this one will not take long. i just want to get it out before i forget.

i have been building on a series of designs (teaching moves) lately in my uninorte level one sessions.

i have continued to explore and exploit the potential of images. sometimes it feels strong: students seem to keep up with my intentions of getting them to learn the simple present structures, especially question formation, through visualization of actions (action verbs). other times, though, it doesn’t feel right: students fail to advance.

recently, though, i venture with the groups and ask them to not only make questions on the basis of the proposition in question. let us explain: someone says “my sister works as a secretary.” to this someone else (another student) creates the question: “where does she work?” regardless of the answer, other students may follow up with another question: “when does she work?”, or “what time does she work?”. the point is obvious, the automatization of the construction/structure of the question. students have found themselves being more fluent in making the question. even students who i though could not make it are doing so.

this time, though, i went farther. i had students follow up with a question coherent enough and related to the reply provided. for example: “my sister works as a secretary”. student b: “you said your sister works as a secreatary, right? well, what time does she start? or does she like her job? it is amazing how student can create questions. their communicative sense is effective.

english language teaching, also known as elt, is what i make a living on. and i thought, well, why not include a series of videos in the list of things i could say anything about. so, let’s be it, then.

this first one i caught while searching for something on british council / bbc website. to be honest, i had never seen the man who according to some has lately become a voice in the teaching of english as a second language. of his books there was one on the teaching of grammar that changed much of the way i used to teach it. in my opinion, the most striking aspect of his work (books) is his ability to take what is there (being written on language learning) and give it a spin. at the end, you say, “gee, i never thought about it or saw it from that angle.” this is clearly an invitation to always consider things from new perspectives. i hope to expand on this and his work later on.

for now, i intend to direct my attention to some interesting points of his 2 videos we see here:

• the first is on repetition. most coursebooks handle topics of units singledly. that is, unit 1 is on bees and never again you will “see” anything on bees again. he invites ts to consider using texts about bees from a different genre, ie, a poem. by the way, isn’t true that unless ss are exposed to different uses of the same word, will they be able to learn to use it.
• the second video is on register. especially topic development that deals with cohesion, which also deals with repetition. in the case of register, isn’t it true that words are associated with the situations they happen to represent. even if we use the word bee figuratively somehow we remain close to its original idea of animal. back to register, all we need to do is make ss aware of language.

.

.

sct for social cultural theory

motives to write come from reading: handbook of research in second language teaching and l earning by eli hinkel from a chapter written by lantolf.

i have read about the social cultural theory, on and off. which means i have not been consistent. which is a pity. why? it occurs to me it is not the type of theory that touches practical grounds. added to that, we second language teachers are so much filled up with functional approaches daily that something not so concrete gets lost easily. and yet, the theory is a beautiful one.

i’m not going to introduce it here. i felt like writing about it because i happened to run into a chapter on activity theory and task based learning, starting page 345. the dialogic nature of reading has pushed me and the result is now here:

to begin, to me the theory is like fresh air for those of us immersed in students producing concrete learning outcomes. that is, it is a theory of dynamics and not of measurable results. when either a teacher or a student knows of the latter using the language as a tool and learning it as he or she uses it, then both also know that it is a matter of time and doing and nothing else. this, for example, stands in an opposite side of a methodology that “conveniently” forces individuals to produce accurate language from day one. the so frequent concern of students due to their expectations and worries fades away.

some interesting issues result of reading the piece above

• when a task is designed with the purpose of fulfilling objectives based on needs, the learning outcome is predicted. or so the task designer thinks. with sct, this is not necessarily true. lantolf argues that we, teachers, “can only compose the circumstances and conditions that promote learning. we can not guarantee that it will happen at any given point or in any given way”.
• leontiev’s six principles for the understanding of human learning and development in activity, the first three shared with animals. of the six, the last two are the most important. they result in “meaning offers a person a high degree of freedom from what is determined”:
  • drive for gratification
  • response to a stimuli
  • learned habits and dispositions
  • social norms and expectations
  • a life-world and meaning (as opposed to an actual situation)
  • free choice
• the metaphor of the shovel versus the saw is excellent for understanding the concept of activity and its implications. if we needed to dig a hole doing it with our hands may do the job. however, a shovel is a better tool. so we learn the movement of the shovel. would the movement of a saw if we used it to dig a hole be the same as that of the shovel? in this sense, we would be predicting the way an activity unfolds. yet, this does not seem to happen when L2 learners speak. they choose to do it their L1 way. unless, they needed to pass the toefl.
• lantolf following quote summarizes: “interaction between learner and task is not a one-way but a two-way street. tasks as cultural artifacts should indeed have an effect on how learning activity emerges, but at the same time we should fully anticipate that learners will also shape the tasks in unexptected and creative ways in order to make sense of their own learning activity.
• the nature of language in sct. hopper’s emergent grammar is used as a way to explain the system of language in sct. according to hopper language code system was an invention of the greeks to simplify their language for foreigners. on the other hand, grammar is a by-product of communication: “a name for certain categories of observed repetitions in discourse”. his emergent grammar opposes the fixed code (the linguistics system) which he says is monologic: the ideal perfect knower in a homogeneous speech community. he defines grammar “not as a general abstract possession that is unifrom across the community, but is an emergent fact having its source in each individual’s experience and life history and in the struggle to accomplish successful communication”. (see page 349 for expansion on hopper’s emergent grammar)

..

where was i when google started this? well, i will be posting an increading list of those youtube talks i watch whenever i have the time to do so.

