| . |
. |
. |
|
Lessons
from Language for Mainstream Lecturers
|
|
|
Language awareness and development is often
thought of as something that is associated only with the teachers of language. Often the
case is that the language class provides the only opportunity for students to practice
their "foreign" language be it English, Italian, French, etc. Occasionally,
however, the language to be practised and developed is the medium of instruction for
classes other than the "language" class. In other words, students are also
studying other subjects (economics, mathematics, accounting, etc.) with this
"foreign" language as the medium of instruction. This was the case at the
Peninsula Technikon in Bellville, South Africa, where the vast majority of students were
studying for their education diploma in English, although English was not their mother
tongue and was more likely their third or even fourth language. This situation was
problematic for two basic reasons: The students' English competency was low (there was no
real proficiency level expected of the students due to an open admission policy) and, at
the same time, the lecturers were continuing to teach as though their student population
was versed in the language of instruction, as was the case to a larger extent during
apartheid. To improve such an imbalance of the students' language skills and the
lecturers' expectations of their students' skills, I have taken eight language learning
principles and shown how they could apply to mainstream classrooms. In this way, the
language awareness and responsibility of mainstream lecturers can be raised, while at the
same time the language development of the students can be nurtured instead of left to the
local language department to perform a quick fix for academic success. The principles are
summarized in terms of their original language use and then discussed in terms of how I
feel they could be applied in mainstream classes to make the material more suitable to the
students in the mostly ESP classroom.
|
|
|
Language issue at Peninsula Tech-nikon in South Africa
|
|
|
The Department of Languages and Communication at
the Peninsula Technikon in Bellville, South Africa, is commonly called a "service
department." The classes the department offers are considered outside the mainstream.
From this precarious position, two problematic trends are being perpetuated at the
Technikon: the attitude that language is not an issue on campus and/or that if
language is an issue, the Department of Languages and Communication is on campus to
correct it.
|
|
|
Most language instructors have probably
encountered this attitude before. Language is not something that can be fixed with a
ready-made product. If only it could be. Granted, some learners are more apt to learn at a
faster pace, but the majority take time, need practice, and require repetition of one sort
or another. Language is developmental.
|
|
|
To better understand why the "just fix
it" attitude is not feasible in this situation, one needs to know a bit about the
student population at the Technikon. In terms of language, the student population at
Peninsula Technikon has changed substantially over the last six years, from predominantly
native speakers of Afrikaans and English (up to 1990) to native speakers of Xhosa and
Afrikaans (by 1996). According to the "Report on Student Profiles" (Peninsula
Technikon 1995:3), about 80% of the first-year student population at the Technikon speaks
English as a second, third, or even a fourth language. At the same time, English remains
the medium of instruction for a majority (65%) of the classes in the education diploma.
|
|
|
To make this situation even more complex, there
is no consistent Technikon-wide policy regarding language competency level. Although
required language levels also vary in the U.S., depending on the course of study, there is
usually a comparable scale used (e.g., TOEFL score). The students at Peninsula Technikon
are admitted mostly on the basis of their high school results (matriculation). The
situation differs from school to school and diploma to diploma in terms of language
requirement. Some schools use only matriculation results, while others use testing.
|
|
|
Electrical Engineering uses the Swedish points
system, which has a strong language focus. The Dental Technology diploma requires results
from an HSRC (Human Science and Resource Centre) standardized language test. This test has
been criticized for its heavy cultural bias, as it was written years ago when apartheid
was in full swing. This is a very challenging situation indeed.
|
|
|
One-hundred percent of my students (24
first-year students studying a national Diploma in Commerce Education) were non-native
speakers of English. These students were registered for 13 subjects per semester, each
having three hours of contact time. For the Xhosa students, 92% of their classes are
taught in English (the exception being their Xhosa class). For the Afrikaans-speaking
students, the situation is just the reverse; they have only the communication class in
English. This imbalance is due to the fact that Peninsula Technikon is a dual-medium
instruction institution and content lectures are taught in Afrikaans and English. The
students who speak something other than Afrikaans, English, or Xhosa, are attending all
lectures in an additional language.
|
|
|
Clearly a quick fix would be ideal given their
study load, but the approach should probably be spread throughout all of the classes with
each lecturer teaching in English taking responsibility for adjusting both the language
level in class and even the methodology. It is highly unrealistic to think that three
hours a week of communication in English will improve the EAL students' language level
sufficiently to enable him/her to cope with the other approximately 33 hours of lectures
that are given in English.
|
|
|
Although English is an official language in
South Africa, it is only one of the twelve with official status in the country.
