I spent a few contemplative hours this morning going through some of my dozens of notebooks of poetry and philosophy/aphorisms, written over the last 30+ years.
As I was reading one, I came across this list of points on “How To Learn English”. I remember writing this before my first ever conference presentation, my second year of teaching. If memory serves me well, it was in Ostrov Nad Labem, Czech Rep. 1992. Looking at it now, still rings mostly true.
Last week I watched the “Reinvent Learning” roundtable with Howard Reingold. As I walked and ran on my treadmill (got in a good 14 k), I listened to the pronouncements of all the experts about what is happening or should happen in education right now. Lots of food for thought but two things really got me questioning this leadership and that despite their great ideas – they don’t quite “get it” and live in a little bit of a plastic bubble.
1. Communication. I was struck by their “lingo”. Now, I’m well versed in it but even I had a hard time following each person’s plethora of terms and labels. If you can’t communicate in a simple fashion, what should be done and why – it doesn’t stand a chance of ever getting done. We have to get rid of all this “educationalese” before any substantial reform will happen in the constituency that counts – students, parents, the common man. We as educators have to speak simply, commuicate the essential of what education really is and its importance.
2. Power. There seemed to be a pink elephant in the room that nobody wanted to talk about – namely “who has the right to tell anyone what they need and must learn?” The point was touched on ever briefly but I feel it is central to what is happening in the present learning revolution. Also, who has the right to tell a person, even a child, they must go to school?
We need a real reformation in education, not just reform. Having read my Erasmus, the reformation was all about challenging the powers that be, decentralizing and making it about the people and not pronouncements and power. The reformation had a profound effect and a reformation in education could have the same. It could take the power to certify, to graduate, to say “who passes Go” out of the hands of the academic watch towers and into the hands of the community and the people actually teaching and learning. It would give value to learning and not just “doing time”. This to me IS the issue and focus of change these days. Everything revolves around it. Technologies allow access to knowledge/learning for pennies to all – how we handle this, just like the Reformation eliminating intermediaries between man and god, is what we’ll be judged by. Not whether we are for or against digital learning etc ….
We need to begin making our schooling our education (to paraphrase and reference Twain’s famous quote). That process begins today with all of us tearing down the walls, the authority, the ivory towers that stand between the student and learning.
I spent part of the morning rereading Frank Smith, particularly his thoughts about how we learn. Delightful, insightful, thoughtful. Here’s an excerpt from his book: Comprehension and Learning but I also highly recommend his book about whole language, Understanding Reading.
One of the things that I think hinders many teachers and stops educational reform is our misguided beliefs about learning. Our beliefs about learning are part of framework that govern our behaviors as a teacher (Stern, 1983; beliefs about language, society, learning, teaching). If our beliefs are more inline with “how things were done to me” and not research driven – we end up with an educational model that is dysfunctional.
Through my years of teaching, I’ve come to see 5 large scale myths about learning which operate across our teaching culture. They don’t allow for effective teaching or learning. I used to adhere to all of them but have worked hard to brush them away from in front of my eyes. Here they are for your reading and assessment.
1. Learning is orderly.
Learning isn’t a tidy, stage 1, stage 2, clean, unidirectional affair. It is individual and we each form and make our own connections to get from A to Z. Further, there is no way we can measure or be sure of “what” the student will learn. We may be teaching about past participles but the student could be learning how the letter P is written on the board (while viewing us write it several times). Most of learning is accidental and incidental.
Smith says that the core of learning is through “demonstrations”. The world is full of demonstrations and in a class or a book/activity – the demonstrations are not just the ones we wish the student to learn. Each act is a cluster of demonstrations and we can never be sure which the student will learn or consume. I’ve always been astounded that the research shows that the best way to teach a student to read and love reading is to just have students see you the teacher reading and enjoying text/books. With this demonstration, they are learning just as much as they would by or through a read aloud.
Learning is not orderly, it zigs and zags and as teachers we should believe in the long term goal/destination and not be occupied/frustrated at keeping students on a straight line of learning.
2. Learning is a fight, a struggle.
Yes, that’s what we are all taught – we have to “wrestle” with ideas and struggle to understand. However, exactly the opposite is the case – struggle and effort do not happen when there is learning and are actually evidence of the opposite (part of the boredom spectrum with one end being quiet “giving up” and the other end, fierce effort). Learning is not something effortful. When a student is learning, there is engagement, thought, flow, rhythm – the student is within the learning zone and is motivated by each successive success not their failure.
Most teachers teach failure, not success. Most teachers teach students to reach to far ahead instead of that knowledge which is within reach. We teach too fast and too violently for most students. We leave a train wreck of students who can’t learn, don’t even want to learn, in our wake.
Learning is what happens when there is an absence of the expectation that it will not take place.
3. Learning is either on or off.
So many of us teachers believe that if Johnny is looking out the window, he’s “not learning” and just goofing off. What we really should be honest about is that he is just not learning what we are teaching or want him to learn.
Learning is something that is a natural part of our cognitive and biological make up. It is never “off”. We are all constantly learning and are incredible learning machines. This in fact might be our most important human trait – man the learner (and by default, flipping it, man the teacher).
Learning is something active and organic, always on. As a teacher, be aware that a light is always on in our students. We ignore this at our peril.
4. Learning = knowing.
Learning is mistakenly equated with knowledge. That we know something means we have learned it. How mistaken we are! Knowing is only the start of learning, the surface and appearance of learning. Knowledge is an empty vessel.
As teachers, we need to understand that a student learns something only when they understand and can apply it in a new situation. Our life teaches us what we have learned. Now you may say to yourself that most teachers know this, it isn’t a myth. And you’d be absolutely right – teachers do “know” this but have they learned this?
5. Learning is a solitary act.
At the end of the day, most teachers believe learning is done alone, in our own heads. It is the grey matter and how it flickers and sparks that counts. That is why we test individuals and put up big dividers between students in test areas. We want to know what that student learned.
However, we err. What a student knows and learns is always something that can’t be ripped from the social fabric. Students learn because they make an investment in “the other”. This could be an imaginary Harry Potter, their science project peers or a favorite teacher but learning is dependent on the existence of “the other”. Students learn when they are interested in something someone else is doing – there is no getting around this. Students also learn as a social unit and should be tested as such, despite our Cartesian and individualist cultural mindsets telling us not to.
Over the years, I’ve kept my eyes and ears open for great “thought experiments” for language. Real examples and events that are so extreme, they really force you to think differently about ones preconceived notions about language learning (and by default teaching it).
Here are the top 5 examples off the top of my head that are indeed “out there” and from the Twilight Zone. Please tell / share your own!