1. jan 09, 09: michael kinsley. what a brilliant mind! great sense of humor. i remember reading him when i was in the states.
2. jan 10, 09: lee siegel. boy, his analysis and criticism of the new technology called internet is superb and in fact raises important questions. i wish users would simply watch this one.
3. jan 11, 09: noam chomsky.  a name of its own, especially in the world of linguistics. not ever been happy with usa international politics. of communisit philosophy? at any rate, he has a great mind and transpires so much wisdom. it feels he can talk for hours and his discourse reenergizes itself by bringing more content. i was never bored.
4. … sajorde4

intro

If I were asked where my approach to second language teaching is heading, what would I say?

a possible answer

to make things easier I will use the following lines from david kern’s book “literacy and language teaching”

• “even the most basic acts of communication require interpretation, involving the use of resources that extend well beyond the grammar and vocabulary of a language”
• “the design metaphor emphasizes the construction of meaning and not a simple transfer of it in every communicative act”
• “from the metaphorical perspective of design, communication occurs at the intersection between language and context and relies on the perception of linguistic, cognitive and social relationships”.

.

keywords are: communication, design and the third line. put together, they build the framework reference i have for my teaching principles and approach:

one
communication is everything. a sense of it is constantly in the air. exactly, it is like air without which there is language learning. so, intentions drive all efforts to get things done or express feelings, and ways are found to let others know of them. that is communication, and that should be clear to learners.
two
design is none of other than construction of meaning. language learning is a process more than a product. it is dynamic. it changes in every instance. it is a mind game. it is fun. that is how sessions can be described: continuous designs.
three
from the perspective of methodology explained, language learning takes humans to understand that is language is not a code alone. language uses context to exist. in other words, there is no language without context. who, where, when, by whom, to whom, etc.. everything expressed must answer all these questions. and only humans can understand such a complex code, which they process in their minds and use as well as improve it through social actions.

While watching the Mint company video sell its money management software this afternoon my mind took on a sudden trip to language learning land, a recurring thought due to the nature of my job: language teaching. ( Mint video? Has teaching got anything to do with software or time management. Games of the mind, I suppose)  

Two interesting things followed up my initial thoughts: one was how I decided to tackle the thought processing, and two, what the content of my thinking was. The first one focuses on an approach to representing my ideas as I processes them. Anyone who comes across these lines may think it is foolish to write about it, but hey, these are my reflections. As far the as the second aspect is the result of an impulse to articulate my beliefs in what I think happens when an L2 beginning learner goes through at the moment of speaking.

THE APPROACH

My decision to represent my thoughts on paper by drawing lines and words as I was able to think them was the result of an initiative that had been cooking a few days ago back. Somehow I had begun to allow within me, some mental and emotional readiness, to justify trying this new idea on. There was in fact a video in TED I found that based much of its content on notes taken by computer scientists. The naturalness of these notes called my attention. These guys had no respect for form. Content was everything. Form for me has always been in the way of substance. A very disappointing fact, I´m afraid.

Where might it all have started? I can go back to the early years of school when my teachers, most of whom were priests, emphasized accuracy over everything else.  Writing on the board, let alone on paper, was an issue. Latin learning was a matter of knowing its grammar well. Our notebooks were revised and graded on the basis of its good presentation. How much of that had a strong influence on me? At least, some, I recognize. With the years, I´ve found myself rebelling against those principles of aesthetics.

When I stopped to “line” my thoughts, as shown in the image, I did it with the very intention of focusing on the what of the information with little regard of how it was put on the paper.

THE CONTENT ANALYSIS

How does second language spoken occur? And how is related to acquisition? This is the question or questions I attempt to answer that is contained in the representation. It goes like this:

An L2 learner always struggles to be coherent, especially if it is only recently he has been involved in the learning process. He seems to self ask: “How do I make myself understood? This implies that the learner is very much aware of the message s/he wants to convey. He knows the WHAT.

He goes on saying to her/himself: “Now what do I do?” And wonders: “What knowledge do I possess of the target language that I can use to make sense of what I want to say?“ In other words, the learner (or if not as learner, then a language producer) seeks for ways, for linguistic resources that can help her/him. These resources are represented in the basic components of any language, mainly words.

