Hope for the mature learner

[quote=“bob”]I agree with what you are saying[/quote]Do you? Why?

[quote=“bob”]I think the thing that at least a few people are missing with regard to this discussion is the simple fact that for a lot of English students here the most interesting… source of English in their lives is DVD.[/quote]Yet,[quote=“bob”]To be honest it frequently appears that they don’t actually want to learn the language.[/quote]Are the DVDs interesting enough?

[quote=“bob”]…there is an extrordinary reluctance here to accept the value of simply listening to a lot of English only some of which you understand.[/quote]Have to say I share that reluctance! More exposure does not equate to more learning. I have no doubt that you have met people who have learned a lot from watching movies (although I suspect that that many of them had a reasonable level of English comprehension BEFORE they made serious progress with this method). I have met such people as well.

What is important is finding the most efficient way for the majority of students to learn. You said you’re teaching adult beginners, but you also say that;[quote=“bob”]…I understand that this is certainly no easy thing that I am asking of them and that it is not really suitable to low level students (such as myself :oops: ).[/quote]
You have seen the problems that are caused by an overwhelming amount of new vocabulary. I agree that selective listening skills need to be developed and that this is new and difficult for many learners. But we have to do what we can to make the task manageable for them, and I feel that the best way to do this at least at beginner and pre-intermediate levels is to find material of an appropriate level.

Surely there are English-learning DVDs which are not deadly dull?

Also, I think you mentioned before that you take short excerpts from films and get students to learn them and act them out. That sounds good, again providing that the material is at least partly comprehensible beforehand.

[quote=“bob”]It is the ones who never quite “get it” that drive me a bit batty. Perhaps I just need to accept that this learning style isn’t for everyone and leave it at that.[/quote]Reckon so. However efficient and effective the system may be, it won’t be any good unless students connect with it in some way. There may well be cultural mental blocks against particular ways of learning. And, just as there are a few people who have a natural gift for language learning, there are a few who find it unusually difficult.

Something I find to be food for thought is the research that found that the most important factor in language-learning success is not instrumental motivation (the desire to learn for specific purposes such as to function well in another country) but integrative motivation, the feeling that one has something in common with a group of native speakers of the target language; a feeling of belonging. Of course both types of motivation are important but integrative motivation is the more so. (If you need the reference I’ll dig it out.)

Not “all” of my students are middle aged beginners. By God Joesax you certainly do pay attention! I knew there was a contradiction in what I was saying but assumed that I would be able to just sneak it through so to speak. Anyway what I mean when I say that I agree with what your are saying is basically that I agree that you are not learning much if you are not understanding anything of what you hear. I can’t quite agree that you are not learning anything though. I mean at least you are hearing what the language sounds like and I suspect that this must have a cumulitive affect on your pronunciation after awhile. I realize I may be alone in this. And anyway, and this is really the key point, there is an ENORMOUS difference between, say, watching the news once and not understanding a word and watching a scene from a DVD once with no subtitle, once with, once with eyes closed (suppose that would be listening to), discovering the vocabulary that you want and writing it down, acting it out, discussing the confusing bits, and then listening again a few times as you go about cleaning up the house or eating dinner etc. I explain this to everyone I teach. Some heed the advice and some don’t. The ones who do invariably report a phenomenal increase in listening comprehension. This is gratifying to me because I feel basically that vocab acquisition and listening practice are actually what language learning is all about. I have seen enough people who have never done enough of either attempt to join conversation classes to be convinced of this.

Are the DVDs interesting enough? Well, they certainly are to me although perhaps I have been foisting material on them that was not only crammed with vocabulary but thematically difficult as well. In any case choice of film can be a struggle as well since people have such different taste in films. The ones I would say everyone has loved so far would include such films as: Finding Nemo, Good Will Hunting, Pay it Forward… People here seem to prefer films with a clearly positive message about life (Pay It Forward unfortunately lost it’s advantage there with it’s ending). They also seem to frequently enjoy such God awful stuff as that (gack!) What Women Want. I get into trouble sometimes when I suggest to my students that what women appear to want according to that movie is to be as stupid as yesterdays gossip column. Anyway I think there is some value in encouraging a more critical approach. It ceratinly makes for some lively discussion!

Would love to hear more about the integrative motivation that you mentioned. Recently I have been very much aware of something similar operating in my own learning in that the more I can find ways to have to be affectionate and respectful of Chinese culture the easier it is to build the motivation I need to learn. In fact recently this has been the dominant factor. Sometimes it is easy and sometimes much less so. I think this relates to the DVD thing as well because if I can introduce them to characters whose struggle they can relate to in some way it seems to generate some, could we say, “emotional motivation”. Sex in the City has it’s share of critics but in this regard it was the best that I found so far. Especially with women. Hardly suprising I suppose as the show was pretty much just female fantasy writ large til the last sason or two.

[quote=“bob”]Not “all” of my students are middle aged beginners. By God Joesax you certainly do pay attention! I knew there was a contradiction in what I was saying but assumed that I would be able to just sneak it through so to speak.[/quote]I am an inveterate nitpicker and detail fiend.

[quote=“bob”]Anyway what I mean when I say that I agree with what your are saying is basically that I agree that you are not learning much if you are not understanding anything of what you hear. I can’t quite agree that you are not learning anything though. I mean at least you are hearing what the language sounds like and I suspect that this must have a cumulitive affect on your pronunciation after awhile. I realize I may be alone in this.[/quote]I think that listening to a lot of incomprehensible Mandarin (even when back in the UK) helped my pronunciation, but I don’t believe that it works for many people this way.

