Since 2015, I've been starting my Advanced ESOL Reading and Writing class with some readings about mindset and a TED video by Carol Dweck. Why? I have been frustrated with students who arrive in my class from their previous classes believing that they are "A" students, so everything that they do should have an "A" grade attached to it. First, where does this fixation on grades come from? While adult immigrant students earn credits for their ESOL community college classes, the grades do not impact their college transcripts. In other words, if they do well enough in their ESOL classes to move up to Basic Skills Writing courses, a grade of "C" or better in ESOL will not affect their chances of getting into a four-year degree-granting institution. Second, when there is nothing to lose by earning a passing level grade of "C," why is there still an obsession with grades? Third, if students are supposed to complete certain skills by the time they arrive at the highest level, why are a third of them arriving in the last "advanced" level course without what I expect are the requisite skills? Why do we ESOL professors feel pressured and compelled to move students on to the next level - to pass them because they're immigrants and can't be expected to be as skilled in English as a native speaker? Interestingly, in a class discussion about language and literacy across the world, one of my students said that she thought a big difference between her country (Colombia) and the USA is that in Colombia if a student doesn't reach the required level of skill in Spanish, for example, (s)he will have to repeat the class. No ifs, ands, or buts. They might even have to repeat it twice; it is the same for mathematics and science classes at the middle school level. In that way, it actually means something when students complete middle school. If they don't pass, then they can't go on to high school.
This is a point I need to explore further. There are 'triage' or two-tier apprenticeship vs. academic-track systems in Europe where students who don't have high enough scores on level tests get filtered out as pre-teens or teenagers into so-called apprentice programs (where the focus is on learning blue-collar skills and office/clerical skills for service-oriented professions) rather than academic or science-oriented careers.
When I got exposed to Brainology and the work of Carol Dweck in 2015, I had little idea how well it would work to help my students focus on learning and growing their minds. The concept of the fixed and growth mindsets was revolutionary to me and to my non-native Englsh-speaking adult population. In addition, it was empowering for me and for some of my students. Since January 2015, I've had a handful of ESOL students who knew they were not going to pass my class who stayed in my course beyond the withdraw deadline (10 weeks of 16 week semester) because they decided that they could improve their essay writing, do advanced-level readings, participate in reading circle discussions or debates, build their knowledge of more advanced grammar structures, and be better prepared to repeat the class the next semester. One student who did this wrote in her portfolio reflection that it was one of the best experiences she had had in ESOL because she wasn't worried about her grade. Instead, she was focused on learning. Wow!
I have continued to use the growth mindset and find that it has worked for me and transformed my way of communicating to my students. This approach to teaching doesn't protect students from getting "D's" in my classes; it means, in my view, that they're not yet ready for the next level. (See Dweck above). I also share my own educational flops in my long journey through a four-year degree at UCLA and two master's degree programs (anthropology and TESOL). I let them know that I don't equate grades with intelligence because when I suffered from "D" grades, I know that I didn't suddenly get dumber. I was over-extended (working, commuting by bus over two hours per day, and emotionally stressed and depressed over a broken relationship). These were not excuses; other factors overpowered my ability to focus on classwork.
Praising effort over grades does not mean that a student should pass a class because they worked hard. Many of my students were hard workers, but they knew that they had not achieved the learning outcomes. Their English "muscles" were not strong enough to perform at the level of a college freshman.
Is it easy not to pass a hard-working ESOL student? No, of course not. However, I wish the previous professor had conveyed the same message to his/her students so that I wouldn't have had to deflate egos and overcome the bad attitudes of students who came with fixed mindsets - and saw anything as difficult as an attempt on the instructor's part to show/prove that they were not very smart. Some students told me that they "knew" all the grammar and passed at an "A" level in the previous course, yet they didn't know basic irregular verb forms (e.g., teach -> "teached") or how to use present perfect or simple past nor did they know that modal verbs are not followed by past tense verb forms (e.g., should "went"). On top of that, several of these same students complained that I should spend more time on basic grammar even though "grammar" was supposedly what "they already knew."
This is not a rant, but a suggestion that adult-level ESOL instructors use concepts from elementary school curricula to enhance their approach to teaching, in general. The Brainology reading for 5th graders in the public school was not too simple for advanced-level ESOL students. A side benefit one semester was the revelation that one of my students connected to her son because he had studied the same reading. My adult ESOL student was fearful of going back to school, but as her children were out of kindergarten, her husband encouraged her to go to college and to seek a career outside the home. Learning to write in academic English was her first big step.