Words are, in my experience as a second language teacher, the life of the learner, especially for those who experience second language learning for the first time. And so, their first reaction to a problem/solving situation such as looking for ways to express their ideas is to ask themselves about the words that are part of their database, if any.

One … we need to explore here before we go any further. If words is what learners refer to when they have the WHAT, how do they identify them? The most obvious answer is their native language words. So, what we are saying is that learners’ most natural reaction to the situation above is to relate (the concept of relational database comes to mind), or translate the words. By translating, then, language producers intend to transfer the condition of something to something else. This fact, translating, must be recognized  ………………………

(to be continued)

Alan Kay´s presentation at TED reminds me of the theory of experiential learning with some minor differences, especially at the start of the cycle. One tends to believe what one initially sees, and that must cast some doubt. However, it is the feeling through the senses that triggers the curiosity to observe attentively whether there is a pattern in the dynamics of phenomena. The learner then parts from the emotions and enters the world of the abstract. It is here where s/he conceptualizes, where s/he interiorizes knowledge. So do his learners in his experiments: they touch the balls and feels the weight. Then they go through observation of movements, use Mr Kay´s software to conceptualize while at the same time link the behavioral patterns observed.

What I personally find fascinating about Alan Kay´s samples of learning is the effectiveness of its simplicity. In fact, his argument is that the old traditional way of teaching physics, in the case of gravity for example, is absurd. No wonder most grown ups find the issue too hard to understand, including me. Children, as it is very apparent in the video, reach to their conclusions in a very logical manner. It is as if to say that we are born with the ability to solve problems if the right environment is provided. Traditional teaching denies the individual the opportunity to train for thinking.

Alan Kay is the cofounder of Viewpoints Reserch Institute a research group dedicated to improve education in children through computing. The areas covered are four: Teaching and learning powerful ideas, powerful ideas content and how to represent it, UIs that help learning and doing and inventing fundamental new computing technologies. A little into his biography and one can´t help but admire him: he in fact comes a long way, from the 60´s when he worked at XeroxPARC and was part of changing inventions, such as the graphical interface we find in computers today, the object-oriented programming which makes it easy for programs to incorporate subprograms or modules, etc. For more information check his profile. 

A few phrases: 

• “We see things not as they are but as we are” ( Talmud )
• “We go to the theater in order to be fooled” ( Shakespeare )
• “We do more. We like more. Complex means more”

Randy Pausch is one man anyone should learn lessons from or imitate.

To begin with, he is not afraid to die, and he´s very close. He has pancreatic cancer and it is a matter of months if not days before he dies. Seeing him deliver his talks or be interviewed on ABC as well as write about his sickness on his last days, it is truly amazing. 

Or maybe he is afraid to die, but knows there is a lot that needs to be done before that happens for him to spend the rest of his days crying. For example, he has a family, a wife and three kids, that he is worried he will not be able to protect when he dies. That makes him sad and very human. 

He is a successful man in many ways. He is a Professor of Computer Science, Human-Computer Interaction, and Design. He has taught for many years and has shown great sensibility for the growth and development that his discipline demands. Proof of this is Alice, a 3D language programming environment which allows novice programmers to resolve problems that otherwise may even discourage them, which he is the founder of.   

Hello, me,  or you. This is my first attempt at writing a blog about myself. I have been writing one about my now four-year-old daughter, one about a group I teach at Universidad del Norte in Barranquilla, and one I´m initiating about my teaching philosophy, but nothing where I allow myself the luxury of reflecting publicly on things taking place in or out of me.                     How comfortable will I feel doing so? I have no idea. I have read blogs on issues of different ypes, personal or impersonal (personal anyway since it shows attitude), and marvel at how easy it seems for the writers to deal with such issues. However, on closer look I notice that the great majority of these blogs are found in North America (I´ll have to check Europe, though). So, it is in most likelyhood a cultural thing. So, where does that leave me? I´m not American. And yet, I lived there for years. I hope to borrow from them the good feeling of not being prejudiced agaisnt, if that´s what worries me.               Why would I want to write a blog, then? I guess one reason is the experience itself. I feel that if I don´t do it as is the case with lots of other technological stuff around I´ll be missing something about today´s world. In addition, the experience of simply writing to the world out there is also new to me. I was born in a time when computers were not heard of, let alone the internet. Another good reason is that writing in a sort of formal way (something I struggle with when I think about this blog concept) helps me construct and organize knowledge. This I really believe. Being my job to teach, learning approaches today includes actions such as writing which promotes knowledge construction. Another explanation for writing the blog may be its journal-like side. I guess I would like to go back and see what happened certain day or what I thought about what happened.               What will I write about? I don´t know quite know what. However, knowing myself and how inquisitive and critical I tend to be of everything around me, anything might just as well go.