1. Daniel Tammet learns to speak fluent Icelandic in one week.
A famous idiot savant, Daniel took on the challenge and bet of learning Icelandic in one week. He succeeded, going onto national Icelandic television and passing as a fluent speaker. He even went on to found his own language elearning company Optimnem.
2. 1930, the Leahy Brothers visit the highlands of New Guinea.
First Contact, an amazing film about the first meeting of the tribes in New Guinea and white men. Fascinating how decades later, the film makers return and everyone laughs about the first contact and shares stories in the now common pidgeon/creole.
3. Wade Davis writes in The Wayfinders about linguistic exogamy.
A remarkable book where the explorer and thinker writes about cultural diversity, the “ethnosphere” and language death and its consequences. He reports about a fascinating Amazonian tribe, the Barasana, that has a rule whereby you must marry outside your language group. Some extended families have 7 or 8 languages with everyone speaking them all!
4. North Korean man doesn’t speak or hear German for 47 years but after a few days can speak German fluently again.
The true but fascinating case of a N.Korean man who left his German wife and 2 kids in E. Germany in the 1960s. 47 years later, she and her kids reunite in N. Korea and he remembers all his German, no problem!
5. The Imposter documentary. How identity is stronger than language.
Amazing documentary and must see. About a young adult in Spain who fakes a story to assume the identity of a boy who disappeared years before in Texas. The family accepts that he is their son despite his heavy accent!
6. Lastly (but not actually true), the Twilight Zone episode “Word Play“.
A man starts his normal day but as the day goes along, all the language changes. Dinosaur becomes “lunch”. Dog becomes “Wednesday”. Asks us to reconsider what is a word and remember it is all arbitrary!
One conclusion I’ve come to after years teaching – testing and assessment are poorly used as a way for students to learn.
This is curious and unfortunate because students for the most part DO get motivated and energized through tests and quizzes. The pickle is, the way they are designed doesn’t make the test a learning experience and rather is meant to trick students. I’m calling for all teachers to review the way they test and I’m offering one example using the popular convention of testing – multiple choice questions.
I recently began one of my classes after the New Year by writing the following on the board. A typical, 3 truths / 1 lie activity where students try to guess the lie.
This new year I resolve to ….
1. grow my hair long
2. plan my classes better
3. travel the world and teach
4. get a new coffee maker
It’s a great activity for teachers to share themselves and also for students to do and allow the teacher to get to know them. However, I’m teaching teachers so I took this opportunity to go beyond the activity and ask them what this multiple choice question might say about assessment and how we decide design these questions.
What’s remarkable about this question is that you can pose it two ways. One – which statement is the lie? Two – which 3 statements are the truth? Now you might think this is just semantics but I believe if we created multiple choice, standardized assessments where the students were asked to not choose just one right answer but three right answers – they’d learn a lot more. They’d be encountering a lot of “right” knowledge and not trying to side step through a labyrinth of wrong.
Here’s another example.
A typical standardized multiple choice question for language students might be;
Beth ___________ to the store every day.
a) has b) is c) went d) liked
A multiple choice test that would actually give students more success and help them learn would be them choosing the 3 appropriate language forms.
Beth ________ to the store every day.
a) went b) likes c) goes d) has gone
It’s important that students choose 3 right answers and not be asked to choose the 1 wrong answer. This way, we can give marks for right answers. This way they feel “success”.
This is just one of many ways we could rethink assessment and make it more about “learning” and less about tricking students. Do you have any other ways?
PS. The 3 correct resolutions for this year are 2,3,4!
{ I originally published this in Barbara Sakamoto’s wonderful blog – Teaching Village. I revive it here because I think its message is pertinent and important. }
“The problem with our profession is that there is too much teaching and not enough learning”.
I said this recently during a discussion and I think it is such an important point to understand about “teaching” a language – that we have to get away from delivery systems that are teacher directed and more towards models where students are self-paced, self-motivated and learning independently. The future IS learning not teaching.
English Language Teaching has been progressing towards an understanding of this. CLT (communicative language teaching), PBI (project based instruction), TBI (task based instruction), collaborative learning and other approaches have made big inroads into traditional teaching models. But they’ve been baby steps. The emperor still believes he / she wears clothes and won’t “give up the ghost” and stop swinging the baton. It IS all and too much, about control.
I’m not going to belabor the point nor expound on my own beliefs about why self directed learning is the future of language instruction and learning (given the access to curriculum technology gives us). No. Let me be down to earth and simply describe my “perfect classroom”. This will give you an idea of what I mean by SDL – self directed learning and giving students increasing choice and independence over what and how they will learn.
My Perfect Classroom. It looks like this.
The class starts without any teacher talk nor any teachn’ and preachn’. Students walk into the classroom, sign in and head towards their assigned computer. They glance at the whiteboard for the assignment of the day.
The students work with a headset to produce language, finish projects, practice vocabulary word banks using quizzes/flashcards. The activities are leveled and self-paced. Low level students work with the right content – higher level students can challenge themselves. They help each other through English only chat or directly in the class. They are the experts.
The teacher sits in the middle, coffee and tea at hand. With a ring of the bell – she calls for a group to come meet. The teacher practices conversation with the students, using the target language and grammar for the week. She tests the students on the language they’ve been learning. He assesses their needs in a small group and gets valuable feedback about the activities. After 5-10 minutes, it is time for the next group.
The last 15 minutes of class, students get the choice to work on a variety of online activities. Games, songs, blogging, chatting, watching videos – all accessible as provided by the teacher.
The class doesn’t really end. The teacher flicks the lights and the students log off and walk out of the class. They can go online anytime and do the same activities and access the same content. The teacher can download a nice handy log with graphs of student progress and especially time spent on task/activity.
The teacher feels refreshed. He gets another cup of coffee. She skips into the staff room among her weary colleagues.
——————–
That’s my perfect classroom. However, it actually did happen and I actually did teach like that! It isn’t pie in the sky. Moreover, it all worked like that described. The trouble-making boys became engrossed learners. The unmotivated high level students became engaged and ignited. I, the teacher, felt invigorated after a day teaching, not weighed down and kaput. It was like Sugata Mitra recently quipped, “When the students are motivated, the learning just happens.”
But we all can do similar things and take steps towards getting to true self directed learning. It isn’t so difficult and in fact it is what YOU as a teacher are doing right now, right this minute.
It can begin with the simple step of deciding it should be so…..
Let’s hear your stories and struggles to be a SDL teacher. We can all learn from them.
Interested in SDL with your students? You might start with these excellent sites – Young Learners: Mingoville Teens/Adults: English Central (sign up as a teacher). Flashcards: EFL Classroom 2.0 Quizlet sets
During the last year, I’ve been following the KhanAcademy locomotive as it chugs on to distant fertile lands and glory. I’m a big believer of video and its revolutionary impact to disrupt normal channels of educational delivery. The KhanAcademy user group (google) emails are just mind boggling. Seems everyone from the granny on the couch to CEOs of major companies are leaving desperate messages – “get intouch with me!”, they scream. However, I must say that they are on the wrong educational bandwagon.
