Re: Teaching and Learning English in Hong Kong

phippsmartin_at_hotmail.com
Date: 03/27/05 

Date: 27 Mar 2005 06:45:31 -0800

Hi. I tried to call you but it was Sunday. When is a good time? :)
You can also try calling my cell phone: 0917476998

Jim Walsh wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 19:18:41 -0800, phippsmartin thought carefully
and
> wrote:
>
> > The problem is where you have a double standard. When I was
teaching in
> > a school in Erlin in Chunghwa county, the local teachers spoke
Chinese
> > all the time and asked the foreign teachers to use only English.
>
> That is wrong in two ways.
>
> All teachers should use the same methods,

Agreed.

> and all teachers should speak
> English exclusively.

We need to talk. :)

> > This doesn't work. The students, not accustomed to hearing
instructions
> > in English, became frustrated because they couldn't understand the
> > foreign teacher.
>
> Understood.
>
> > Everybody agreed that this was happening but the administration
argued I
> > should play more games so that the students would like me more.
>
> Games can be instructional, or a waste of time. Everyone should use
the
> former. None should use the latter.

Agreed.

> > This would then reduce their exposure to spoken English and
opportunity
> > to speak conversational English even further. The result: most of
the
> > students couldn't speak a word of English even those who had been
> > studying for years before I had even come to the school.
>
> Every student in my school can say:
>
> "My name is ///." "It is red/blue/yellow/green." "It is a
> pig/monkey/dog/cat." "How are you?" and "I am fine, thank you." after
the
> first (2 hour) class.
>
> Most of them can also say "What is your name?" and "What is it?"

Younger students tend to pick up spoken English faster. But they can
only learn so much in one semester. True story: I asked a
kindergartener once "Do you like fish?" and she stammered "Yes, I am...
Yes, I can..." Which was fine. It takes a while for students to learn
the grammatical rules. It's a lot easier for them to learn the
substitution patterns "It is...", "It is a...", etc. or the pat
responses "I am fine, thank you" but it takes a lot of practice for
them to actually converse meaningfully.

> > It also helps when the local teachers use English regularly and
then
> > this would encourage the students to use more English themselves.
>
> The "local teachers" use English exclusively in the classroom.

Good for them.

> > The teachers argued that they had to use Chinese in class because
the
> > students would not understand them if they gave instructions in
Chinese.
>
> I have never needed to use Chinese to give instructions. If the
> instructions are THAT complicated, simplify them.

I forgot to mention that I am teaching adults now. I would teach
kindergarteners differently.

> > Of course, this leads to real problems for a foreign teacher who
speaks
> > no Chinese and HAS to give instructions in English. I would use
hand
> > gestures, draw pictures on the board, even demonstrate what I
wanted
> > students to do, but it was frustrating for everyone involved. The
> > student's level of comprehension just wasn't there. Partly this
had to
> > do with how they were taught (ie grammar translation), partly this
had
> > to do with improper placement of students and giving them material
that
> > was probably too advanced for them (and explaining everything to
them in
> > Chinese) and part of it had to do with wishful thinking and the
belief
> > that it was up to native speakers to teach them how to speak
whereas the
> > local teachers were just there to teach grammar.
>
> I agree with ALL of the above.

Of course.

> A. Grammar/translation is a terrible teaching method. B. Improperly
placed
> students are the bane of every teacher. C. Student who "understand"
> Chinese explanations of complex grammar and vocabulary have NO useful
> knowledge.

Yes, because they know the grammar in theory but don't use it.
Similarly, I have zero speaking ability in Japanese now, even though I
did study it for a while.

> Students who can use English to express their own thoughts are
> the path to fluency.

Indeed. Which is why I do ask students not to discuss things amongst
themselves in Chinese before they answer me in English. They need to
break the habit of translating everything they think from Chinese into
English before they answer me.

> > The students were expected to learn English simply by exposure to
it for
> > one or two hours a week. There was no detailed plan in place for
how
> > they would take students who couldn't speak any English and develop
> > their speaking skills. The result was that speaking skills were
largely
> > ignored in favour of the student's ability to do written tests and
this
> > was the criteria used to determine whether or not students advanced
to
> > the next level.
>
> Bad, totally bad.

I know.

> >> If that knowledge motivates them, fine, but it is not a reason to
speak
> >> Chinese in the classroom.
>
> > I very rarely do. But when I do it is a strong motivating factor.
The
> > motivational influence of the ability of foreign teachers to
demonstrate
> > competency in the local language should not be ignored. Motivating
> > students is a big part of teaching.
>
> My students are motivated by successfully acquiring useful skills.