[quote=“bob”]Are the DVDs interesting enough? Well, they certainly are to me although perhaps I have been foisting material on them that was not only crammed with vocabulary but thematically difficult as well.[/quote]All I meant was that if the DVDs have too much unknown language, that may well outweigh the intrinsic interest of the material.

You need to read “Attitude and Aptitude in Second Language Acquisition and Learning”, which is the second chapter of Stephen Krashen’s “Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning”. The whole book is available here;
sdkrashen.com/main.php3

In that chapter, Krashen cites 5 studies which found that integrative motivation was the most important factor. He cites 2 where instrumental motivation was more important, and another one where integrative motivation “played no role because of political ill-feelings”. Of course he comments on these studies and explains them in terms of his overall theory. To understand the theory, you need to read the whole book of course, probably more than once.

I think that book is a good starting point. I have also read what I could of the work of Krashen’s critics and language acquisition theorists in general. It’s not always easy especially without access to a decent English-language university library. But Caves has some surprising gems and there is some useful material available online. There is also Amazon and the like.

What I find exciting is the growing body of research into language acquisition and teaching. Many of the studies are flawed and it’s difficult to combine the results, but some tentative conclusions are possible. The reason I think that this is so good is that theory based on objective data transcends both the idea of the ivory towered-theorist who has never seen a classroom, and the “real teacher” who only believes in his/her own experience and has no time for fancy theories.

We would be very cautious about consulting a doctor who only practised based on his own experience without any reference to medical research. In the same way I believe that teachers should try to learn about the field in general, particularly where the literature is based on real studies of real language learners which make a reasonable attempt at obtaining objective, useful data.

Absolutely. I may not have spent much time in Uni but I’ve spent my share in the library. The reassuring thing, to me anyway, is that I seldom come across anything that I would describe as counter intuitive. Krashen though I imagine is someone I should read more of. Thanks for the link. Now if I can just find those damn reading glasses!

Found the reading glasses and managed to wade through Krashen’s article. The difficult thing with that kind of material for me at least is that he uses a lot of scientific(ish) terminology to explain things that I am accustomed to hearing and saying in much simpler language. Still he did clarify some things and it is nice to see the scientific method applied to certain issues. Here’s what I learned, or rather had confirmed…

  1. Taiwanese are correct when they ask for a friendly teacher who will try to place their learning experience within the context of a pleasnt social experience. It is hard to sustain motivation to study the language of a people that you have no affection for.

  2. Attitude is at more important than aptitude in the long run. Thank God.

  3. It is essential that we help our students actually find some way to actually use English in the real world to accomplish real goals. Integrative motivation frequently folllows from instrumental motivation and the two are not entirely distinct. I don’t know if Krashen actually said this but if he didn’t he should have.

I think that is about it. I would certainly like to get that book that is mentioned in the “Taipei Lectures” link.

I read things to challenge myself. If I find myself agreeing with an author then I actively search out well-grounded criticism of that author. Objectivity is more important than one’s personal tendencies. That is why the attempt at objective data collection and analysis is so important; it is the proving ground for theories. Not saying that we should ignore our own experiences. But if we look at them in the light of the collected and quantified experiences of others, that can make our own practice stronger.

[quote=“bob”]The reassuring thing, to me anyway, is that I seldom come across anything that I would describe as counter intuitive. Krashen though I imagine is someone I should read more of.[/quote]Krashen should not be too reassuring. If you find him so then I suggest you re-read. For example, he has major points of disagreement with Earl Stevick.

Though Krashen is often paid lip service by those who espouse the Communicative Approach, his theory contradicts certain established practices in that approach, such as PPP (Presentation, Practice, Production). If you agree with Krashen, do you also value PPP? How do you reconcile this?

There are a lot of teachers who favour an “eclectic approach”; using a variety of practices deriving from different theories. Is this a mature position deriving from a thorough analysis and rejection of the extremes of theory, or is it simply a fudging of issues, an unwillingness to engage, analyse and select?

I’m more of an Observe - Hypothesize - Experiment man myself but to be completely honest I am not entirely certain how well this conforms with anybody else’s theories. I’m fairly certain that I didn’t invent the idea myself though so I am sure I must be in agreement with somebody. I’ve just forgotten who it is. :blush: I guess Joe that I feel that what with all the variables we are pretty much swimming in mystery here. We can try to nail it down with a scientific study here and there but there will always be some wild card thrown into the mix to confuse things. What we do get from a combination of analysis and experience though I think is a general set of principals that are pretty much relaibale guides to work with. I mean we have been at this awhile now and there does seems to be a number of things that are certain. The big three for instance: motivation, listening environment, communication experience. People who have these things improve.

It also appears certain though that most people benefit from a number of other things as well, beginning with a structured grammar program. A bilingual environment provides a brilliant opportunity for language learning. People should have a rough idea of how to use a dictionary. Learned vocabulary should be recorded in both written and aural form and reviewd at very least once. Vocab should be learned in context and people should be trained to guess meanings from context “without” immediate recourse to translation. Language learning is most effective when it relates to the total person, especially his hopes for the future. Mistakes should be corrected gently and unobtrusively and sometimes an explanation of the correction should be offered. Mistakes are a natural and important part of the learning process and rather than being ashamed of them students sometimes need to be taught to regard them as the learning opportunity that they actually are. That’s about it I guess. Oh, and it is impossible to learn a language as an adult without spending a great deal of time on it.

I don’t think I am as scientific minded as you Joe but I will admit to a tremendous amount of gratitude for people who are. These things, that I believe are well established, are that way very much because of people like you who regard our profession as a science as well as an art. I guess I am just more the artistic type relying on intuition and impressions as much as anything else.