I believe there is a time and place for all teaching methodologies as they each have specific purposes and unique strengths. What strategy to implement in the class room will always depend on the level of the students I am working with, their age range, their individual motivations and goals, as well as the over all classroom dynamic. It will also depend as much on what their own philosophies are toward learning and being as student, as much as my own philosophy about what it means to be a good teacher. A flexible approach that values the multi-faceted value of past teaching dogmas will serve me best. While I will strive to be eclectic, the methodology that resonates most with me and has proven itself successful is task-based communicative instruction (CLT).
I believe the CLT activities that are meaningful and contextualized lend themselves best for language learning, especially when the goal is competent and proficient output. The use of interactive games, social interaction, information sharing, and other tasks that involve functional communication practice are necessary in order to create a positive classroom environment and in which the students will excel in the new language quickly,.
One of the drawbacks of having a rationalist perspective on language teaching is the possibility of a school pidgin to form, which is difficult to eradicate. This is why I also find it useful to do grammar translation or other exercises that do bring attention to grammar patterns and highlight the nuances of the language being studied. While explicit instruction is never the objective approach in the classroom, such analysis often lends itself to students with different intelligences. Also, older students who enjoy learning rules sometimes desire a visual study approach and the foundational grammatical comprehension. I will always approach grammar rules first through contextualization and personalized learning experiences, followed by explanations of grammar only in a manner that reinforces language already mastered by the students. This often gives them the tools to expand creativity in their new language. When to interweave explicit instruction about grammar and how I draw attention to the nuances of grammar patterns is in the end entirely dependent on the character of my students, their needs and motivations.
On the whole, the audio-lingual/empiricist approach is not one I tend to favor in the classroom. Nonetheless, I believe that the creation of a cultural island were L2 is explicitly used is quite helpful. When working with students at a higher level I concur that eventually having an unconscious level of comprehension builds confidence. Then again, the empiricist drawbacks include its rejection of universal grammar and lack of encouragement toward creative speaking. This is not the atmosphere I want in the classroom, as it does not lend itself towards different learning styles.
Overall, I value:
A student centered classroom
being flexible, high context, comprehensible input
modeling instead of explaining
variety with in a structured routine
TPR
lower affective filter of students in the classroom
create an environment that is fun and rewarding
I want to get to know my students: not just their names but their unique motivations, their unique qualities and interests, bring something to the classroom that will target every individual students intelligences whether it be artistic, musical, mathematical, naturalistic, etc...
No comments:
Post a Comment