korean, which they didn't understand so well at the time or that they spoke Konglish (Sounds like English but with a lot of words that only Koreans would use: skin-ship/eye shopping/ pension (referring to a condo), etc).
Now, I really can't believe that the teacher would speak in Korean, if 3 of the students in the class didn't understand it that well. If a teacher (even of TOIEC) can't conduct a class in English, they have no business teaching an English class.
And if the teacher did speak "English", they spoke in Konglish. It makes sense that it's the first I've heard of it, from the Chinese students because the Koreans probably wouldn't notice! They said it was too annoying too listen to. Now, I also can't really believe this, that the program that hired them wouldn't do an English interview, that had a native speaker present. Most jobs in Korea, that involve teaching English don't actually interview the person in English, they just look at the TOEIC score, or how long they studied in the USA or whatever. It's quite disturbing.
Anyway, all this to say: I think a competent, professional native speaker is better than a Korean English teacher. I have no exceptions to this. A newbie fresh off the boat from Canada will likely not be so competent, I know I sure wasn't my first year. But 4 years later, a lot of reading/blogging about teaching and actual time in the classroom, I think I am. I would say this for the following reasons:
1. We can conduct our classes entirely in English, very easily and usually have no other choice. It makes the students actually think. When I learn Korean from someone who speaks English, I get way too lazy.
2. Our accents and pronunciation are perfect, obviously :) Who wants to learn the wrong way to speak when you're learning a language? It seems like a waste of time.
3. Even for grammar, native speakers are better I think because we can teach it in a relevant, simple kind of way that makes sense. My students have studied English grammar since they were in elementary school. But they still don't know the basics, like: "he/she/it (verb)s" or "He (has) brown eyes, she (is) tall." When I teach it to them, I make it very simple, and they often say it's the first time they've actually understood this concept and how to use it in a sentence. Like I literally see lightbulbs going off in their heads, about stuff that they should have learned in their first year of learning English.
4. And finally: the style. Koreans lecture. Foreigners are usually more interactive. Everything I've read about language learning doesn't show that the lecture style works.
What do you think?
They were telling me that they all started out taking my class as well as a TOEIC class (grammar for a test basically) but that they all quit the TOEIC thing after a week or so. They said that it was a waste of time, because the teachers either spoke in Korean, which they didn't understand so well at the time or that they spoke Konglish (Sounds like English but with a lot of words that only Koreans would use: skin-ship/eye shopping/ pension (referring to a condo), etc).
Now, I really can't believe that the teacher would speak in Korean, if 3 of the students in the class didn't understand it that well. If a teacher (even of TOIEC) can't conduct a class in English, they have no business teaching an English class.
And if the teacher did speak "English", they spoke in Konglish. It makes sense that it's the first I've heard of it, from the Chinese students because the Koreans probably wouldn't notice! They said it was too annoying too listen to. Now, I also can't really believe this, that the program that hired them wouldn't do an English interview, that had a native speaker present. Most jobs in Korea, that involve teaching English don't actually interview the person in English, they just look at the TOEIC score, or how long they studied in the USA or whatever. It's quite disturbing.
Anyway, all this to say: I think a competent, professional native speaker is better than a Korean English teacher. I have no exceptions to this. A newbie fresh off the boat from Canada will likely not be so competent, I know I sure wasn't my first year. But 4 years later, a lot of reading/blogging about teaching and actual time in the classroom, I think I am. I would say this for the following reasons:
1. We can conduct our classes entirely in English, very easily and usually have no other choice. It makes the students actually think. When I learn Korean from someone who speaks English, I get way too lazy.
2. Our accents and pronunciation are perfect, obviously :) Who wants to learn the wrong way to speak when you're learning a language? It seems like a waste of time.
3. Even for grammar, native speakers are better I think because we can teach it in a relevant, simple kind of way that makes sense. My students have studied English grammar since they were in elementary school. But they still don't know the basics, like: "he/she/it (verb)s" or "He (has) brown eyes, she (is) tall." When I teach it to them, I make it very simple, and they often say it's the first time they've actually understood this concept and how to use it in a sentence. Like I literally see lightbulbs going off in their heads, about stuff that they should have learned in their first year of learning English.
4. And finally: the style. Koreans lecture. Foreigners are usually more interactive. Everything I've read about language learning doesn't show that the lecture style works.
What do you think?