This post I recently read, highlighted one problem not addressed by the Khan Academy – the motivation of the learner. Even self directed learning won’t just magically generate a “self directed learner”. What counts is the environment in which the learner is found. The teacher is essential to this. However, in a very indirect and “get out of the way”, way.
I firmly believe that given a free start, each child, each student, wants to learn and will learn. We must create the environment from which their seed will grow. Just like there are seldom any “bad” teachers, just teachers in the wrong environment and place – so too we must get students encountering a world of learning that they themselves encounter, they explore, they engage and nurture. Sugata Mitra has it right – learning is a self-organizing principle.
So without further ado, here is the man. Click the photos of the presentation to get to my favorite presentations detailing his beliefs. See my own posts mentioning him. Here’s my bio of the man for further reference. Sugata Mitra
I sure wish Bill Gates would have given him that big bundle of cash.
I will also add to this, “Give a man a fish and he’ll just expect to not work for any more. Make him pay a little and he’ll value that fish and his work to purchase it”.
I’m saying this as background to some reflection I’ve been doing based on the recent FREE TEFL Certificate course I launched.
It has always been my goal to provide free or low cost assess to knowledge and materials for teachers. I’ve worked night and day, year in and year out, to counter so much of the blatant commercialism that pervades TEFL. Worked tirelessly to “fight the good fight” and use the possibilities of new technologies to the utmost benefit of hard working and low paid teachers. Sharing, community, can empower us.
However, both on my community EFL Classroom 2.0 and especially with the launch of the new TEFL Certificate course, I’ve learned an important lesson. If teachers get it for free, some really don’t value what they get. Not everyone but my guess is a good majority. Not blaming or accusing any one person – it is just human nature.
I won’t go into all the emails of support and so positive in nature. I also won’t go into how many emails I got from so many who seemed “entitled” and being very aggressive about why “this wasn’t there” or “there was a dead link, quit wasting my time”. Not going there. Want to relate something else.
With the Free TEFL Course, I was gladly going to pay the cost/ student that is incurred. My paying it forward for education. However, never thought so many would take advantage of this (I expected 20-30/month – we now have over 300 and close to 200 students taking the course right now). But most importantly, never thought so many would just NOT watch the videos, think about the ideas but rather whiz through the quizzes, just trying to complete them and get the certificate.
The nice thing about the school’s LMS is that I see everything. Loads of student data. I can tell how long a teacher stayed on a page, interacted with the content. How many times they took a quiz, the results etc… To my amazement, over 70% of teachers were just clicking the quizzes and trying to run through the lessons like it was some video game.
Example: A great student.
Example: A “quick” student.
So, I tried limiting the attempts. Also, monitoring the time on task. However, still teachers are taking very little time watching videos and reflecting/interacting with the ideas in the PDFs. And there isn’t a lot I can do.
So I’m now going to make teachers pay a minimal user fee for the course. I think this will make it so they will value the community, the resources and the certificate that results. Sorry it has to be this way but I guess I have to learn the hard way.
All those who pay the $9.99 will get my Teach | Learn coursebook when they graduate + a great certificate of completion. Also, 3 months of access to the resources (and to complete the course). The course will also serve as a pre requisite to the 120 hour accredited certificate I’ll offer in Jan. 2012.
Those who’ve already signed up for the class will get it free. I hope they slow down and savor the lessons! All those presently doing the course will have a month to graduate. Good luck! I also think this course would be a great “primer” for any teacher training program and hope trainers out there might encourage their students to take it. Even plan a course around it.
I do hope all teachers understand and realize the truth of what I’m saying, where I’m coming from. I thank you all for your support and again, not accusing any one teacher at all.
David
Most of us teachers pretend we are “modern”. I don’t think we are at all. Mostly because the underlying principles which maintain the factory approach, still rule. Timetables – punch in, punch out. Memorization, recall. A focus on efficiencies, rules, order. Age grouping. Class lists. Command and control from curriculum bosses. I could go on and on ….. don’t let all the fancy “reform” ideas fool you. If you teach these days, you are most likely dancing to the tune of a grammaphone.
Yesterday, attended a delightful talk by Kieran Egan about his Learning In Depth initiative. He’s one of my heroes, for many reasons but mostly for his focus on what works in student development/learning. Students connecting with ideas in a passionate, literate, human way. Creating learners rather than creating “knowers”. Here’s one other teacher’s appeal.
Let me be frank and “take out the cork”. School is so irrelevant these days. Truly. That’s sad, I’m saddened that these places of so much potential – do so little to light a fire and better the world.
I see 3 fundamental problems with schooling. Unless these are fixed, we don’t stand a hope in hell of “reform”.
1. It’s compulsory. Meaning, there is no value given to work done outside the factory. The informal side (but I hate this term) has no relevance but truly that’s where things are happening in our world.
2. It’s one size fits all. Students are grouped by age when there are more important criteria to consider – learning style, personality, interests, skills, maturity level, motivation/goals for learning etc…. Further, there is little attention to which teachers get which students. A crucial thing in the whole mix. Please read Ira Socol for a full report on this “illness”.
3. Learning is commanded. We know this doesn’t work these days. Knowledge is too vast, we can’t control it any more. It’s about “how” not “what” these days. Yet we continue with this silly model of “the system” dictates, “you” regurgitate. No matter how you lipstick it – it still is this pitbull approach which we go by.
It would be a long discussion to address all the issues in these 3 points. Let me just pose a few questions to leave you thinking – a few questions about point #3 – the command approach.
Why don’t we have schools where the students decide what to learn?
Why can’t they learn the basics through things that they are “sparked by” instead of having to wait hours to ask a question or days until the curriculum hits upon something they are passionate about?
Why can’t we let go? Why can’t we start educating children to be adults instead of just “better children”?
Knowledge is now accessible to most in Western societies. The school no longer has a stranglehold on “the rabbit in the hat”. So why don’t we let students run free in the garden of knowing? Why do we keep the apples hidden away?
How can we bring back student interest in school? So they want to go to school for knowledge’s sake and not just sports or to socialize with their friends? What if Johnny went to school to learn what he wanted?
Ending with a few thoughts from “Kids Aren’t Cars”.
If you enjoyed this post – you might like “Giving Students Room To Do Their Own Thing.”
This video is raw, raw and real. Meaning, to me it speaks on many levels (both good and bad) because it is from the heart, the belly and the brain – because it has spirit and eyes and emotion. We need more of this type of thing for our students, even given by our students.