Approximately 9% of the 40 million plus people of South Africa speak English as a first or
home language (Department of National Education: 1996). English, however, is, more often
than not, the medium of instruction for post-secondary instruction. In general, this often
means that a majority of the student population at open-admission institutions are taught
through the medium of English, and for these students, English is an additional language.
|
|
|
For those subjects taught in English, this fact
alone should have an impact on everything said in the classroom. Classes at the Technikon
(economics, didactics, accounting, etc.) have, in a sense, become English for Specific
Purposes (ESP) classes. By this I mean the majority of the learners in the classroom are
studying the content in a language which they are still busy learning. The focus of the
classroom is still the same; but clearly getting the message across has become more of a
challenge and concern given the learner profile.
|
|
|
Language learning principles for mainstream classes
|
|
|
Hutchinson and Waters (1997:128) present eight
language learning principles in relation to a learner- centered methodology. A
learner-centered methodology need not exist only in a language classroom, and much
language learning takes place outside of the language classroom. Hutchinson and Waters
relate the learning principles to the ESP classroom, but often these EAL (English as an
Additional Language) learners are in classes that are not taught by language experts, and
therefore the classes are not remembered as a rich resource for language input.
|
|
|
The discussion on teaching techniques is not
meant for language experts only. I have used the principles as a point of departure for
discussions on language across the curriculum seminars. These seminars often concern
department or campus-wide staff who are not well informed on language issues. Perhaps
teachers are intimidated by the thought of fostering language development in the classroom
because they equate the notion with grammar rules. The eight (language) learning
principles are outlined below along with a discussion of their teaching implications and
how they are to be applied to teaching beyond the language classroom.
|
|
|
1. Second language learning is a
developmental process. In other words, learners use existing knowledge to make the
incoming information comprehensible. Gagn, and Bridges (1988) discuss "external"
and "internal" conditions of learning in much the same way. The example they use
is understanding when the U.S. presidential elections take place: the first Tuesday after
the first Monday in November, every four years. In order to truly grasp this
"external" knowledge (when the elections take place), they explain that a
learner must have certain "internal" conditions in place, i.e., the knowledge of
the days of the week, and the months in the year, etc. This example may seem too simple to
be applicable at the tertiary level, but one can easily imagine how concepts and ideas in
a field are made understandable by building on some existing knowledge.
|
|
|
The teaching implications of this principle are
that lecturers should reconsider what, if anything, they have been taking for granted
concerning their students' knowledge base. In the case of the Technikon, students come
from vastly different backgrounds and experiences. The knowledge that each student brings
to the classroom is likely to be just as diverse. Do the lecturers adapt the presentation
to the "internal" knowledge of the student? In other words, is there ample
opportunity given in class to discover what learners understand about the concept being
taught? As an example, how is the idea of "perfectly competitive market"
explained in an economics class filled with EAL learners? Do learners know what
"competitive" means? If they have indeed heard the words, what types of
understanding do they have? It is quite possible that "market" for some of the
students here in South Africa simply means a fruit and vegetable stand or maybe even what
is commonly known in the U.S. as a "flea market" (a number of stalls selling
various items ranging from food to crafts). The definition of perfect competition, "a
large number of relatively small price-taking firms that produce a homogenous product and
for whom entry and exit are relatively costless" (Dillingham et al 1992:250) means
nothing for the students if they are unaware of the more basic components of the concept.