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Monday, May 25, 2009
Translators
I was eating dinner with some girls in Cheonan last night who work at public schools. A newbie to teaching and to Korea was expressing her frustration at her middle school classes that were apathetic, didn't flow and were very low level. As she talked more, it was revealed that she has a co-teacher (CT) at all times, and so she speaks English and then the Korean CT will just translate what she said. I think this was very revealing at to why her classes don't interact with/respond to her. I don't like translation in a class for the following reasons:
1. I've never taught with a translater, either for kids/adults, beginners or upper levels, so it's just not what I'm comfortable with. This is the complete opposite of my public school friends, who are completely dependant on the translator so they obviously would not feel comfortable going at it alone with a group of kids.
2. Why would you put any effort into understanding another language, if someone who speaks you language is just going to translate anything of importance? In essence, the native speaker has no value within the classroom. Of course the kids have no motivation.
3. It hinders actual communication. In order to speak English fluently, a student must leave Korean behind, at least for a little bit so they can try to think in English, instead of just translating from Korean. Students who just translate from Korean will always remain at the very beginner level and never move to actual communication. If this is the model they have in class, then why would the students ever be inspired to actually learn English?
4. It breaks up the flow of the class, always having to stop to translate.
5. I'm somewhat dubious of the translation abilities of the teachers in public school here in Korea. While some of them are excellent, I've met more than a few who can't even have a simple conversation with me. Like I actually switch into Korean when talking to them, which doesn't say much at all since my Korean is somewhat pathetic.
6. There are ways to make yourself understood, in English even with someone who doesn't know a word of English. I've done it. It just takes a bit more effort and planning. Pictures/body language/speaking extremely simply with no superfluous words.
What are your thoughts? This could be quite the controversial topic I think.
1. I've never taught with a translater, either for kids/adults, beginners or upper levels, so it's just not what I'm comfortable with. This is the complete opposite of my public school friends, who are completely dependant on the translator so they obviously would not feel comfortable going at it alone with a group of kids.
2. Why would you put any effort into understanding another language, if someone who speaks you language is just going to translate anything of importance? In essence, the native speaker has no value within the classroom. Of course the kids have no motivation.
3. It hinders actual communication. In order to speak English fluently, a student must leave Korean behind, at least for a little bit so they can try to think in English, instead of just translating from Korean. Students who just translate from Korean will always remain at the very beginner level and never move to actual communication. If this is the model they have in class, then why would the students ever be inspired to actually learn English?
4. It breaks up the flow of the class, always having to stop to translate.
5. I'm somewhat dubious of the translation abilities of the teachers in public school here in Korea. While some of them are excellent, I've met more than a few who can't even have a simple conversation with me. Like I actually switch into Korean when talking to them, which doesn't say much at all since my Korean is somewhat pathetic.
6. There are ways to make yourself understood, in English even with someone who doesn't know a word of English. I've done it. It just takes a bit more effort and planning. Pictures/body language/speaking extremely simply with no superfluous words.
What are your thoughts? This could be quite the controversial topic I think.
Presentation Update
A few weeks ago, I talked about how I was doing presentations in my classes this semester and I wasn't sure how it would turn out. Today was the first round and I was pretty impressed with most of the students. Out of a class of 20, only 1 didn't memorize the 2 minutes spiel. And the grammar was almost perfect, far better than they'd ever do just speaking in class. It was actually like they consulted their textbooks or something :) And it was not horribly tedious because they could pick from 5 different, general topics and the speeches were only 2 minutes long, so it was all over pretty fast. And because I gave them topics, straight out of the stuff we've studied this semester, it would be glaringly obvious if anyone copied off the internet (no one did!) I'll definitely be doing it again next semester :)
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Worth a read...
Another interesting article in the Korea Times about the state of Engrishee teaching in Korea, this time by Michael Breen.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Pencils Down!
Thanks to Jinks for this somewhat genius idea. When students are doing grammar exercises in their books, I don't let them use their pens to write in the answers the first go. They have to talk with their partner and work it out together. Sometimes there are over 10 questions to do, and so they have to remember their answers for when I randomly call on them later. I'll let them write the answers in when we're going over it as a class.
This has the following advantages:
1. Speaking/reading practice. It's a whole different world when you must actually produce the language as opposed to just taking it in.
2. A more focused effort. They will perhaps get called upon later to answer.
3. Error correction on the go if you have a good partner. At the very least, more thought put into it if you're doing it together, as opposed to alone and just writing any old crap down to get it done.
This has the following advantages:
1. Speaking/reading practice. It's a whole different world when you must actually produce the language as opposed to just taking it in.
2. A more focused effort. They will perhaps get called upon later to answer.
3. Error correction on the go if you have a good partner. At the very least, more thought put into it if you're doing it together, as opposed to alone and just writing any old crap down to get it done.