I just wish it wasn’t about $$ but about language learning (or teaching). You gotta want it. You gotta eat, sleep and breathe it. You gotta see nothing but it. Then, you’ll get there and you’ll uv done it. And if you fall, fall looking up. ‘Cause if you can look up, you can get up. Fall and then get up and try again, and again, and again. ‘Til the roosters come home to rest.
It’s so strange how the ends, the extremes are both so close, so similar. How this message and this great SERVE message – both opposites, say the same thing. To me anyway.
Snippets:
Don’t cry because you quit. Cry to keep going.
You won’t be successful until you don’t need a dime, a return, a nothing, to keep going.
All men are created equal but some worked harder pre-season.
It’s not about where you come from, it’s about heart.
To be able at any moment to sacrifice what you are, for what you want to be.
Word.
Do you hear me? Do you hear this guy? How’s this for a keynote at an educational conference!
One of the nice things about the small city I moved to recently, is that it has a wonderful theater downtown, minutes from my house. Every Sunday, they have a $5 showing and tonight they showed “The King’s Speech”. Great movie, highly recommend it despite my aversion to “period pieces”, especially British ones! Go see it and if you are in the mood, think about the lessons that it might have for us teachers. Here are 5 points I took home from this remarkable film:
1. The importance of the “informal”, especially when dealing with language learning.
Lionel, ever the informal Aussie, really insists on a first name basis for their teacher – student relationship. He insists on calling the king, “Bertie”. Moreover, he stresses informality and humor in the teaching environment. This is so important a concept for language / literacy teachers – lightening the “affective filter” so language may be acquired. Here’s a clip to remind us of this important dynamic of teaching. {and also note how there must be a name – research suggests that using a student’s name during instruction can alone, raise scores and help learning, as opposed to no name being used.}
2. Credentials are over valued.
There is a scene at the end of the movie where the king is angry/overcome upon learning that “Dr.” Lionel has no official “credentials”. That he learned everything through the “teacher’s college of hard knocks”.
The point is – teachers are not trained or taught, they are developed. This is a big point. Credentials are not as important as we think, in our over crazed world for a certificate, any certificate. Recently I was looking through the local college’s course offerings – you can get a diploma in anything! And it takes 2 years! Dog grooming, two years. Flower arranging, two years. Oh, don’t get me started….
In TEFL, I will keep praising the backpacking teacher. Sure, there are some bad apples but overall, the profession benefits. I’ve witnessed too many great teachers in action, great teachers without a modicum of formal training, to think otherwise. Teachers should be judged on what they do in class and have done in classes. A system of merit not credentials. Bertie proves this.
3. Teaching is mostly about relationships.
In the movie, the relationship between teacher and student grows as it goes through a rocky series of ups and downs. The movie shows a man teaching/helping a student, not teaching a subject. The personal is evident and attended to by the ever consummate professional, Lionel.
Teaching is about the relationships we form with students, how we connect with them. It doesn’t have to be overly personal but we have to connect on some “human” level, to be successful and make a difference. Further, we have to also realize our students have their own lives and background. Just like the King, each student has their own world they bring into the classroom. Teacher’s must know their students – administrators have to give teachers more time to develop relationships and less time for paperwork and lesson drafting.
4. A Teacher’s Belief is what counts.
Passion makes the “great teacher”. Passion for their subject but also passion for their students. Lionel truly believed in his student, the king. Truly, 150%. He told him, he kept with him along the struggle to succeed and learn. Never discount the power of a teacher’s faith in their student to transform the world. We all remember our homerun teachers. And what made them have such an impact on us, was the faith in us that we felt they had. Research too shows this is more than just emotional snake oil. In blind studies, a teacher’s belief in their student’s ability (thinking they were teaching a class of high achievers when they were not) increased the student’s own scores. Yes, faith can move a marking sheet!
5. Childhood development is crucial to long term success.
“Bertie” experienced a lot of trauma in his development. His “inability” both in stuttering but also (and they are sides of the same coin) emotionally was because of a lack of a proper environment when growing up. We have to continually fight for all students to get the support and nurturing that is required at an early age so they may succeed at school.
A lot of what we see at school – what we call failure and non-achievement is not because of a student’s own laziness or inability. It is societal. We don’t value the young until it is too late, despite our pronouncements and platitudes. If we put as much money into universal early education and child development as we did Trident subs – we’d have a much different world in our high schools and universities. I kid you not. Look at the damage Bertie suffered. Many will tell you it is just “physical” etc… Don’t believe the buggers – it is all about how the child is raised in 95% of cases. We need to follow more, the principles of re-education.
Let’s too, also remember how determining environment is for language and literacy development.
If you haven’t seen the movie – here’s a trailer to wet your appetite. Enjoy!
If you enjoyed this – you might enjoy, “What makes a great teacher?”
“but I gave them the room to just do the thing. Figure it out, go create”
– Diana Laufenberg
One of the things I’ve often done with teachers and students alike is just give them a set of materials, say flashcards and then, “just get out of the way”. Let them decide how to use them and let the learning objectives naturally emerge from their own processing and interaction.
It’s scary but it is the new paradigm that we are facing in education. Diana Laufenberg in her short, valuable TEDx talk – hits on this among other things. That with information surplus, kids no longer have to come to school to get information or be “informed” or “lectured to”. They come to school to be part of a learning culture where they engage with the content/curriculum – they don’t just consume it.
We have to give students a reason to come to school. And not just to be around their friends. We have to give them the chance to explore what THEY want and in their own fashion. Student created content – the mantra I’ve been expounding through my textbook is something appropriate for our day and age. It allows students to try, to try again. It emphasizes “doing” rather than “repeating”. It de-emphasizes the teacher as the “general” and makes them more of a “producer” that behind the scenes gets everything in place.
Take a watch, Diana offers valuable examples of the Sugata Mitra methodology of “I’m going away now”. A method that won’t just be experiential in the future but rather what teaching is all about….
This is an addendum to my last post - The future of learning.
Just watched this now 3 year old presentation – A Manifesto for Learning. I think it appropriate, given what the last 3 years have presented to us (better access to technology, more profusion of web 2.0, better audio/video tools for learning) to post this up again and I hope others will comment…..
Last week I wrote about a forthcoming course book that I am publishing – Teach | Learn.
It will be out next week but thought it would be interesting to some, to see a sample lesson and to get a few thoughts about the delivery of this lesson and the use of the course book.
Here is an example lesson. All 36 lessons are like this one and have the same methodology more or less. I’m using a lesson I showed previously, so you might also see how this book has developed and been designed.
Basically it goes like this:
Page 1: Whole class. A student or teacher is at the front of the classroom and is the focus of the target language. The activity is completed (see Teacher’s Notes below, which are for each lesson in the back of the book). This gets students comfortable with the target language and prompts background knowledge and schema.