Just as the debate still sizzles in public schools, I have found that some of my colleagues teaching college-level ESOL courses are caught in a battle over what our purpose is. Is it to help students reach a level of English fluency and accuracy that will allow them to communicate well in a work or business context to colleagues and employees, or is it to equip our students with enough language to be functional, comprehensible, and "good enough" - assuming that they will improve over time with exposure to native English-language speakers?
I am torn between treating my students as I would want to be treated in a foreign country, studying in an academic setting, alongside native-born students. Would I want to be passed along because it was viewed as not PC (politically correct) to fail me and force me to repeat a course until I had reached a more functional level in the target language in which I needed to express myself? If I continued on in a foreign environment and obtained a degree there, would my degree be worth the same as the native-born student's? Are we cheapening the value of a UCSD degree by taking on so many non-natives who don't command the language into our degree programs? Was the professor forced to pass me along because I was foreign-born and working hard to acculturate and learn the local language? Does it degrade the value of a degree from UCLA or UCSD if a non-native speaker receives a degree from one of these prestigious universities and is incomprehensible in English outside of a classroom context? When we discovered that President George W. Bush graduated from Yale University, did we not pause to wonder whether the standards of Yale were as high as we once thought them to be?
Now, in February 2018, I am still puzzled and asking many of the same questions.
Showing posts with label writing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label writing. Show all posts
Sunday, February 11, 2018
Friday, August 21, 2015
Is "just" a female word?
It has been many months since I took the time to write a think-piece here. One of my 2015 New Year's resolutions was to save my blog. However, instead, I worked on activating my Picturing English and my Mbote from San Diego (travel and wildlife observations) blogs. I also began a new career path, working in a community college.
A while ago, I ran across this article about Words to Eliminate from your Vocabulary but I never took the time to fully reflect on it here. "Just" and "that" were on the elimination list. Subsequently, I noticed another article re-posted on LinkedIn about the use of "just" in speaking - about how women tend to use it more and how it weakens whatever we express. After Ellen Leanse published results of her informal survey comparing the usage of "just" by men and women in a business context, the idea that women mark themselves as weaker or more tentative when speakking has gone viral. More significantly to me, I realize that I am one of those women who regularly uses "just." Consequently, now every time I write or hear myself say "just," I remove the word or remind myself to avoid it in the future.
Of course, there has been a backlash to this view. After doing a little "googling" around, I have decided not to throw out all my justs. Last month an alternative view was published. The article is long because the writer substantiates claims with citations and the research of academics. Krissy Eliot has published another fascinating examination of how women's speech is scrutinized and depicted in American culture. (Watch the video, at least.)
Men's speech is the standard to which my speech is compared. That is definitely something I need to think about before I automatically remove all justs - and you know which "just" I'm talking about, right? (There are many meanings of just, but the one I'm writing about isn't well defined at Merriam-Webster.)
NB: As always, I welcome my readers thoughts on any post. I also express my apologies to anyone who has been a follower and stopped visiting me regularly. This year I have only added about four new posts here, most of which have been directed toward ESOL teaching with lesson materials and thoughts about how to be more effective in the classroom. I feel liberated writing again about our many Englishes!
A while ago, I ran across this article about Words to Eliminate from your Vocabulary but I never took the time to fully reflect on it here. "Just" and "that" were on the elimination list. Subsequently, I noticed another article re-posted on LinkedIn about the use of "just" in speaking - about how women tend to use it more and how it weakens whatever we express. After Ellen Leanse published results of her informal survey comparing the usage of "just" by men and women in a business context, the idea that women mark themselves as weaker or more tentative when speakking has gone viral. More significantly to me, I realize that I am one of those women who regularly uses "just." Consequently, now every time I write or hear myself say "just," I remove the word or remind myself to avoid it in the future.
Of course, there has been a backlash to this view. After doing a little "googling" around, I have decided not to throw out all my justs. Last month an alternative view was published. The article is long because the writer substantiates claims with citations and the research of academics. Krissy Eliot has published another fascinating examination of how women's speech is scrutinized and depicted in American culture. (Watch the video, at least.)