Monday, May 18, 2009
Koreans resistant to learning English
Here is an interesting article from John Huer in the Korea Times about how Korean Culture makes it hard for Koreans to learn English.
He points out the problem of Koreans thinking they can master English, without learning any of the cultural things that go along with it, which is obviously crazy. Korean is so nuanced with various forms of addresses, depending on who you're talking to, that I would never try to learn it apart from their culture. Or their greeting, "Have you eaten rice?" If you don't understand the culture, you'd have no idea that this means, "Are you well?" and that you shouldn't literally tell them if you've had rice for breakfast or not. Maybe this is partly reflected in how Koreans will often study English as a subject, learning technical grammar rules and obscure vocab but will have none of the tools required to actually speak to someone in English.
His second point is that Koreans are very Korean. They are proud to be Korean and don't have much curiosity or openness to other cultures. They have a designation in Korean, "foreigner" which you'll hear almost everyday and puts up a brick wall between "them" and "us." In Canada for example, we'd never call someone a "foreigner." If you're living in Canada and it's your home, you're Canadian. Naturally, if you don't care about the world outside Korea or people outside your social/familial circle, then why would you care about learning English? In my experience, it's really only Koreans who ACTUALLY LIKE AND WANT TO SPEND TIME WITH foreigners and in foreign countries that become fluent in English.
So, until there is a radical change in the Korean mindset, I think all the money throwing at English education may just be futile, as it largely has been in the past.
He points out the problem of Koreans thinking they can master English, without learning any of the cultural things that go along with it, which is obviously crazy. Korean is so nuanced with various forms of addresses, depending on who you're talking to, that I would never try to learn it apart from their culture. Or their greeting, "Have you eaten rice?" If you don't understand the culture, you'd have no idea that this means, "Are you well?" and that you shouldn't literally tell them if you've had rice for breakfast or not. Maybe this is partly reflected in how Koreans will often study English as a subject, learning technical grammar rules and obscure vocab but will have none of the tools required to actually speak to someone in English.
His second point is that Koreans are very Korean. They are proud to be Korean and don't have much curiosity or openness to other cultures. They have a designation in Korean, "foreigner" which you'll hear almost everyday and puts up a brick wall between "them" and "us." In Canada for example, we'd never call someone a "foreigner." If you're living in Canada and it's your home, you're Canadian. Naturally, if you don't care about the world outside Korea or people outside your social/familial circle, then why would you care about learning English? In my experience, it's really only Koreans who ACTUALLY LIKE AND WANT TO SPEND TIME WITH foreigners and in foreign countries that become fluent in English.
So, until there is a radical change in the Korean mindset, I think all the money throwing at English education may just be futile, as it largely has been in the past.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
A Game to Practice Questions
This is a very fun game that I've played with 7-25 year olds and everyone seemed to have a pretty good time. I wrote out a bunch of animals on slips of paper. Then I put them in groups of 2 or 3, and the groups would each get 2 or 3 animals/person. The first person, picks a paper, but doesn't look at it and shows her group members. Then she'll ask yes/no questions about it until she can figure out the animal. Ex: "Does it have 4 legs? Can it swim? Does it eat meat?"
I've also done this with jobs and other things, depending on what we're studying that week or month.
Kids vs. Uni Students
I teach in this extra program at my school for elementary and middle school kids from around Cheonan who have been classified as "gifted." They really are pretty good at English and seem to soak up everything like a sponge. I only teach them about once a month, which turns out to be pretty enjoyable most of the time. The major difference is this:
I have to control their energy. Like they'll actually start yelling and stuff in the classroom if I don't lay down the hammer. And once I do, it will all go quite smoothly after that. I'm constantly saying, "Calm down, quiet please, relax." Uni students, when I walk in the class are already sleeping, irregardless of anything I have done or how boring I have been. I need to liven them up and get them to stand up or something to get some energy going.
Anyway, it's a good break from the normal world. I would suggest this to you, to mix it up a bit if you can. Teach some kids, teach some adults at least once a month.
I have to control their energy. Like they'll actually start yelling and stuff in the classroom if I don't lay down the hammer. And once I do, it will all go quite smoothly after that. I'm constantly saying, "Calm down, quiet please, relax." Uni students, when I walk in the class are already sleeping, irregardless of anything I have done or how boring I have been. I need to liven them up and get them to stand up or something to get some energy going.
Anyway, it's a good break from the normal world. I would suggest this to you, to mix it up a bit if you can. Teach some kids, teach some adults at least once a month.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