Page 2. Pairs / Small groups. Students do the same but with their own language, questions, input, experiences. There are multi media materials to click which both teacher or student can use to reinforce, repeat or complement the lesson.
I’ll have more tomorrow about the rationale for this methodology. Go here for some more thoughts on my own beliefs/process in creating this course book.
I have written and pounded the pulpit long and hard on the issue of teachers “getting out of the way”. Ranted and pleaded with teachers to be more inductive in their approach, more sandbox about the learning environment.
No greater compliment to my own constructivist and technology enabled vision can I find than Sugata Mitra. He’s a wonder and I’ve been writing about him for the last 3-4 years. I try to spring him into any of my lectures, on as many occasions as is possible. He really makes it clear, usually through the voices of children – that they can learn on their own. That indeed, one of the biggest obstacles to student learning is the teacher (and by default, the administration and curriculum).
I’ve now found the perfect presentation by Sugata – The Future of Learning. It outlines in lively form, all his research and thoughts. You got to take a look. Yes, his other talks are wonderful but here, he lays it all out succinctly and of course with his trademark giggle. A gem.
Things I found particularly important, even revelatory:
1. The discussion at the 1 hour mark is the major highlight. Sugata rightly suggests that we should un focus from content – the content can be found easily. We need to ask the right questions and turn into question based curriculum experts. Also a great part about designing the right classroom….
2. Students CAN obtain educational objectives on their own. Sounds impossible? Well, watch/think/listen.
3. Students CAN create the curriculum. This is especially important to note for language teachers. We shouldn’t straight jacket how students process information and interact with information. We must remove the doctrine, the brainwashing of our curriculum – make it active. The answers are available and the students know how to get to them. Teachers have the job of making the information relevant, that’s all. (and turning the curriculum upside down).
4. Technology provides tools that enable students to become self directed learners, life long learners.
5. Learning is self organizing, social and even organic. It is for teachers to assist this process and allow its creation through arranging the proper learning environment. There doesn’t need to be outside intervention (by teachers, staff, admin, parents) for emergence to happen. Learners are their own way.
6. The “I’m going away” methodology. He reminds me that the cause of all learning is desire/hunger. “When learners have interest, learning just happens” says Arthur C. Clarke and Sugata. Reminds me of my own experiment collecting student’s questions – What’s Worth Knowing.
7. A new discontinuity has arrived. We’ve profoundly underestimated how fast, what, how high students can learn.Students need strong reading skills, strong search skills and a belief system that says anyone can learn anything, any time.
So much more….
If I’d been there though, I’d really have liked Sugata to talk a bit about the difference between “knowing” and “understanding”. Students can learn facts, information – but I still think they need to learn the “nuance” of information.
What are your thoughts about the implications of Sugata Mitra’s research and findings? How might we change our teaching, our own “system”?
I’ve recently been updating articles and resources on the TESOL Teacher Training page/course. One article that I read several years ago has always stood out for me. What do we know about learning and teaching second language – Implications for teaching. Written by Francis Mangubhai, it is somewhat technical but still can be read by teachers and gleamed for its intelligence. He sets out some things that he can be pretty sure of, after 25 or more years in the field.
I’ve listed his “insights” below but read the whole article for his own elaboration. Also, please vote here – I’d like to know your opinion on how acquisition happens. Over the next few weeks, I’ll be making a few brief comments of my own about each insight. So today let’s start with the first –
1. Adults and adolescents can “acquire” a second language
This suggests the most valuable of all knowledge for teachers – that we don’t “learn” a language but rather “acquire” a language. It is through exposure, an environment of meaningful communication that we “get” language – not by memorization or conscious, ABC building.
Take the learning to drive metaphor. Yes, you can learn to drive in the sense that you can read a book about it, attend a lecture, memorize all the parts of the car and the rules of the road, pass a test. But can you just with that alone drive a car? Not a chance. You must observe (we call this input – and see Stephen Kraschen’s work for more elaboration) for many hours, drivers in action. Further, you then must actually drive a car (see Swain’s notion of Comprehensible Output). You can’t actually drive a car through just conscious learning. It has to come in the backdoor through productive practice. Same with language – language learning always comes in the back door and not the front door.
Why do students in foreign countries take so much longer to acquire English, despite all their hours of English classes? Mostly because unlike in an ESL setting, these EFL students don’t get the necessary amount of input. They don’t encounter English enough in the public realm, in the real, non-artificial , non-classroom world. They don’t have the opportunity to “acquire” English through unconscious learning. Of course they learn something, but never enough to actually say they can “drive a car” / “speak “X” language.
But with a proper environment, both adults and adolescents can acquire a second language, especially if give sufficient input (and children do actually need less exposure to language to acquire it). Extensive reading has been shown as one method to foster language input, social media (videos, radio, TV) is another. We as teachers have to learn to “speak” to the student’s need to learn language “implicitly” and realize our “subject” is not like so many others but one which involves “tacit” and personal knowledge and knowing — not facts, blocks and unmovable knowledge.
We might also think about how this might challenge the more “nativistic” views of language acquisition in L1 – such as Chomsky’s own notion of a “language acquisition device”. This LAD according to Chomsky, is hard wired in our brain and with input, we can sort it out and “acquire” language. But do we really need a part of our brain geared to language? Isn’t our brain already powerful enough? (and new “connectivist” theorists would say it is). Chomsky says that the “poverty of input” that a child gets suggests that we do have an LAD. I’m not so sure. We can’t just define language as words or what is spoken, but it is also very non verbal and most children don’t need a lot of verbal input to still start to create connections and organize language in their heads. I’m not so convinced that in our evolutionarily short span of time as “language makers” , we would have developed this “LAD”. So I’m going to sit on the fence.
But what I suggest this “insight” really says to every day teachers is that we should teach language through inductive and playful means. There should be an effort to “hide” the instruction and for students to be unaware they are really learning English. I”m still a big cheerleader of the “keep them talking” notion. The best teachers can step away and be the guide at the side, not the sage on a stage!
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Insights into Language acquisition and learning.
1. Adults and adolescents can “acquire” a second language
2. Learners need to focus on form also in order to develop a more complete grammatical repertoire in the second langauge.
3. The learner’s developing grammatical system, the interlanguage, is often characterized by the same systematic errors as made by a child learning that language as a first language.
4. There is a predictable sequence in second lang. acquisition; learners have to acquire certain structures first before they can acquire aothers as their interlanguage develops.
5. To become fluent in a language – one must practice it! (and get extensive input)
6. Knowing a language rule and being able to use it in communication or writing are two different things.
7. Isolated, explicit error correction is usually ineffective in SL learning.
8. In meaningful contexts, learners are able to comprehend much more than can be judged by their ability to produce accurately language of comparable complexity.