Men's speech is the standard to which my speech is compared. That is definitely something I need to think about before I automatically remove all justs - and you know which "just" I'm talking about, right? (There are many meanings of just, but the one I'm writing about isn't well defined at Merriam-Webster.)
NB: As always, I welcome my readers thoughts on any post. I also express my apologies to anyone who has been a follower and stopped visiting me regularly. This year I have only added about four new posts here, most of which have been directed toward ESOL teaching with lesson materials and thoughts about how to be more effective in the classroom. I feel liberated writing again about our many Englishes!
Wednesday, August 12, 2015
Organizers for Teaching Connectors
I have been meaning for some time to make these graphic organizers available to all here at Many Englishes. I have several versions of these two on connectors, but these are the most recent ones that I have distributed to my classes. One organizer focuses on coordinating conjunctions and transitions or conjunctive adverbs. I usually teach the usage of the FANBOYS and transition words together. The other organizer focuses on a small array of subordinating conjunctions (which I encourage students to expand upon as they encounter other subordinators). Subordinating conjunctions which require more explanation of meanings, punctuation, and usage (especially the prepositional forms) are taught separately.
Many readers of this blog are familiar with my Intermediate Connectors Game Board which is a fun way (with some dice) for students to practice conjunctions orally. Here is another way using sentence strips that works well for a high intermediate+ level class. You can print the sentence strips on heavy paper or on colored paper. You need to cut between words where there is space (e.g., between conjunction and subject + verb, cut around the commas and periods. Students need to figure out what makes since. The words are all in capital letters so as not to give the students a clue about where to put a connector (at the beginning of a sentence or in the middle). Please make comments if you have any questions or suggestions about other ways to improve the activity. I usually place a set of the strips inside a large envelope and put students in groups of four or five to sort and work together. You can do the activity more than once and make it a race to see which group remembers the sentences and puts the words together quickly and accurately.
Many readers of this blog are familiar with my Intermediate Connectors Game Board which is a fun way (with some dice) for students to practice conjunctions orally. Here is another way using sentence strips that works well for a high intermediate+ level class. You can print the sentence strips on heavy paper or on colored paper. You need to cut between words where there is space (e.g., between conjunction and subject + verb, cut around the commas and periods. Students need to figure out what makes since. The words are all in capital letters so as not to give the students a clue about where to put a connector (at the beginning of a sentence or in the middle). Please make comments if you have any questions or suggestions about other ways to improve the activity. I usually place a set of the strips inside a large envelope and put students in groups of four or five to sort and work together. You can do the activity more than once and make it a race to see which group remembers the sentences and puts the words together quickly and accurately.
Tuesday, August 11, 2015
Making Connections in English
It is easy to formatively assess how well students "know" grammatical structures of English, by starting the fall semester with a review session. Divide your class into groups of four or five students and ask them to list and define what parts of speech, functions of parts of speech, phrase, and clause (independent/dependent) mean. Using SV to indicate to students "subject" and "verb" or a "clause" leads me to ask the class to define and give several examples of simple, compound, and complex sentences. The letters SV are often used in grammar books, so their use as representations for a clause are usually familiar to advanced level students.
By reading and sometimes clapping or walking in front of the class (taking one plodding step, for example, for each simple sentence), an instructor can illustrate why, as writers and speakers, we should use a range of connectors. Sometimes, to be emphatic, we might use a string of the same simple structure as in, "I love your smile. I love your voice. I love your soul." That would definitely have an impact on me! However, if we don't use any conjunctions to connect sentences in a writing, I show how it starts to be monotonous for a reader by clapping as I read. Da da dadum; da da dadum; da da dadum, and on and on.
Because of my background in anthropology, I always try to give students strategies for learning in general by being aware of their human biological roots. For most of our history, language was spoken. Whatever students learn for written discourse can be used in speech. There is a connection between fluent and accurate speech and fluent and accurate writing. Some students seem to be better at writing because they are familiar with a lot of vocabulary and grammar structures, but they are shy about mispronouncing words. Thus, their speech lags behind. Other students are fluent in speaking because they are focused on communicating and not on the accuracy of their grammar or making pronunciation errors. They often have more difficulty at the advanced level correcting their grammar and vocabulary errors in writing because they already have well-developed habits of expressing themselves and making themselves understood in speech.
