|
 |
Krashen and beginners | ||
Tags: Natural method | Beginner | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Language Programs, Books & Tapes |  | |
| Cainntear Pentaglot Senior Member Scotland linguafrankly.blogsp Joined 5822 days ago 4399 posts - 7687 votes  Speaks: Lowland Scots, English*, French, Spanish, Scottish Gaelic Studies: Catalan, Italian, German, Irish, Welsh | Message 25 of 39 27 September 2011 at 10:21pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The truths in Krashen's output are trivialities, but trivialities that he uses to support extreme (non-trivial) conclusions.
The idea that you can't learn without communication and usage is trivial, and everyone understands, believes and accepts it as truth. This is not Krashen's point, and it's not Krashen's idea. The term "comprehensible input" is particularly specific and doesn't simply refer to interaction with the language. Now you cannot say that the English classes you took at school did not contribute in some way to your current ability. I agree they were probably not very efficient, but they may well have had some effect. I've personally found that when I learn facts about a language and then forget them, they come back to me when I encounter the language "in the flesh", so to speak. Edited by Cainntear on 27 September 2011 at 10:23pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Vytenis Newbie Lithuania Joined 4618 days ago 8 posts - 16 votes | Message 26 of 39 27 September 2011 at 10:47pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"The idea that you can't learn without communication and usage is trivial, and everyone
understands, believes and accepts it as truth. This is not Krashen's point, and it's not Krashen's idea. " Believe it or not, many educators fail to realize this simple truth. They seem to think that all students need to do is to go through their grammar-based syllabuses, do grammar tests and then they will be able to muster this knowledge to cunstruct their fluent speech and understand real-life colloquial language. I know that you agree with me that this is absurd, however, I meet such teachers (and the products of such attitude) every day. "Now you cannot say that the English classes you took at school did not contribute in some way to your current ability. I agree they were probably not very efficient, but they may well have had some effect. I've personally found that when I learn facts about a language and then forget them, they come back to me when I encounter the language "in the flesh", so to speak." Yes, it may be true that it helped me, but it was only because of massive input I received. I have, however, met hundreds and hundreds of examples how all this theory- based instruction did NOT produce fluent English speakers even after many years of instruction at Schools and universities. Whatever you may say, but the fact remains that if those years were devoted to providing students with something more useful than cramming in the iformation needed to pass grammar tests, the final outcome may well have been very different! 4 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Vytenis Newbie Lithuania Joined 4618 days ago 8 posts - 16 votes | Message 27 of 39 27 September 2011 at 11:15pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
BTW, I personally find Pimsleur's lessons extremely useful to get a good headstart with a
new language. It provides a lot of input and after listening all 90 lessons (I wish they produced more), I get enough basic vocabulary to go on to listen to the more complicated listening material I manage to procure. I do however find that the vocabulary they provide is a bit limited (even after all 90 lessons). But what they do extremely well is they familiarize the ear to the words and expressions of a new language - after hearing them repeated so many times, they sound so familiar when you encounter them in more challenging listening. This makes the task less daunting. Finding a listening material simple enough to be comprehensible after having done with 90 lessons of Pimsleur but also challenging enough to learn new words or expressions is a real challenge, which may correspond to Krashen's "i+1" concept. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 jeff_lindqvist Diglot Moderator SwedenRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 6720 days ago 4250 posts - 5710 votes Speaks: Swedish*, English Studies: German, Spanish, Russian, Dutch, Mandarin, Esperanto, Irish, French Personal Language Map | Message 28 of 39 27 September 2011 at 11:54pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This is very similar to why "Europeans don't forget English", as discussed in another thread: http://how-to-learn-any-language.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?T ID=29525 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Vytenis Newbie Lithuania Joined 4618 days ago 8 posts - 16 votes | Message 29 of 39 28 September 2011 at 10:29am | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Thanks. I will be sure to take a look!
1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Elexi Senior Member United Kingdom Joined 5376 days ago 938 posts - 1839 votes Speaks: English* Studies: French, German, Latin | Message 30 of 39 28 September 2011 at 12:03pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Vytenis, it is interest that you talk about Pimsleur and Krashen together - surely the Pimsleur method violates pretty much every rule of Krashen's monitor hypothesis? - To me Pimsleur is in reality a modified grammar-translation model with the explicit grammar teaching taken out (which, at least for me, is one of its drawbacks).