9. The different rate of learning observed in our students arises out of individual differences.
10. The “pour” into a vessel view of knowledge doesn’t work.
11. Teachers’ practical theories guide their behaviour in classrooms.
One thing that I’m very convinced of, is the notion that us teachers are “motivators”. It is our job to motivate our students, to lead our students towards becoming self directed learners, learning for themselves, intrinsically.
Oh sure, we have to do all the regular classroom stuff but at the end of the day – with language, there aren’t enough class hours. That’s why it is imperative to give students the chance/opportunity to learn online. Further, to actually make this part of your curriculum. Use online materials in class and then have students practice them online at home, the library or the coffee shop. So teachers, get making a wiki (see this one as an example – I recommend Pbworks )and put up your links for students to practice! You’ll find lots of great links here and none better than Abracadabra.
I’m back in Canada and was reminded of this great Canadian literacy site made by Concordia University. It has everything, including assessment tools. Though a “reading” site and not specifically a second language site, it is terribly appropriate for ELLs! Teachers, read all about the framework for the site HERE. However note, it is directed towards young learners.
Other self directed learning sites teachers can post on their school / class wiki:
Language Lab here on EFL Classroom 2.0 – make one log in and all your students use the same one!
Quizlet – see all our flashcards or make your own. Students then learn the vocabulary by playing flashcard games online.
Mingoville – like Abracadabra, a learning environment for YLs that has characters and a lot of free content.
Click and Learn- a Spanish site with loads of activities for students to practice/study English.
English Central- nothing more cutting edge! Watch videos and practice the dialogue. Teachers sign up and track students!
Take a look at my voicethread and find more great sites! Make a comment on those you like. (click the site name below the photo – to visit the site itself)
Get your students being self directed learners!
As a teacher trainer, there is one “theoretical” thing I really want all new teachers to believe and understand. It is the difference between “knowing” a language and “doing” a language. Further, the implications that suggests for our classroom practices.
In general speak, we use the word “learn” quite liberally. It is a fuzzy word and covers a lot of territory. It can mean what is supposed to happen at school, which might be just the act of sitting in a classroom, “I’m at school, I’m learning.” It might mean the ability to recall facts and information. “Today, I learned that E=MC2″ It might mean that you can apply knowledge and have “learned” to do something. “Look, I’m driving! I’ve learned to drive.”
However, “learning” is much fuzzier than these examples make it appear. Why? Well, learning is something we do all the time. There is no off button for human experience. To live is to learn and most of the above examples represent a specific subjective pigeon-holing of what learning means. A cultural and institutional definition, if you will.
A kid plays plays a video game – he is learning. A woman bakes a cake she has made a thousand times – she is learning. I am writing this, I am learning. We are ALWAYS learning. So when a teacher tells me – “My students aren’t learning.” I really have to suggest that yes they are learning, just not what the teacher intended!
In TESOL though, learning has a much narrower definition (thank god!). It is this that teachers should be well aware of - Learning vs Acquiring a language.
Stephen Krashen popularized this ancient distinction between “knowing” and “understanding” with his Learning-Acquisition Hypothesis. He states,
“Acquisition requires meaningful interaction in the target language – natural communication – in which speakers are concerned not with the form of their utterances but with the messages they are conveying and understanding.”
Krashen believes we can’t learn a language. Learning is only “having knowledge of” a language. For example, we all can think of a student who “knows” a lot of English and has an amazing TOEIC score yet can’t meaningfully communicate his/her thoughts. For Krashen, they have “learned” English but they haven’t “acquired” English. Think of it like the distinction between “hear” and “listen”. I can hear someone but I don’t necessarily need to listen. Listening, like acquiring, requires a whole new kind of brain activity, something much fuller and deeper.
I hate the word – acquire. It is beyond me why academia must couch all their terms in such stiff, mechanical and scientific language (when it is anything but more precise). I prefer “do” a language. We can “know” a language but when we are fluent, we can “do” a language. And unlike Krashen, I believe there is a gradient between the two. There isn’t as he later developed in his Natural Approach, a dark space between the two.
We do “monitor” language, but this can also lead to acquisition. There are many ways to get to fluency and teachers know this – many academics don’t. We do what works, they suggest what doesn’t. I won’t pontificate any longer – if you are interested in a critique of Krashen’s Acquisition hypothesis, no better place than Timothy Mason’s great post.
So, what are the implications for us teachers?
Well, we have to mix it up. Students need authentic models and communication in order to “do” language. They need the “real” and as teachers, we should constantly try to bring reality into the testing ground that is our classroom. Students need A Lot of tasks and activities where they must communicate real meaning. In a nutshell – the main course is CLT (Communicative Language Teaching). However, that doesn’t mean we can’t fortify this meal with grammar lessons, testing, conscious “learning” of a language. We can and we must. It too has a role. Without the “knowing” – we can’t ever get to “doing”. For example – beginning students have to memorize language!!!!! You can’t skip this. As a teacher, I stand by this claim. If not, you’ll only go from nothing to nothing.
But as teachers – we need to remember this vital distinction between “knowing” and “doing” language. It is the steering wheel that should guide us through the “learning” course.
Do teachers kill creativity? What is the harm that a “teacher” does, just by being a teacher? Do we indeed stunt student achievement, growth and “thought” by our mere presence as a model and person to look up to and copy/become?
Like Ken Robinson’s story in “Do School’s Kill Creativity”, where the little girl is drawing God and the teacher says, “You can’t draw god!” — are we limiting our students by teaching our students? Where does culture start and control begin?
I remember when I was a kid. It was nice to observe adults but I much preferred doing it myself, learning by myself. Teachers were actual barriers on the road to learning. So many detours I had to take, to think for myself! To find the quick way, the effective way to the nuggets of gold and understanding.
Watch the video below comparing chimpanzees and children. Thought provoking.
I’m more and more calling for a world of self directed learning. Technology is prying open that door, that possibility. I think that maybe we do have it wrong. Teachers – who needs them?
(** note, this video suggests that humans are the only animals that “teach”. I just watched a BBC Earth video where they showed a clip of a mother teaching her baby chimp to use the proper stick to fish for termites. So this notion of our uniqueness is false. Surprisingly, the baby chimp kept pushing away the mother’s “stick” , kept pushing away the teacher. Maybe that’s why Jesus’ famous phrase, so hotly debated (Luke 14:26 – “If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple.”))
Web 2.0 and English Language Learning
A New Model or A New Muddle?
“ In the electronic age, we wear all mankind as our skin”
- Marshall McLuhan
(this article is one of a series on my blog – highlighting how educators can publish and get readers online instead of keeping their knowledge behind the heavy iron doors of academia. See the original at “The Captive Mind”.)