Native speakers of any language make allowances for non-native speakers. In addition, since there is so much redundancy in language, even if you only know infinitive forms of a verb, for example, you can get around very well without knowing tenses. Many non-native speakers of English in this country who learn to communicate through immersion never master the correct academic forms of my language. That is why it is easier for a teacher to train a beginning-level student than an advanced-level student. Beginners see progress every day whereas advanced-level students sometimes feel that they are going backwards or marching in place. In fact, sometimes advanced students DO have to go backwards and relearn what they mislearned earlier.
One way to make students aware of connectors at an advanced level is to have them come up with the various types of types of sentences in a formulaic representation. If they have difficulty, you can guide them to come up with the forms. Then have the class work in groups and put different types of sentences on the board. Ask them to share a range of connectors, too.
Your whiteboard might look like this:
SV. SV. SV. SV. I like hamburgers. I don't like hot dogs. I like sweets.
SV, and SV. SV, so SV. SV, but SV.
I like hamburgers, and I like sweets. I like hamburgers, but I don't like hot dogs.
SV because SV. SV although SV. SV while SV.
I like hamburgers because they are tasty. I like sweets although they are not good for my teeth.
First, SV. Second, SV. Third, SV.
First, I heat the grill. Second, I make the hamburger patties. Third, I put the patties on the hot grill.
Along with a review of parts of speech, this is probably enough for a first meeting of class. It serves several purposes: (1) it helps the instructor to know what the students know and don't know; (2) the instructor and students start to get to know each other and to speak with each other in English; (3) the students start to see that they have a foundation to build on. They build social and cognitive connections in English.
Saturday, August 16, 2014
Spelling Matters
The word "matters" has a double meaning here. (However, matter actually has more than two meanings or uses.) One meaning in this post is that spelling is important (i.e., matters is used as a verb to mean it has significance or importance). The other refers to the topic of this essay, Spelling Matters (i.e., issues, problems or difficulties).
Convincing students that spelling is important in English is a daily song and dance, especially in writing classes. Why do I care that students learn to spell words correctly? With word checkers built into Word software, why should anyone care?
Amazingly, many tests of English (the Cambridge Exams, IELTS (International English Language Testing System), SAT writing, AP writing, and so on) require test-takers to write by hand. Even if you take the internet-based TOEFL exam, there is no spell-checker on the test computers. In other words, the test candidate must demonstrate his/her skill in writing in English without a dictionary or spell-checking device on the computer. They are not allowed to bring any electronic equipment (e.g., cell phones, iPods, etc.) into the testing area. One letter can create a huge or embarrassing difference in meaning or perception: "mad vs. made," "sit" vs. "set," "to" vs. "too," "read" vs. "red," and on and on. Whether you are a native or a non-native speaker of English, mastery of spelling is a mountain we must all climb to become literate communicators.
I, like many others, fall into the group of educators that believes that spelling counts. Last year Loewenstein wrote a thought-provoking blog post for Edutopia which posed the question "What would happen if you were to eliminate subjects in your classroom?" That is, instead of labeling what students learn in school as "spelling," "reading," "writing," "math," and "science," why don't we focus on projects-based learning, which integrates all the skills that students need to communicate in the real world?
While I'm not sure that eliminating the label "spelling" as a topic or subject of concern in school would make it any less of a pain for poor spellers, developing the habit of correct spelling does make a lot of sense. Similarly, it makes sense to learn how to add and subtract correctly. That means not being sloppy or lazy whenever you make any kind of financial transaction. When you enter an amount to withdraw from or depost to your checking account at the ATM, don't you pay attention to how many zeros you type in? The ATM doesn't have a checker for you? In the same way, sending an e-mail message to a work colleague can have a very strong negative or confusing effect if you misspell a word or leave words out. If you spell a word that exists in English, a spell checker isn't going to catch a mistake, so you can easily confuse a reader.
In a previous post, I published a photograph of a headline of the wrong word choice printed in the San Diego Union Tribune. However, when I searched for a link to the newspaper's online version, the headline had already been changed. My only proof of this public gaffe is the photograph. While this error was not a simple spelling error, it highlights the significance of word choice and word form as well as spelling. Living in a society with a written language system necessitates being careful about spelling and the words we choose to express ourselves. Words matter, and so do their spellings.
Convincing students that spelling is important in English is a daily song and dance, especially in writing classes. Why do I care that students learn to spell words correctly? With word checkers built into Word software, why should anyone care?