Except that step one is convincing them that being able to speak a
foreign language IS a useful skill.

> > For Chinese teachers to use the local language, on the other hand,
is
> > just laziness... Local teachers demonstrating competence in the
target
> > language is similarly a strong motivational factor as they can then
> > serve as a role model.
>
> Good point.

Thank you. :)

> > Ironically, native speakers can only serve as a motivational role
model
> > (as a language learner) when they speak the local language, because
> > everybody knows that the native speaker can teach the target
language as
> > a result of having grown up with it.
>
> I provide a motivational role model by showing them that THEY can
express
> themselves in English.

I think you mean that the students who can speak English well serve as
role models for the other students. Unfortunately, it doesn't always
work that way: the students who do well are the ones who were already
strongly motivated and the students who don't do well can convince
themselves that English is too difficult for them. Oh but when the
weaker students start to understand, their motivation does pick up!
I've certainly noticed that!

> > But explaining the difference between "he" and "she" IS grammar
because
> > they don't make those distinctions in their own language.
>
> Explanations (especially in Chinese) have zero effect on fluency.
Point at
> a female (in person or on flashcards, of which I have many hundreds,
> literally), say "she". Point at a male and say "he". They will
> automatically recite after you. Keep it up until they can do it
without
> your prompt.

Students get confused when the same flashcards are used for he/she,
boy/girl, Jim/Mary, brother/sister, etc. You need to provide more
context than that. One time I had to explain the word "cousin" to
kindergarten students without knowing the word in Korean. Any
suggestions?

> Explaining the difference doesn't produce fluency. My way does.

I disagree. If you were studying Chinese, you'd probably want to know
what the particles "de" and "le" mean. Somethings need to be
explained, especially when they are concepts we aren't familiar with in
our own language.

> > If you can't read Chinese then you won't be given a book
> > with Chinese in it. It is frustrating when the book that you are
using
> > is mostly in Chinese. Most books designed to prepare students for
the
> > GEPT are mostly in Chinese.
>
> A student preparing to take that test HAS TO be able to read English
well
> enough to study English grammar in English.

Actually, no. The questions given on the GEPT writing test at the
intermediate level are all given in Chinese. I was floored when I saw
that.

> > There is value in being able to point out when (and why)students
> > make these mistakes.
>
> Well, maybe. But focusing on mistakes is less useful than focusing on
> correct expressions.
>
> Teacher: John, what did you do this morning?
>
> John: I go to school.
>
> Teacher: Very good. You WENT to school.

No. Just say "past tense" and then ellicit the correct sentence.
Don't just make them repeat after you. Otherwise they'll keep making
the same mistake. Really.

> John: Yes, I went to school.
>
> Teacher: Good. Sally what did you do this morning?
>
> Sally: I go to school.
>
> Teacher: Very good. You WENT to school.
>
> Sally: Yes, I went to school.

A common mistake is "I play computer". I would ask "Did you play
computer games?" They would say either say "Yes" or say "No, I checked
my e-mail". If it was the latter then I would say "So you weren't
playing, were you?"

Finally a kid confronted me. He asked me why he couldn't say "play
computer" if he was checking e-mail so I explained that checking e-mail
is not a game, so you don't play it. He NEEDED the explanation and
appreciated it.

> > Do you know that when a Chinese student says that a drink is
"spicy" he
> > actually means it contains alcohol, which is a confusion based on
the
> > fact that they use the word "la" in two different ways in Chinese
(with
> > the meaning usually clear in Chinese as a result of context)? Or
that
> > students confuse "bus stop" with "bus station" because they use the
same
> > words in Chinese to describe what English speaking people would
consider
> > two different things? Or that when they say "food store" they
might
> > mean either a "grocery store" or a "restaurant"?
>
> My students don't make those mistakes, because I teach them how to
say
> something is spicy and how to say something has alcohol in it. They
learn
> bus stop and bus station by looking flashcards that clearly
distinguish
> them. Etc.

If you don't know they have this problem though you might encounter
serious confusion later on. I once asked a student "Is there a bus
station near here?" and he told me that there was one right outside at
the corner!

> >> You can email me (remove the capitals) or call me (Taipei,
2933-5118)
> >> if you are interested in pursuing this very important debate.
> >
> > Oh, thanks. I appreciate that. I'll try that but I'll send this
> > message out in case it bounces. My e-mail address is phippsmartin
@
> > hotmail.com I have to be careful because some newsreaders hide the
> > e-mail addresses for privacy sake.

I tried sending e-mail to jim_walsh_ @ operamail.com but it bounced.
Feel free to try e-mailing me.

Martin

Loading