Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
_I
Breaking
Guy Cook encourages
us to rummage around in
our pedagogical dustbins
and re-assess what we have
cast out.
taboos
valid teaching and learning strategies
have become taboo. So strong is the
academic and commercial hype behind
this process, however, that teachers are
often scared to re-assess rationally what
has been lost.
I would like first to consider five
such strategies, and then suggest that,
despite their apparent disparity, there is
one overriding misguided idea that lies
behind their designation as 'taboo'.
Taboo one
Teacher talk,
student silence
Many teachers believe that they should
at all times reduce their own talking
time and increase that of their students.
But why is this necessarily a good thing
in every lesson? Students are not rats
who only learn by doing. They have the
human capacity for passive learning
through attention, observation and
reflection. Judging by favourite leisure
activities (film, theatre, television,
reading), people very much enjoy
listening to other voices, and can learn
a great deal while doing so. When and
why did teachers lose confidence in
their ability to instruct and inspire?
This is not to say that every lesson
should be a teacher monologue, nor
Taboo two
Dictation
As a demanding, form-focused activity
in which the teacher does all the talking
and students write in silence,
reproducing somebody else's words,
dictation must rank as the most unreal
and uncommunicative exercise
imaginable, to be eliminated from any
up-to-date classroOm. How strange
then, that it is still widely regarded as
Breaking
taboos
their own words, thus gaining through
imitation. Secondly, paradoxically, its
highly artificial focus on forms and
components is a very authentic general
learning strategy, similar to the kind of
thing we would do when learning to
drive (manoeuvring in safe environments)
or to play an instrument (practising
scales and arpeggios). Thirdly, copying
down spoken words accurately is
involved in many real-world tasks: both
work-related (eg minute taking) and for
pleasure (eg copying a song). Lastly, the
fact that it is undeniably hard work,
demanding conscious effort, should not
disqualify it for serious learners (except
perhaps the very youngest). Though it
has been in the marketing interests of
publishers and private language schools
to claim that a second language can be
picked up effortlessly, learning a new
language entails hard work. Students
know this, and can get pleasure from the
knowledge of what that work will lead to.
The taboo on dictation is part of a
larger problem. Implicit in many
communicative materials, is the message
that spoken language is more basic and
important than reading and writing.
The assumption in early communicative
textbooks was that every English
language learner had no more pressing
need than to buy a cup of coffee
without drawing attention to themselves
as a foreigner. One indication of this
bias towards speech is the failure of
almost all EFL textbooks to address
one of the most pressing needs of many
of the world's English language learners
(Japanese, Chinese, Arab and many
others), which is to master a new writing
system. This is something which needs
painstaking practice and instruction. As
with the fetish for student talk, though,
the assumption is that if students are
not chattering, they are not learning.
Taboo three
Repetition and
rote learning
These two related activities are generally
described as both artificial and boring,
and pejoratively dismissed as
`regurgitation' or 'mere' imitation. The
criticism, however, usually focuses upon
Taboo four
Translation
Since the early 20th century, translation
has been so out of fashion in ELT that
it has rarely been discussed, either as a
means or an end. It is simply assumed
to be wrong, and has attracted all the
usual insults. It is boring, artificial, the
last refuge of the incompetent teacher. It
has been regularly and explicitly
forbidden in materials, curricula and
Taboo five
Invented
examples
The standard argument, religiously
reiterated in nearly every recent
textbook and dictionary, is that
invented examples are dead and
artificial, demotivating students and
misrepresenting how the language is
actually used. In addition, they are
damned by association with grammartranslation and graded-structure
teaching. The cult of 'real language'
demands that every example must be
drawn from databanks generally held,
in practice, by academics and
publishers. Faced by this heavy
pressure, and unable to match these
resources with their own, teachers have
been scared away from making up their
own examples. They react rather as
they do with translation. They continue
to use invented sentences, but guiltily
and with a sense of inadequacy.
But why? As with so many other
discredited practices, there is confusion
between the practice and its misuse. It
is true that traditional textbooks were
crammed with tedious invented
examples, but they do not necessarily
have to be of this kind. The 'real'
examples in fashionable textbooks and
dictionaries can be just as deadly. They
are someone else's, and no longer 'real'
by the time they reach the classroom.
The important issue is not the
`reality' of examples, but whether they
are useful, interesting and relevant. The
best examples are surely those invented
by teachers, isolating important points
of vocabulary and grammar, and
adjusted with wit and sensitivity to the
level and interests of their students. If
they are bizarre and unreal, all the
better it will make them memorable.
Lifting
taboos
These five taboos are not as disparate
and unconnected as they may seem.
They all have their roots in a single
misguided vision of first language
learning which, having captured the
gullible imaginations of 20th-century
ELT theorists, was then imposed upon
teachers and students. The vision has
several related components. Firstly, it
supposes that language is a separate
mental faculty, which cannot be learned
in the same way as other skills and does
not benefit from the usual learning
language pedagogy is then arguably an inaccurate one. Real children are very
likely to develop language as they learn
other things, using speech and writing
together, and very probably in a
bilingual context full of code switching
and translation. Yet even if this view of
first language acquisition were correct,
there would be no necessary reason to
impose it upon adults learning a new
language in later life. They and their
teachers should be able to make their
own choices about how to learn. The
late 20th century can be regarded as a
period when one single narrow view of
language and language acquisition
deprived both teachers and learners of
many of their most useful strategies,
making the classroom a much less varied
and flexible place than it should be. We
have accumulated too many taboos,
and it is time to break free.
19
Language Learning
(Oxford University Press).
g.cook@reading.ac.uk