The components which comprise a concept should be carefully elicited from the students and
addressed if necessary.
|
|
|
In addition to new concepts, learners are
grappling with new academic discourse. For most, studying at the tertiary level is more a
great hurdle than a step from the secondary level. The discourse alone is likely another
language, even for English-first language learners coming from secondary schools. The
first-year student population at Peninsula Technikon has probably not been through
"prep" classes, which typically familiarize the students with the conventions of
studying beyond secondary school. For this reason, students should be eased into their
first year study. They should be given prompts as much as possible. These could take the
form of visual aids, handouts, or even words and concepts written on the board. By hearing
and seeing the language, the students are better able to match the concepts and
terminology to their internal knowledge, and thus be better equipped to add the external
information if possible. This suggestion may sound painfully easy or remedial, but many
learners, especially language learners, need to see the information as it is being
discussed.
|
|
|
2. Language learning is an active process.
The learners must actively use the new information. This is easier said than done. In
terms of language learning, this means practising the vocabulary and grammar with great
frequency for it to be internalized. With this principle in mind, many language classes at
the tertiary level in the U.S. are time-tabled for maximum contact time (five hours a
week), whereas the "content" subjects average three hours a week. The thinking
behind this imbalance is related to the unlikelihood that the learner will have contact
with the language outside the classroom.
|
|
|
What can a mainstream lecturer do with a
majority of students for whom English is not their mother tongue? Students at Peninsula
Technikon do have more contact with the language, but in general it is delivered at normal
lecture speed, often leaving the students puzzled and unsure of the main points. The
principle of frequency, however, is the same: Revise the information. According to
Hamilton and Ghatala (1994:118), elaboration is the key to getting information into
long-term memory. By elaboration, the authors mean working with the same information in
different but related ways. Examples of elaboration techniques are: summarizing,
outlining, mind-mapping, drawing pictures, using metaphors, eliciting examples for
learners, etc. In ESP, the terms, concepts, and definitions are new and unfamiliar to
students. According to Gagn, and Briggs (1988), repetition is the key to retention (see Footnote 1 ).
|
|
|
Students often struggle with the information
conveyed orally, and perhaps the fact that they are struggling is partly due to the way
the information is conveyed and partly due to their level of language proficiency and
cognitive ability. Written material is another obstacle, but at least one can take one's
time with the reading and consult a dictionary or peers to make some sense of it.
|
|
|
3. Language learning is a decision-making
process. Typically, teachers do all the talking and making of decisions in the
classroom. The teacher is the knower of the information, so it is considered more
efficient for him/her to present the material. But efficient in what way? For the
lecturer, no doubt, it is easy to walk into class, deliver the information, and leave.
What about the students? Hutchinson and Waters (1987:129) argue that in order to develop,
learners must use existing knowledge, make decisions based on that knowledge, and see
results.
|
|
|
This means that learners need to go through a
processing step, both internally and externally: internally to formulate decisions, and
externally to test those decisions. Externally, the learner would express his/her ideas
and receive feedback from both the rest of the class and the in-structor. In conventional
teacher- controlled classrooms, the external step of students expressing knowledge does
not happen until the end of the term in tests, exams, or assignments.
|
|
|
External processing implies a move away from
summative evaluation to formative evaluation. Learners should demonstrate their knowledge
often and if possible be credited for it. To wait until the end of term not only puts more
pressure on the students in terms of the "all or nothing" mark, it also leaves
the facilitator to estimate what percentage of the lecture material is being internalized
during the term. Summative evaluation for first year students might also promote a culture
of passiveness or idleness, taking advantage of the new-found freedom of tertiary study.
Checking understanding frequently with mini-tasks, quizzes, or worksheets is beneficial in
a number of ways: It gives the facilitator an idea of what is being internalized by the
students, and it gives the students reinforcement of the material as well as motivation to
attend class (accountability).
|
|
|
4. Language learning is not just a matter
of linguistic knowledge. The premise here is that there is more to comprehension,
production, and learning in general than the words themselves. A learner may be cognizant
of each individual word due to a good vocabulary base, but not understand the ideas
expressed in them because of a lack of cognitive development. The reverse could also be
true with a student having the cognitive capacity or background to understand the
concepts, but not the linguistic ability to respond successfully. As a result, language
learners are often inaccurately perceived as being cognitively and conceptually slow, when
in fact it might well be their linguistic ability that is lagging.