Amazingly, many tests of English (the Cambridge Exams, IELTS (International English Language Testing System), SAT writing, AP writing, and so on) require test-takers to write by hand. Even if you take the internet-based TOEFL exam, there is no spell-checker on the test computers. In other words, the test candidate must demonstrate his/her skill in writing in English without a dictionary or spell-checking device on the computer. They are not allowed to bring any electronic equipment (e.g., cell phones, iPods, etc.) into the testing area. One letter can create a huge or embarrassing difference in meaning or perception: "mad vs. made," "sit" vs. "set," "to" vs. "too," "read" vs. "red," and on and on. Whether you are a native or a non-native speaker of English, mastery of spelling is a mountain we must all climb to become literate communicators.
I, like many others, fall into the group of educators that believes that spelling counts. Last year Loewenstein wrote a thought-provoking blog post for Edutopia which posed the question "What would happen if you were to eliminate subjects in your classroom?" That is, instead of labeling what students learn in school as "spelling," "reading," "writing," "math," and "science," why don't we focus on projects-based learning, which integrates all the skills that students need to communicate in the real world?
While I'm not sure that eliminating the label "spelling" as a topic or subject of concern in school would make it any less of a pain for poor spellers, developing the habit of correct spelling does make a lot of sense. Similarly, it makes sense to learn how to add and subtract correctly. That means not being sloppy or lazy whenever you make any kind of financial transaction. When you enter an amount to withdraw from or depost to your checking account at the ATM, don't you pay attention to how many zeros you type in? The ATM doesn't have a checker for you? In the same way, sending an e-mail message to a work colleague can have a very strong negative or confusing effect if you misspell a word or leave words out. If you spell a word that exists in English, a spell checker isn't going to catch a mistake, so you can easily confuse a reader.
In a previous post, I published a photograph of a headline of the wrong word choice printed in the San Diego Union Tribune. However, when I searched for a link to the newspaper's online version, the headline had already been changed. My only proof of this public gaffe is the photograph. While this error was not a simple spelling error, it highlights the significance of word choice and word form as well as spelling. Living in a society with a written language system necessitates being careful about spelling and the words we choose to express ourselves. Words matter, and so do their spellings.
Friday, July 25, 2014
SAT Writing vs. TOEFL Writing
The big news for educators this year has been that the College Board is redoing its Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) by eliminating the writing requirement in 2016. Is this a good thing? Will this de-emphasis on writing have an effect on ETS's Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL)?
More than a decade ago, ETS (Educational Testing Service), which also makes the SAT, decided to create an online internet-based TOEFL (iBT - Test of English as a Foreign Language). In my view, this change was a vast improvement over the paper-based test as it included compulsory speaking and writing components. Before the iBT, I saw many of my Asian students proudly achieve the score of 450+ gain admission to local California community colleges. Later, however, I discovered that many of these same students were still taking ESL courses. Why? Although the paper-based TOEFL was supposedly their passport to entrance into and success in an American college, they found out subsequently that they had little ability to produce academic-level spoken or written English. The old paper-based TOEFL was not a great predictor of success for these non-natives in an American college system.
Not only were these students challenged to understand lectures in English, but they had to summarize and verbally restate in writing what they had heard in lectures. The skills that they needed to be successful at an American college were not just the passive skills (reading, listening, and structure/grammar) that they were tested on in the Paper-Based TOEFL (PBT). They needed to be able to produce English - not just recognize meanings or do error correction. They had to be able to rethink what they heard or read and interpret meanings. With almost no or little preparation or training for this approach to learning, they remained stuck in remedial ESL classes. With the advent of the iBT, many of these foreign students found a purpose to learning to be active producers of English.
It makes no sense to eliminate writing as a component of the SAT unless there is some other way to verify a college applicant's capabilities to produce English. Doing a timed written test in English is different from submitting a prepared statement of purpose for admission. This latter document was likely read and edited by multiple friends, family members, and paid tutors - and may not be an indicator of how a student will fare under college test conditions. Why is ETS planning to eliminate an important measure of the productive and critical thinking abilities of native English speakers while demanding measurable performances from non-native speakers on the iBT (internet-based TOEFL)?
