Unit 3 Reflections

[Admin]

Proficiency

I quite liked Widdowson's quote about proficiency. It certainly is thought-provoking, as I'd never seen it in the way he describes it. When one says "proficiency" what normally comes to mind is sounding like a "native" speaker, and proficiency tests like TOEFL, Cambridge etc. that measure your level of language use and put a label on it. While these are important as they are used for university and employment purposes, I don't think that they should dictate how well someone can use the language. Like the course said, passing these tests makes one a good test taker but not necessarily an efficient language user, communicator. These follow certain strategies that a test taker can learn to apply, but are quite rigid and do not allow for any creative use of language. I agree that when a speaker takes hold of the language they are using and confidently uses it for successful communication, then they can consider themselves proficient, why not? When you "submit to the dictates of its form" you cannot help but monitor your accuracy and I think that with that you lose fluency and perhaps communicate less effectively than you truly are able to. "Native" speakers hardly speak with 100% grammatical accuracy (as expected from a standard-English perspective), so asking this of an L2 speaker seems rather ridiculous.

English inside and outside the classroom

In terms of in-class activities that might be adapted to the way learners learn outside the classroom, I think it would be helpful to bring the outside inside the classroom. Some ways might be: creating blog posts and actively responding to classmates' posts as they would in their daily life; watching TED talks from varied speakers of English both as L1 and L2 (already heavily practiced) -- I have heard many times that it was hard for learners to understand what the speaker was saying because he/she had a British and not an American accent -- and using them effectively in class; reading from actual newspapers etc.; using corpora to access authentic speech from different varieties of English; giving learners the opportunity to step out in the real world during class and use the language; listen to different types of music and discussing its message and thus the language it uses; watch TV show episodes with focus on vocabulary.

Would love to hear more ideas and/or comments.

[sameerco1971]

In my opinion, most of the proficiency tests that measure the test takers' level of proficiency are not accurate. Even if native speakers tried to take the test, they wouldn't get the full mark which means that the scores are not reliable.
In my school where I teach, English inside the classroom is different from English outside the classroom to some extent. This is a problem for many teachers because the students are not interested in most of the topics in the books because they do not address their actual daily life.

[Kunlong Jin]

I think cultural values for some cognitive styles plays a role in learning English as a foreign language. I take Chinese students learning English in China to illustrate here. Cultural-based learning approaches is seen in the superior capacity for rote learning among Asian students who have had more experience with teaching methods that involve memorisation. Chinese students score dramatically higher than Europeans and other English-speaking students on testes that measure memory for number (e.g., PISA), which reflects ways they have learned to learn in the course of earlier schooling. This achievement is based on prior educational experience but not genetic makeup. Chinese students learning English as an second language may learn more effectively and efficiently through memorisation, while this approach au not work as well for students less accustomed to this learning strategy.

Overall, I think the learning English in the classroom in China, more or less, impedes their acquiring a master-level of English.

[severoc]

May 20, 2020 1:01:47 GMT sameerco1971 said:

In my opinion, most of the proficiency tests that measure the test takers' level of proficiency are not accurate. Even if native speakers tried to take the test, they wouldn't get the full mark which means that the scores are not reliable.
In my school where I teach, English inside the classroom is different from English outside the classroom to some extent. This is a problem for many teachers because the students are not interested in most of the topics in the books because they do not address their actual daily life.

That's on point. What we learn and what we teach in the classroom are way too different than the application of english in real life. Most of times they would rather learn from music and tv shows.

[Daniel Palmer]

May 20, 2020 1:01:47 GMT sameerco1971 said:

In my opinion, most of the proficiency tests that measure the test takers' level of proficiency are not accurate. Even if native speakers tried to take the test, they wouldn't get the full mark which means that the scores are not reliable.
In my school where I teach, English inside the classroom is different from English outside the classroom to some extent. This is a problem for many teachers because the students are not interested in most of the topics in the books because they do not address their actual daily life.

I couldn't agree with this more. In a previous role I was preparing students for the IELTS, and I found some questions in the practice paper that I'd have real difficulty reading, comprehending and then writing about - this included when I was using the skimming and scanning techniques which I taught them to use.

I think I may have mentioned this before, but I conducted a study on some of my students about when and where they use English outside of the classroom - and the answer was overwhelmingly 'with my classmates'- especially those sharing the same first language. The research participants often noted that they found it much easier to learn and practice English with peers speaking the same first language, because they are able to more accurately predict and understand the 'errors' made as result of first language intrusion, and to more effectively accommodate for them. This leads to me to believe that a 'correct' English is one which allows for effective communication, and that learning to accomodate fot different types of English is closer to true fluency than mastering 'standard' English.

[erenkenny]

May 20, 2020 1:01:47 GMT sameerco1971 said:

In my opinion, most of the proficiency tests that measure the test takers' level of proficiency are not accurate. Even if native speakers tried to take the test, they wouldn't get the full mark which means that the scores are not reliable.
In my school where I teach, English inside the classroom is different from English outside the classroom to some extent. This is a problem for many teachers because the students are not interested in most of the topics in the books because they do not address their actual daily life.