|
|
|
In the end, many lecturers of these typical
second language learners base their judgment of students solely on their surface ability
to communicate orally and in writing. If the student is poor in communication due to
grammatical errors, that is often where the line is drawn and the mark given. Conversely,
a lecturer is often lenient in marking because s/he understands more or less what the
learner is getting at even if the message is not clearly conveyed.
|
|
|
5. Language learning is not the learner's
first experience (with language). The students are generally competent in another
language, and in terms of subject-specific information, they might have some knowledge of
the concepts or terminology. A classroom should tap into these competencies and help the
learners transfer them from one language (or experience) to another, or activate the
existing knowledge to aid in the understanding of the new information.
|
|
|
Hutchinson et al. (1987:140) suggest getting the
students to predict before reading or listening. Having students predict is advantageous
for two reasons: It sets the students' schema (or road map) of the subject, i.e., the
internal knowledge, thereby getting it ready to attach to external knowledge, as discussed
in connection with principle three above, and it informs the lecturer as to what knowledge
the students already possess. A lecturer then will be able to target the session
accordingly, spending time on concepts that are not clearly known, and only reviewing
those that are.
|
|
|
In terms of teaching, schema-setting can take
the form of a brief review of the day's class lesson, pre- reading, pictures, drawing,
diagrams, charts, discussions, anecdotes, etc. The function of assigning readings before a
lecture serves the schema-setting purpose. However, one needs to bear in mind the level of
language used throughout the passage as well as the length of the passage. At the
Technikon, lecturers need to monitor their schema-setting materials carefully, keeping in
mind that students' backgrounds are quite different and their language abilities
potentially limited.
|
|
|
6. Language learning is an emotional
experience. This principle concerns the affective filter of the student, or
variables related to motivation, attitude, anxiety, and self-confidence. The condition of
these variables, according to Dulay and Burt (in Oller 1993:32), determines what
information is internalised. Students can be fragile entities. They can easily be
intimidated, resulting in debilitating effects. The key then is to create a relaxed and
non-threatening atmosphere in the classroom for optimal learning. To make the learning
more positive, Hutchinson and Waters (1987:129) suggest a number of ways of being
sensitive to affective filters:
|
|
|
- Use pair work or group work to build social relationships;
- Give students time to think, and generally avoid undue pressure;
- Put less emphasis on the product (the right answer) and more on the process of getting
an answer;
- Value attitude as much as aptitude and ability;
- Make "interest," "fun," and "variety" primary
considerations in materials and methodology, rather than just added extras.
|
|
|
Fun and games should not be excluded from
tertiary study. Fun and games do not preclude learning. Activities can still be fun and
challenging and thereby cater to those students for whom pressure is a stimulant. Using
pair and group work in the class has numerous advantages; it provides the following
opportunities:
|
|
|
- Students get to know other students;
- Students form study groups or join with partners;
- Instructors see progress in class and "test" student knowledge and input;
- Variety is brought into the classroom;
- Pressure for individuals is reduced;
- Students work with the concepts and terminology actively rather than being
passive-listeners;
|
|
|
In addition, using pair and group work takes
some of the pressure off the instructor in terms of constant "performance,"
gives the students some independent learning skills practice, and at the same time allows
the instructor to observe the "intake" of learners. Following this observation,
instructors can provide specific input where necessary.
|
|
|
7. Language learning is to a large extent
incidental. One does not need to be actively studying language to learn language.
In other words, at Peninsula Technikon, English (or Afrikaans) is the medium through which
students learn the content, but the language itself does not need to be the focus. The
content subject lecturers at the Technikon would not suddenly be required to explain
grammatical rules to the class, but writing down vocabulary and terminology would be
appropriate for a class with a majority of second language speakers. The focus would not
be taken off the content, but the lecturer should be sensitive to the medium of
instruction, should slow down the presentation, should provide visual aids, and should
repeat and revise often. These are not radical measures to adapt teaching to a varied
student population, but they are helpful.
|
|
|
8. Language learning is not systematic.
Although information is stored systematically, the process by which it is assimilated is
not necessarily systematic. Each learner has a preferred method of learning, and within a
classroom, any combination of learning styles could be represented: visual, auditory,
tactile, and kinesthetic. Davis and Nur (1994) discuss various learning style inventories
used to determine a student's preferred style of learning: cognitive, affective, and
psychomotor. Briefly, cognitive inventories determine how a person takes in information:
what problem-solving strategies are used and how they classify and sequence information.