Though I admit to preferring more creative writing in high school, I was grateful in the end that my 11th grade English teacher worked my class hard, so that the five paragraph essay was almost reflexive by the time I was a freshman at UCLA. I passed the Subject A exam of those days and was able to enroll in a required English course from my first quarter. The former "Subject A exam" still exists at UCSD, for example, in the form of The Entry Level Writing Requirement. Students who do not achieve at least one of several entry-level writing composition scores must take a composition course (for which they earn no credit toward their future degree) and pass an exam. An ESL instructor who teaches this composition course at UCSD through Mesa College told me that if a student fails the end of quarter writing exam, (s)he must repeat the course until a passing mark is reached.
As much as I am against the teach-to-a-test approach to education, if high school students know that colleges require a writing score from the SAT, they will prepare for it with the guidance of their teachers. This practice alone may send a message to all (i.e., parents, students, teachers, administrators) that critical thinking clearly expressed in writing matters.
For a supporting view, please check out this Washington Post commentary. For a broader view of the elimination of the writing component of the SAT, read Inside Higher Ed's news brief.
More than a decade ago, ETS (Educational Testing Service), which also makes the SAT, decided to create an online internet-based TOEFL (iBT - Test of English as a Foreign Language). In my view, this change was a vast improvement over the paper-based test as it included compulsory speaking and writing components. Before the iBT, I saw many of my Asian students proudly achieve the score of 450+ gain admission to local California community colleges. Later, however, I discovered that many of these same students were still taking ESL courses. Why? Although the paper-based TOEFL was supposedly their passport to entrance into and success in an American college, they found out subsequently that they had little ability to produce academic-level spoken or written English. The old paper-based TOEFL was not a great predictor of success for these non-natives in an American college system.
Not only were these students challenged to understand lectures in English, but they had to summarize and verbally restate in writing what they had heard in lectures. The skills that they needed to be successful at an American college were not just the passive skills (reading, listening, and structure/grammar) that they were tested on in the Paper-Based TOEFL (PBT). They needed to be able to produce English - not just recognize meanings or do error correction. They had to be able to rethink what they heard or read and interpret meanings. With almost no or little preparation or training for this approach to learning, they remained stuck in remedial ESL classes. With the advent of the iBT, many of these foreign students found a purpose to learning to be active producers of English.
It makes no sense to eliminate writing as a component of the SAT unless there is some other way to verify a college applicant's capabilities to produce English. Doing a timed written test in English is different from submitting a prepared statement of purpose for admission. This latter document was likely read and edited by multiple friends, family members, and paid tutors - and may not be an indicator of how a student will fare under college test conditions. Why is ETS planning to eliminate an important measure of the productive and critical thinking abilities of native English speakers while demanding measurable performances from non-native speakers on the iBT (internet-based TOEFL)?
Though I admit to preferring more creative writing in high school, I was grateful in the end that my 11th grade English teacher worked my class hard, so that the five paragraph essay was almost reflexive by the time I was a freshman at UCLA. I passed the Subject A exam of those days and was able to enroll in a required English course from my first quarter. The former "Subject A exam" still exists at UCSD, for example, in the form of The Entry Level Writing Requirement. Students who do not achieve at least one of several entry-level writing composition scores must take a composition course (for which they earn no credit toward their future degree) and pass an exam. An ESL instructor who teaches this composition course at UCSD through Mesa College told me that if a student fails the end of quarter writing exam, (s)he must repeat the course until a passing mark is reached.
As much as I am against the teach-to-a-test approach to education, if high school students know that colleges require a writing score from the SAT, they will prepare for it with the guidance of their teachers. This practice alone may send a message to all (i.e., parents, students, teachers, administrators) that critical thinking clearly expressed in writing matters.
For a supporting view, please check out this Washington Post commentary. For a broader view of the elimination of the writing component of the SAT, read Inside Higher Ed's news brief.
Friday, July 4, 2014
Assessing Grammar through Speaking
Recently I taught a course in high intermediate grammar. One of the SLOs (student learning objectives) was "Students will be able to ... produce in writing and speaking... [certain structures, such as present perfect with question formation and basic subject-verb agreement]." It is relatively straightforward to assess for grammatical structures in a writing assignment, but how does one objectively assess the "natural" production of certain structures in a speaking task? You can have students give prepared presentations, but this is somewhat "unnatural" in my view. What I would want to know if I were an English student is whether or not I can control certain structures in a "normal" conversational situation.
To get students to practice target structures in a conversation mode, I gave pairs of students a game board, with die. They also received a speaking rubric for the task so that they could see what they were being evaluated on. The game board has more than 50 squares with the base form of both regular and irregular verbs in each square.