Download this to read as a pdf
Overview
There are over a billion English as a foreign or second language learners worldwide. In the United States alone it is estimated that over 25% of the population will speak a mother tongue other than English at home within the next 10 years AND be in need of acquiring the English language for success in school, business and the social realm. It is no overstatement to say that access to and acquiring the English language will be the key ingredient and imperative need of citizens of the 21st century, everywhere in the world. Not just professionally but also socially, as the world meets on the common playing field of the English language.
Language is empowerment and especially so with regards to the very unique paradigm shift happening this early century. As technological advances make travel easy, communication instantaneous and populations more heterogeneous – a common language, that of English will be the requirement and passport of this new world.
The internet will become a driving force of change this century. It is growing exponentially and access will most certainly become almost ubiquitous within the next few decades. It offers a revolutionary way to empower people globally. Not just politically and socially but mostly personally — through their own education and voice. Just as the printing press led to the Enlightenment as millions began to learn to read print, the internet will increase the possibility – the voice and perception of billions.
The combination of a proliferating internet along with the need of millions of people to learn English, offers a vast potential in the educational online market. Also the vast possibility of reaching millions with a tool that will benefit their future. I would offer a quote of William Gibson who summed it up well, “The future is already here, it’s just unevenly distributed.” The internet and online learning offers a unique way to address that imbalance.
The Internet and Language learning
Why the internet?
The internet offers the best way to learn language other than immersion in an English speaking milieu. (and even then, it offers support and a great way to assist language acquisition). The advantages of online learning can be summarized under the following headings;
1) Access – the internet offers the possibility to experience English without the need of travel. Even without the need of leaving home or bedroom.
2) Flexibility- the internet allows for users to learn language when they want, where they want.
3) Response - the internet offers the possibility of instant feedback to learners. This greatly enhances the learning experience.
4) Repeatability – the learner can encounter the language in a repetitive fashion until mastery is achieved.
5) Durability - the internet is 24/7. It never tires. It doesn’t take coffee breaks.
6) Modality – the internet is a multi modal learning tool. It stimulates in a rich sensory and cognitive and thus fertilizes language acquisition successfully.
7) Specificity – the internet allows the language learner choice and variety in both what and with who will be learned. Learning can be tailored to the language learner’s precise makeup and needs.
8) Cost – the internet is a business model which due to economies of scale, can offer services for pennies. It also offers to widen access through a “pay as you can” dynamic.
Why is the internet specifically good for language learning?
Besides the above points, the internet offers both a controlled, repeatable and secure environment for language learning. New technological advances of recent note in the realms of voice and video make it the perfect tool for learning a language.
Web 2.0 in particular is a driving force online which will transform language learning. As learners from diverse geographic, social, political and religious backgrounds gather in the common language learning arena, they will be a social presence to be reckoned with. User generated content and the internet as a society of its own will offer the possibility of learners learning English through controlled interactions. Much like present day “Content Based Instruction”, online language learning will scaffold the learner and give them a helping hand with English while they learn other types of content.
The internet is cheap. Billions of dollars are currently spent learning English as a second language. Books, teachers, facilities, travel – they all cost. The internet offers the potential of completely avoiding these cost so long as the language learning model is successful.
What are the guiding principles of this new kind of learning?
Online learning is guided by several transforming principles that are very different from the traditional models of learning.
1) Process before Product — it is all about the interACTION and not the thing / product itself. The product is no longer the focus but it is the social realm and service that is the focus and of import.
2) User generated content. The “market” is not sold but rather sells. We go from passive construction to active construction. Individualization, personalization pervade.
3) Education is unhinged from old authoritarian constructs. It is the use of knowledge that is important and not who controls said knowledge. Know less to be more….. No longer do we need to know when the facts arrive instantly at our fingertips. It is about service, it is about connections and not just that at the ends of the wires. Meritocracy will one day have complete ascension as the old and dusty formal structures of education slowly erode……We will no longer ask – “What have you done and prove it? “ but “Can you do it and prove it?” Sugata Mitra’s “Hole in the Wall” project / research is a perfect example of this.
4) Learning is fun, motivational and is gender and age neutral. Online learning doesn’t know if you are 50 or 5. What counts is how you perform. It will transform how we learn and schooling because it frees the learner to learn on their own, their own time, space and way.
5) Pictures, images are paramount. The world is regressing into the primitive and “cold” media are what really will drive the new learning. Pictures and images are taking over from the old forms of print driven learning. This is a big consideration of any new learning model. (see McCluhan and his The Mechanical Bride especially).
What would a successful language learning model look like?
It would have to meet some specific criteria to be a success and also be driven by those savvy in the new age of “people”. This is an important and crucial factor. More than anything, decisions in the new social networking, online realm will be decided by perceived trust and personality. There are many possible avenues to proceed but they would all have some key similarities. I will discuss what measures I think would be best given the following:
Rationale:
The site must have a steady and overriding rationale. This is commonly referred to as a “mission statement” in business but in the realm of online learning and business, it must be much more than just a buzz word. The rationale will guide all the strings holding the site together. It is the puppet master.
I see the best rationale as one focused on RESULTS. It is a human need to see, feel, want results and to see change. None more so or greater than in language learning. The best schools, those with the most students knocking on their doors have and will always be those that get results (be they real or perceived, this point is really mute when it comes to a rationale).
Many language learning models focus on accessibility or entertainment or social mingling……these are driving forces but none so basic as the compulsion to SEE, HEAR, FEEL real language growth. If you can show a user that they are improving, you will have a successful model – all else equal.
The problem with language is that it is not results friendly. It takes a long time to acquire a language. A person must encounter a word in a new context, up to 100+ times before they “know” it / own it. An online site must mitigate this through motivational techniques, constant encouragement and testing and even the false promotion of progress (an age old technique of any wonderful teacher…..).
Framework.
The best possible framework would be to age and grade the users. This would mean a site with at least 3 different groups; children , teens, adults. Also, a site which would allow for grading of ability within these core groups and the ability to acquire grades/points to advance up in excellence. If some kind of system that is untraditional could be implemented, so much the better. Not grades/levels but some kind of organic scale ?????
I do not believe it beneficial to focus in on just one area such as business, travel, teachers etc……. The framework should be built upon the age and level of students given that the core technique/technology is such that it will offer the greatest benefit to the greatest number. The internet is about either very small scale or very large NOT in between. In fact, in between doesn’t really exist but is rather a purgatory of “will it succeed or won’t it?”
Environment:
The Look and Feel of the site is also paramount and to be tailored for each grade/level. A human feel is very important. Language is closest of all to “humanity” and thus, the site must be flush with faces and warmth. It can’t be cool and steely.