Affective inventories determine a student's motivation for learning and what factors
influence this motivation. Finally, psychomotor inventories show learner preferences for
subject matter and mode of presentation. The point of conducting such inventories is to
discover the students' preferred learning styles and to match the teaching style to
achieve optimal learning in the classroom.
|
|
|
Maybe not so surprising is the idea that
listening passively to a lecture is not the most successful mode for learning, but it
remains the most common in terms of transmission. Simply adding visuals to a lecture will
benefit both the visual and auditory learners. Adding an activity that uses some type of
handout will address the tactile learner. Having the students get up and change seats for
group work or a jigsaw activity will give the kinesthetic learners some stimulation.
|
|
|
Clearly it is not possible to match all
learners' needs to one instructional style. However, alternating the mode of
"transmission" will provide an opportunity for all styles of learning to be
modeled, give students a chance to become familiar with different strategies, and allow
for a varied classroom.
|
|
|
These principles that I have outlined from
Hutchinson and Waters all focus on the learner. Although the principles are from a
language book, I believe they can be used easily in any subject to address learning in
general and learning in a language other than one's home language. This is not to suggest
that language classes at tertiary level are unnecessary. On the contrary, the
"Student Profile Report" of Peninsula Technikon and the "Language
Proficiency Test Report" (1995) show that a majority of the students need overt
language teaching as well as indirect language reinforcement.
|
|
|
The language teaching principles I have
discussed and the implications I have drawn from them are meant to suggest ways in which
instructors can integrate language in their classroom to reinforce anything from
vocabulary to thinking and social skills in the form of group and pair work.
|
|
|
The approach based on the principles outlined
above might be very new to both learners and instructors. Fortunately, one does not need
to employ them all at once to reap the benefits. The students profiled at Peninsula
Technikon could benefit from not only the language assistance discussed, but also a change
in learning habits. A learner-centered approach, I feel, promotes a culture of active
learning and, hopefully, leads to greater confidence and empowerment of the student.
|
|
|
- Davis, E., and H. Nur. 1994. Helping teachers and students understand learning styles.
English Teaching Forum, 32, 3, pp. 12-19.
- Department of National Education. 1996. South Africa's new language policy: The facts.
Cape-Town: CTP Printers.
- Dillingham, A. E., N. T. Skaggs, and J. L. Carlson. 1992. Economics: Individual choice
and its consequences. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
- Gagn,, R., and L. J. Briggs. 1988. Principles of instructional design. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.
- Hamilton, R., and E. Ghatala. 1994. Learning and instruction. New York: McGraw- Hill.
- Hutchinson, T., and A. Waters. 1987. English for specific purposes: A learning- centered
approach. Glasgow: Cambridge University Press.
- Oller, J. W. 1993. Methods that work. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.
- Peninsula Technikon Academic Development Unit. 1995. Report on student profiles of first
year intake.
- ---.1995. Report on the Peninsula Technikon English proficiency test.
- Scott, I. 1995. Facilitating academic development as a key element of transformation in
higher-education. South African Association for Academic Development.
|
|
|
Maria
Snarski was an ETF Fellow in South Africa andhas taught in Spain and Albania. She
will be teaching at CACE (Center for Adult Education) at the American University in Cairo.
|
|
|
Return
|
|
Footnote 1
| 1. I will not go into the arguments
related to the admittance of students who are unable to cope with lectures, assignments,
and readings. That debate is beyond the scope of this paper and I would refer you to the
paper written in July of 1995 by Ian Scott of SAAAD (South African Association for
Academic Development) for more information. |
Back to Article
|
. |
. |