Below you can preview the rubric and directions and decide if you like it before going to the pdf file link above. You can also see the game board which uses a bogglesworld's board template, which I like a lot. I modified slightly with with my own words.
To get students to practice target structures in a conversation mode, I gave pairs of students a game board, with die. They also received a speaking rubric for the task so that they could see what they were being evaluated on. The game board has more than 50 squares with the base form of both regular and irregular verbs in each square.
Below you can preview the rubric and directions and decide if you like it before going to the pdf file link above. You can also see the game board which uses a bogglesworld's board template, which I like a lot. I modified slightly with with my own words.
BOARD GAME - SPEAKING ASSESSMENT
Target Features
|
4
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
Present perfect (questions,
statements, short answer)
|
||||
Subject-verb agreement
(singular/plural)
|
||||
Simple past (question
formation, statements)
|
||||
Irregular verbs (present
perfect and simple past)
|
||||
Pronunciation of -ed
endings (present perfect and simple past)
|
Name___________________
Score______/20
Comments:
PRESENT PERFECT (questions,
short answer, statements in positive/negative):
4 = Error-free use and
production of the structures
3 = Occasional errors in use and
production of structures
2 = Frequent errors in use and
production of structures
1 = Lacks control of use and
production of structures
SUBJECT-VERB AGREEMENT:
4 = Always follows rules of
subject-verb agreement
3 = Occasional errors in
subject-verb agreement
2 = Frequent subject-verb
agreement errors
1 = Almost no control of
subject-verb agreement
SIMPLE PAST (Wh-Q, statements)
4 = Error-free use of the
structures
3 = Occasional errors in use
of structures
2 = Frequent errors in use of
structures
1 = Lacks control of structures
IRREGULAR VERBS (present
perfect and simple past):
4 = Error-free use of the
structures
3 = Occasional errors in use
of structures
2 = Frequent errors in use of
structures
1 = Lacks control of structures
PRONUNCIATION OF -ed ENDINGS
(present perfect and simple past):
4 = Error-free pronunciation
of verb endings
3 = Occasional errors in pronunciation
of verb endings
2 = Frequent errors in pronunciation
of verb endings
1 = Lacks control of pronunciation
of verb endings
A Verb Game board** was used
to elicit questions and responses in present perfect and simple past. Students practiced for part of one period and
"played" again the following meeting. They needed to practice "yes/no" questions in present perfect, short answers, and follow up wh-questions in the simple past. Answers to the wh-questions needed to use the simple past form of the verb in the original question. The paired speaking activity
was recorded and rated for accuracy in use and production of target structures
(about 2.5 to 3 minutes).
**A partial view of the game
board is attached at the bottom. It is not in landscape format. I printed
boards and handed out dice for students to share for this activity.
Saturday, December 22, 2012
No Shortcuts to Competence in Vocabulary
A while ago (12/13/12), an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal (paper version) grabbed my attention. The title was "Vocabulary Declines, with Unspeakable Results." The article by E.D. Hirsch, Jr. can be viewed at the above google-cache link (although I don't know for how long).
The reason I read the article was that, just the day before it was printed, I had had a conversation with a high-intermediate TOEFL student who wondered why our English language school doesn't place students by level according to a vocabulary score. I didn't have a good answer to his question. How important is vocabulary to mastery of English? Can we rate an ESL student's ability level by the vocabulary that (s)he can command in reading, listening, speaking, and writing? How would we create a measurement/scale for that? Do test-makers rate every word used in their exam by level?
The focus of the Hirsch article is on native speakers of English - on the American educational system and how it fails to equip its public-school students with appropriate academic and formal vocabulary so that they can function as well-spoken adults. Hirsch points out that "Vocabulary building is a slow process that requires students to have enough familiarity with the context to understand unfamiliar words. Substance, not skill, develops vocabulary and reading ability - there are no shortcuts."
The reason I read the article was that, just the day before it was printed, I had had a conversation with a high-intermediate TOEFL student who wondered why our English language school doesn't place students by level according to a vocabulary score. I didn't have a good answer to his question. How important is vocabulary to mastery of English? Can we rate an ESL student's ability level by the vocabulary that (s)he can command in reading, listening, speaking, and writing? How would we create a measurement/scale for that? Do test-makers rate every word used in their exam by level?