I agree that native speakers won't get full mark as one of my friend (native speaker) took the test for emigration purpose to Canada and he didn't get full mark so he had to take it again. The question is how do we measure proficiency? or some people are specialized in their subject perfectly - a good command of their field in English but doesn't know speaking norm. 

TED talks are good resource for advanced classrooms for adults. It gives learners  different varieties of English as well.  My students are EAL, which they actually acquire the language in a short time like 3 months -spoken but struggles with Academic English, expanding vocabulary. 

[abdisyam]

I am not completely against those proficiency test because I think they can still be useful in some contexts. I have not really found people whom I consider very fluent but having low scores in mainstream proficiency tests, but I also find some with low scores can communicate effectively. However,I agree that English Proficiency tests should not dictate our idea of proficiency. In my opinion, proficiency is not only defined by how many words we know or how good our grammar accuracy is, but it is also affected by many more factors which are difficult to indicate using any single measurement. People can be very fluent talking about certain topics at a certain time while completely clueless about other topics, or as pointed by others, some might be very proficient in a non-test context and struggle in a languge test.

I also like the idea of bringing the outside inside the classroom, I think it is very useful in EFL context where the 'outside' might not actually be able to be found outside. However, some of these type of activities are time consuming and difficult to assess. In addition, teachers might get some questions from students' parents why their children just watched tv shows in the class and not 'studying'. Perhaps, we should also try bringing what we do inside the classroom outside. Perhaps project or portfolio could be a good idea.

[Nidhi Lakhisarani]

May 12, 2020 19:56:26 GMT Admin said:

Proficiency

I quite liked Widdowson's quote about proficiency. It certainly is thought-provoking, as I'd never seen it in the way he describes it. When one says "proficiency" what normally comes to mind is sounding like a "native" speaker, and proficiency tests like TOEFL, Cambridge etc. that measure your level of language use and put a label on it. While these are important as they are used for university and employment purposes, I don't think that they should dictate how well someone can use the language. Like the course said, passing these tests makes one a good test taker but not necessarily an efficient language user, communicator. These follow certain strategies that a test taker can learn to apply, but are quite rigid and do not allow for any creative use of language. I agree that when a speaker takes hold of the language they are using and confidently uses it for successful communication, then they can consider themselves proficient, why not? When you "submit to the dictates of its form" you cannot help but monitor your accuracy and I think that with that you lose fluency and perhaps communicate less effectively than you truly are able to. "Native" speakers hardly speak with 100% grammatical accuracy (as expected from a standard-English perspective), so asking this of an L2 speaker seems rather ridiculous.

English inside and outside the classroom

In terms of in-class activities that might be adapted to the way learners learn outside the classroom, I think it would be helpful to bring the outside inside the classroom. Some ways might be: creating blog posts and actively responding to classmates' posts as they would in their daily life; watching TED talks from varied speakers of English both as L1 and L2 (already heavily practiced) -- I have heard many times that it was hard for learners to understand what the speaker was saying because he/she had a British and not an American accent -- and using them effectively in class; reading from actual newspapers etc.; using corpora to access authentic speech from different varieties of English; giving learners the opportunity to step out in the real world during class and use the language; listen to different types of music and discussing its message and thus the language it uses; watch TV show episodes with focus on vocabulary.

Would love to hear more ideas and/or comments.

I teach IELTS myself and I have seen how my students struggle because of the test pattern. It is basically a test full of tricks and the one who knows the tricks gets it right. Proficiency to me is communicating well. One aspect that comes under the umbrella of proficiency is fluency and I believe the so called fillers (umms and uhs) are quite natural and one shouldn't try to talk like a robot.A proficient speaker of language is the one who has clarity in communication.

[andrea scabbia]

Bring the outside inside the classroom. I teach English as foreign language in two Italian primary schools. Englishes come in my classes with:
- penfriend project using the Etwinning website
- singing the real Englishes songs
- with a lectorship project of 6 lessons/year for the older classes
- with a storytelling project with English mother tongue actors

[Monica RP]

Proficiency: I don’t believe it can be solely and reliably tested with exams such as IELTS. As previously mentioned, if you know the tricks, you’ll get a decent score.

In my opinion, fluency plays a massive role in how language proficiency is perceived in real life. In the classroom, as outside, I’ve noticed that those who are natural and confident speakers (but not accurate) are perceived as more fluent than those who are accurate but less confident/natural.

[anc457]

May 27, 2020 8:30:13 GMT Daniel Palmer said:

May 20, 2020 1:01:47 GMT sameerco1971 said:

In my opinion, most of the proficiency tests that measure the test takers' level of proficiency are not accurate. Even if native speakers tried to take the test, they wouldn't get the full mark which means that the scores are not reliable.
In my school where I teach, English inside the classroom is different from English outside the classroom to some extent. This is a problem for many teachers because the students are not interested in most of the topics in the books because they do not address their actual daily life.