There is definitely a real need for a physical space. I don’t think 3D is the way to go and I have spent endless hours on Second Life and really consider it a failure. Especially for education because it is just too disorienting…..Virtual is NOT real and this plain fact runs against learning and interferes fundamentally with the learning process.
What kind of physical space? There are many options. I could envision for the young a physical space which runs along narrative lines. A quest. Going from world to world and gaining in language ability until the secret treasure map is filled. For teens, obviously it would have to music. The city street, alive with music. Making friends and talking music. For adults, it could be a shopping mall where people mingle, eat, do stuff…..It could be an office/business space….
I think though, the physical space should be a community. Or maybe even just a Learning Center with lots of rooms for different groups / levels. As users gained language efficiency and were tested, they could take the elevator up until finally reaching the top floor swimming pool. There could be areas for video (cinema), socializing (bar/lounge), sleeping (hotel room), fitness (vocabulary building), performance (theatre) , eating (self study), singing (karaoke bar) etc…….
I do think rather than just an arid focus on technology, this kind of space is needed. But it has to be open ended and flexible.
Know How / Technology
Presently, technology and especially streaming video and VOIP (voice over internet protocol) have made it not just possible but absolutely certain that the internet will be the place most people learn / study English in the future. There simply aren’t enough native speakers to meet the demand.
The technological focus must be on only a few key components. They should drive all the various aspects of learning. I see the most fruitful and those which are the most “human”. This is key in language learning. If you want to succeed, you have to offer what real life offers and MORE…..(this is a rule of the net, an undeclared one).
How to make it human?
User generated content is a must. It must allow users the ability to make content and deliver/share with others. This is a sine qua non of any Web 2.0 site. It should also have personality, be people driven. Highlighting people and showcasing members. The model of this next century for all business will be not that “the customer is right” (the last century’s business crie de coeur) but rather, “It’s about ME, stupid”. Businesses that get that right, will thrive.
Making it human will be real time voice. Speech recognition and its use as the core technology for learning will be a marvel and draw learners to the site. It could be something that will drive users to the site and for sure, this technology is key. Use of bots are a very live possibility and though it might not be fruitful to focus fully here, it should be a consideration for just a few years down the road.
Translation technology in my opinion should be avoided like the plague. People don’t want to pay money or spend time on anything but the REAL THING. Just Coke Classic please. The translation area would be a whole other business altogether but I see people learning English before wholly adopting any translation tool (even if it be a fantastic one) wholly because of my above noted “human” premise when it comes to language.
Pedagogy
Strict attention to pedagogical principles are necessary. I see 4 key areas to focus on; the affective domain, comprehensible input/repeatability, testing/assessment and content/curriculum
The affective domain
People learn because they feel good, secure and safe. This is very much the case with language in particular. Stress, boredom, outside interference, lack of confidence in the class or teacher – all effect the learning process. An online language site should proffer happiness and positive feedback. It should provide constant reinforcement along with content. Signally, “Well done!” “Great job”. As well, learners should be allowed to be reflective and judge their own performance (monitored). This is crucial in language learning and making learners “self – aware and correcting”. The site should be a happy and spirited place.
Comprehensible input and repeatability
Learners fail to learn language quickly for many reasons but most prevalent among all are that they don’t encounter the same language enough (repeatability) nor at a comprehensible enough level. Input is primary and the online environment should introduce new language and structures slowly and incrementally so as to avoid “interference” in the learning process. We learn language even when we conscious think we know it. Why so? Because first language appears masters and then it IS mastered or as Heraclites so well stated, “latent structure rules obvious structure.”
Learners must be set up to succeed. That entails manipulating their learning environment so they believe they are learning but not at too fast a level. Guided/leveled reading has been an instrumental movement in this regard but this kind of “extensive reading” format through the power of technology can be applied to oral language. Further, technology can provide control of the learner and feedback to the learner in terms of new vocabulary, word counts, mastery, speed of speech, comprehension etc…..
Testing and Assessment
Based on a rationale of results, this component is fundamental and must be strong. Learners need to be constantly challenged in fun, motivating and “non traditional” methods. They should have access to detailed data on their learning and this is one very significant plus of language learning – the ability to endow the learner with confidence through constant feedback.
Learners should also be able to gauge their progress through proper leveling and promotion and even a certification process. Though not necessary, a certification process should be an option and would lend authority to any type of pedagogical focus the site would have…..
Content and curriculum
What would the students learn? Obviously, the curriculum is the whole English language but what would be use and how would it be tailored to the learner?
Content should allow for much user choice. This is something the internet offers and should encourage. But the curriculum should have some structure and not just in the sense of “level”. I think the proper curriculum for the English language (but not all languages), is one based on competencies. What the speaker can do. This would also compliment a “results” based focus.
Learners could chose the content but would have to gain some mastery or competency for the particular content before they could move up in level. For example a business man could study introductions in a business setting but the same competencies as a youngster on the street would be mastered – the ability to greet and say good bye.
Competencies would govern the level and achievement. The content would add variety and motivation and be learner driven. We learn best when we choose something we are interested in…..
Marketing
I don’t have much to say here. Only that untraditional means should be tried and the market should not be primarily thought of as “those people using the internet.” This might seem wrong but it is my opinion that those who really succeed in promoting their business or their internet application are those who drive new users to the internet and reach “outside the cables”. If people have a desire to learn a language, you have to market outside the internet and drive people online – to get your product. Think of the internet as a store. Would you just advertise your sales in store or along the street outside?
Economics
Obviously there would have to be a sustainable business model. Traditionally this is in the form of some ratio of user payment and advertisement revenue. I think user revenue has a huge potential in language learning, with businesses and organizations (especially governments) paying vast sums for access to proven educational tools. Teachers could also offer services online and pay a premium. Personalization of services in many forms would offer revenue streams.
I think though, the best economic model is to have a transformational idea. You have to be first to the pot (why? So you can get your hand on the spoon ….others may come afterward but it will be you spooning that soup!).
As I stated at the beginning, the right “personal” touch on the site would be so important. In this new century, learners will want the human touch (because we are beginning to lose it so much in our every day life). The site should ooze this and parade it. Further, there must be a focus on the personal and on gossip/human interest. People like to talk about people. It is a basic fact. This should be a large part of the curriculum along with stories. Of course, guided with a pedagogical focus which would sell the whole learning approach.
The potential market is vast. Even though the window of opportunity (of massive English language learning as we go through this transformational period) may be as short as 30 years, it is long enough. Further, I believe that providing a language learning tool for so many is somehow revolutionary. You can say all you want about technology but unless it really offers learning – it is just another toy and tinkle in the sound room of life. But give a person learning , like the old adage of “teaching them how to fish”, you really profit the whole world……an amazing thing to do and be involved in.
Here is a presentation offering some more quotes/inspiration. Also here.