The focus of the Hirsch article is on native speakers of English - on the American educational system and how it fails to equip its public-school students with appropriate academic and formal vocabulary so that they can function as well-spoken adults. Hirsch points out that "Vocabulary building is a slow process that requires students to have enough familiarity with the context to understand unfamiliar words. Substance, not skill, develops vocabulary and reading ability - there are no shortcuts."
I totally agree with Hirsch that there are "no shortcuts" to learning vocabulary. It is unlikely that a student can quickly grow his/her lexicon without simultaneously expanding her/his knowledge of various subjects. In other words, vocabulary is best learned and remembered within a subject or topical context.
Some readers may disagree with the view that "all verbal tests are, at bottom, vocabulary tests." However, as Hirsch says, research has "shown that ...verbally weighted scores are good predictors of income level. Words are twice as important as math scores..." My students can attest that what holds them back the most in achieving the scores that they need on the IELTS or iBT (TOEFL) is a lack of vocabulary. The TOEFL is designed to test a non-native speaker's ability to comprehend and use language that would allow them to function in an American college.
How can we teachers ensure that students are well equipped vocabulary-wise for college and university or for the business world. Will studying vocabulary lists work? When a test asks a student to figure out the "gist" or general meaning of a reading or listening passage on the iBT, can a student consistently choose the correct answer if (s)he is totally unfamiliar with the topic being discussed or written about. The test-makers (ETS) claim that all the information a student needs to correctly answer a question on the iBT is contained in the reading or listening passage. They do not need to be knowledgeable about any particular subject matter.
Recently, one of my students (Chinese) in a low intermediate preparatory iBT writing class scored 40 out of 120 points on the iBT. He was very ashamed that he got a "0" on the listening part of the exam. He said that he had no familiarity with what the speakers were talking about, so he couldn't guess enough answers to score even a few points out of the 30 possible for the listening section. I was somewhat incredulous that he scored so low, too, because he was very good at recognizing individual spoken words and to orally give synonyms for the majority of vocabulary words that we had learned from a list in our textbook. What went wrong when he had to listen to lectures and conversations in English where all the vocabulary was contextualized? (It is important to note that he had trained for listening and speaking for the iBT, but, according to the student, the topics covered in the listening passages on the exam had not been covered in his practice sessions.) Is there any way to ensure that all potential academic topics discussed on the iBT can be covered in a ten-week preparatory course?
The WSJ article and my own observations of ESL students continue to reinforce the notion that much more attention needs to be given to vocabulary development both in public schools and ESL programs. For teachers, this means that we must be more creative and attentive to the multiple meanings of single words in both common, everyday speech and in more restricted academic contexts. Teaching a love of words could go a long ways toward making students delight rather than cringe at the thought of learning vocabulary.
How can we teachers ensure that students are well equipped vocabulary-wise for college and university or for the business world. Will studying vocabulary lists work? When a test asks a student to figure out the "gist" or general meaning of a reading or listening passage on the iBT, can a student consistently choose the correct answer if (s)he is totally unfamiliar with the topic being discussed or written about. The test-makers (ETS) claim that all the information a student needs to correctly answer a question on the iBT is contained in the reading or listening passage. They do not need to be knowledgeable about any particular subject matter.
Recently, one of my students (Chinese) in a low intermediate preparatory iBT writing class scored 40 out of 120 points on the iBT. He was very ashamed that he got a "0" on the listening part of the exam. He said that he had no familiarity with what the speakers were talking about, so he couldn't guess enough answers to score even a few points out of the 30 possible for the listening section. I was somewhat incredulous that he scored so low, too, because he was very good at recognizing individual spoken words and to orally give synonyms for the majority of vocabulary words that we had learned from a list in our textbook. What went wrong when he had to listen to lectures and conversations in English where all the vocabulary was contextualized? (It is important to note that he had trained for listening and speaking for the iBT, but, according to the student, the topics covered in the listening passages on the exam had not been covered in his practice sessions.) Is there any way to ensure that all potential academic topics discussed on the iBT can be covered in a ten-week preparatory course?
The WSJ article and my own observations of ESL students continue to reinforce the notion that much more attention needs to be given to vocabulary development both in public schools and ESL programs. For teachers, this means that we must be more creative and attentive to the multiple meanings of single words in both common, everyday speech and in more restricted academic contexts. Teaching a love of words could go a long ways toward making students delight rather than cringe at the thought of learning vocabulary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)