I couldn't agree with this more. In a previous role I was preparing students for the IELTS, and I found some questions in the practice paper that I'd have real difficulty reading, comprehending and then writing about - this included when I was using the skimming and scanning techniques which I taught them to use.

I think I may have mentioned this before, but I conducted a study on some of my students about when and where they use English outside of the classroom - and the answer was overwhelmingly 'with my classmates'- especially those sharing the same first language. The research participants often noted that they found it much easier to learn and practice English with peers speaking the same first language, because they are able to more accurately predict and understand the 'errors' made as result of first language intrusion, and to more effectively accommodate for them. This leads to me to believe that a 'correct' English is one which allows for effective communication, and that learning to accomodate fot different types of English is closer to true fluency than mastering 'standard' English.

[Tom Le Seelleur Lisburn, NI]

I am wondering about my many illiterate Arab speakers students who are learning English and how they are processing and internalising this new 'language' as they can't rely totally on their L1 because they can't read or write,

[profebeth]

May 22, 2020 1:04:40 GMT Kunlong Jin said:

I think cultural values for some cognitive styles plays a role in learning English as a foreign language. I take Chinese students learning English in China to illustrate here. Cultural-based learning approaches is seen in the superior capacity for rote learning among Asian students who have had more experience with teaching methods that involve memorisation. Chinese students score dramatically higher than Europeans and other English-speaking students on testes that measure memory for number (e.g., PISA), which reflects ways they have learned to learn in the course of earlier schooling. This achievement is based on prior educational experience but not genetic makeup. Chinese students learning English as an second language may learn more effectively and efficiently through memorisation, while this approach au not work as well for students less accustomed to this learning strategy.

Overall, I think the learning English in the classroom in China, more or less, impedes their acquiring a master-level of English.

It's very interesting what you say about classroom learning "impeding" mastery of English, Kunlong Jin. I wonder if,rather, it is a strength to be improved upon by combining the memorisation with internet- based interaction with other English users? This is more generally thought of as "book learning" or theoretical learning vs. practical learning. Practice applying that rote learning to real life contexts would, I think, be the key to overall mastery.

I agree with others here about some learners scoring higher on English tests than native speakers. It's a very humbling experience to take the IELTS as a native English speaker and know that my non-100% scores will be used to direct my future. Of course there are a myriad of reasons for not obtaining perfect results, but it is nonetheless humbling. It also forces more of a realization why others take courses specifically designed for test success.. 'teaching for the test.'

[catmom101]

May 12, 2020 19:56:26 GMT Admin said:

Proficiency

I quite liked Widdowson's quote about proficiency. It certainly is thought-provoking, as I'd never seen it in the way he describes it. When one says "proficiency" what normally comes to mind is sounding like a "native" speaker, and proficiency tests like TOEFL, Cambridge etc. that measure your level of language use and put a label on it. While these are important as they are used for university and employment purposes, I don't think that they should dictate how well someone can use the language. Like the course said, passing these tests makes one a good test taker but not necessarily an efficient language user, communicator. These follow certain strategies that a test taker can learn to apply, but are quite rigid and do not allow for any creative use of language. I agree that when a speaker takes hold of the language they are using and confidently uses it for successful communication, then they can consider themselves proficient, why not? When you "submit to the dictates of its form" you cannot help but monitor your accuracy and I think that with that you lose fluency and perhaps communicate less effectively than you truly are able to. "Native" speakers hardly speak with 100% grammatical accuracy (as expected from a standard-English perspective), so asking this of an L2 speaker seems rather ridiculous.

English inside and outside the classroom

In terms of in-class activities that might be adapted to the way learners learn outside the classroom, I think it would be helpful to bring the outside inside the classroom. Some ways might be: creating blog posts and actively responding to classmates' posts as they would in their daily life; watching TED talks from varied speakers of English both as L1 and L2 (already heavily practiced) -- I have heard many times that it was hard for learners to understand what the speaker was saying because he/she had a British and not an American accent -- and using them effectively in class; reading from actual newspapers etc.; using corpora to access authentic speech from different varieties of English; giving learners the opportunity to step out in the real world during class and use the language; listen to different types of music and discussing its message and thus the language it uses; watch TV show episodes with focus on vocabulary.

Would love to hear more ideas and/or comments.

[evarojo]

I always try to motivate my students bringing their interests into the world of the classroom. They tell me the songs they like and I design activities with them, they do power presentations about their hobbies and interests related to English, they tell me about their series and we do activities related to them, anything and everything that come from the outer world is welcome in the classroom. I have encouraged my students to choose from Tedtalks for more mature students and Ted Eds for younger ones. With the elder ones, I always start with Do schools kill creativity? by Sir Ken Robinson and give them an comprehension and critical thinking questions and then, they have to do the same with a Tedtalk they like.
Nowadays we have infinite choices from internet and I think it is vital, at least for myself, to incorporate the outside world to the constraints of the classroom. It does not mean that I do not follow the syllabus or do grammar, unfortunately I do it, but leave one session per week to do what I call my real English lessons.