The trouble with the 'pointy-speaky' method Krashen is showing in that You Tube film to demonstrate comprehensible input is that in practice it is best for picking up nouns of physical objects and verbs that can be expressed by acting. It isn't very helpful for grammatical matters or abstract concepts. Let's take a simple example - Krashen says to his students 'meine Hand auf meinen Kopf, wo ist meine Hand?' At the same time he points with his other hand to the hand resting on his head. What is the comprehensible input here? I would venture it is really only 'Hand' and 'Kopf'. 'mein-' is probably also acceptable to speakers of European languages as it is a cognate with 'mine, mon, mi etc (but the use of cognates means you are mapping the target language onto your own). The specific information carried by 'meine and meinem' (feminine noun and dative object following 'auf') is unlikely to be 'comprehensible input' and the fact that 'auf' is a two way preposition that can take an object in either the accusative or dative case depending on whether the object is in motion or resting in a location (as in the example) is highly unlikely to be communicated through pointing and speaking (which a problem field anthropologists who have to rely on this method often report). The answer from the the students is most likely to be a one word answer = Kopf until the possessive pronoun 'dein/ihr' is taught . It will take a huge amount of speaky-pointing to teach that 'auf' takes a dative object. In my view it would by much quicker to follow something like Pimsleur or even better an explicit Michel Thomas style grammar translation method - explain the rule without apparently confrontational grammarian language (e.g. using the motion/location distinction) and get the students to work through examples applying the rule by producing sentences. I believe this is more efficient and quicker than forcing students to make inferences of complex rules from the teacher play acting. Edited by Elexi on 28 September 2011 at 5:32pm 2 persons have voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Vytenis Newbie Lithuania Joined 4618 days ago 8 posts - 16 votes | Message 31 of 39 28 September 2011 at 4:16pm | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Well, I don't really care. For me both Pimsleur and Krashen seem to work and that's good enough as far as I'm concerned. All these theoretical contradictions are better left for language learning theorists (most of whom I guess are far from being polyglots). I am more concerned with practice and my own learning experience.
And who said that beginner students should pick up all these complicated grammatical concepts from the lesson one? Give them a break! I find that it's precisely a problem with all these grammar-obsessed teaching mindsets: they just can't give the students a break! They've just got to kill all the joy and fun of learning from day one. Give those poor beginner students some fun, even if their learning at the beginning stages will be restricted to acquiring just words (big deal!). But no, they must overwhelm learners with grammar abstractions from the very beginning, torture their brains into stupor, scare them with grammar tests and make them miserable at their failures to grasp complicated grammar and thus unmotivated to continue learning the language. Why do that??? Why not let things unfold in their natural way for a while? Words are more important than grammar. Even if they acquire only words and no grammar = that is a big achievement for the beginners. Besides, I am sure they will pick up these grammatical points later as they progress. And even if they don't - we can teach them later, when they will be more receptive having acquired so much background knowledge. Besides, who said that they will only learn from the primitive kind of "pointy speaky" method demonstrated by Krashen? Who said all other ways must be unavailable or forbidden? In fact, at the more advanced stage they may themselves approach teacher with the requests for explanation about the grammar points you mentioned. And that is great. That is what the teacher is for: to explain, to help students make discoveries for themselves. With the grammar drill based teaching, however, they will most likely approach the teacher with only one question: "could you please please please postpone our next grammar test?" :))) Therefore, I personally find that this sort of direct instruction without ovewhelming students (especially if they are children) with abstract metalinguistic descriptions is not only relaxed and fun way to start learning a language but also it is very motivating. 1 person has voted this message useful | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cainntear Pentaglot Senior Member Scotland linguafrankly.blogsp Joined 5822 days ago 4399 posts - 7687 votes Speaks: Lowland Scots, English*, French, Spanish, Scottish Gaelic Studies: Catalan, Italian, German, Irish, Welsh | Message 32 of 39 29 September 2011 at 12:02am | IP Logged | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
"Krashen seems to work" -- what direct experience do you have of Krashen? From your own account, you appear to have none. I have sat in various types of classrooms, and where Krashen's principles are applied by the teacher, I can tell you that the successful student ignores them. And as a "language learning theorist" who has just finished watching a Spanish TV programme (without subtitles) during a break from writing an essay in French while sitting in the student accommadation of a Gaelic-medium college... "far from being [a] polyglot"...? Not so much.
Strawman fallacy. You are equating the teaching of structure with the memorisation of rules -- this is incorrect. Very few people enjoy learning words. Language is about expression, and "direct" methods fail to teach expressive language. Freedom of expression comes with command of functional and abstract language -- "this is a pen" is not very expressive, but "I didn't want to do it" is. The problem with most grammar courses is that they teach (in your words) "grammar abstractions", but this doesn't have to be the case. Instead, they can teach practical and functional grammar -- this is what Pimsleur does! (Not as successfully as Michel Thomas, but that's a different matter.) If you like Pimsleur, you like grammar-led courses.
If you are making hot chocolate, which is more important: chocolate or milk? A language consists of words and grammar -- without either, it isn't a language.
Actually learning the language is an even bigger achievement.
They don't. People get stuck.
The evidence is against you here. In teaching circles, they talk a lot about "fossilised mistakes". This means three things: 1) Habit. You've been saying something one way so long that it's automatic, so you have to unlearn your mistakes and learn a correct form. 2) Pride. Many people overestimate their own abilities in a language. Accepting you're making mistakes means overcoming pride, and a lot of people find that difficult. 3) "Good enough". Many people will think "well, I've managed so far with these mistakes, so obviously the rest doesn't matter." An early focus on accuracy avoids these problems.
...erm... Krashen did. You are defending something you don't understand: Krashen says that grammar, that asking questions, that actively trying to learn in any other way than listening to the teacher is useless and doomed to failure. That is the core of everything Krashen says about teaching. Even you do not agree with Krashen, so I don't understand why you're trying to defend him.
Read this whole thread, and you will see that we aren't talking about that.
This is an unfair comparison. "Not overwhelming" is good, "overwhelming" is bad. But most direct instruction does overwhelm people. There's too much senseless input for most. 5 persons have voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
