Monday, September 29, 2008
Class reflection week 5
I liked the teaching of Stephanie and Brian and I learned something from them. As I am from a different culture background who learned English in the Grammar Translation method, it is hard for me to feel very free while teaching. Although I have always tried to change myself but still when I stand in front of the class, i feel stressed. Seeing American way of interation between teacher and students in class, impresses me. Teachers and students do not stick to a set of behaviours that prevents them to be the person they really are while teaching. In other words, In our culture a teacher should attain certain charicteristics while teaching which can be different from who they really are. For example, it is preferred that a teacher not make jokes with students, or should not act out situations to teach something, or should not make teachin as a fun. However, here teachers are free to do so that I think I support and try to develop such a characteristics to some extent as an EFL teacher.
popular Ideas about language learning
In chapter 7 of L&S, the author discasses both sides of the learning a langauge through imitation. this is true that imitation is not the only strategy of learning a langauge but no doubt it is the best ways of learning L2 especially for begining learners. I have learned a lot of vocabulary and phrases, idiomatic expresions and even grammatical structures through listening to news, movies and even songs. I have learned them all in the context. I used to listen to these sources attentively and then think of its meaning while comparing them to the same thing in my language and finally repeating them loudly. This has helped me save time and energy because through this strategy not only did I learn the thought groups but also I learned the approperiate meaning, pronunciation, and use pragmatically. Thus, According to my experience in learning a foreign language, I came to believe that immitation is one of the most effective strategies in learning a languge especially in the beginning stage where learners dont have any idea about pragmatics, appropriate us and meaning according to the context.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Week 3 class reflction
Reflection on what we did and learned in the class
Theory and Methods of TESL week 3After having done the readings, I learned some useful ideas about L1 and L2 acquisition and some theories about diversity among English language learners and ways to successfully deal with them. However, there were some points in the reading that I could not notice while reading the texts. The activities we did in the class after the presentation and the game helped me understand some part of the readings that I didn’t understand or noticed while reading. I liked the group work because when we were discussing the task, I learnt some important definitions of the hypothesis such as Krashen’s ‘monitor model’. Moreover, the variety of activities had good impact. One, it prevented students to get bored. Second, it reinforced the readings. Finally, before the end we shared some of our experiences of the second language Learning relating to Affective Filter Hypothesis.
Theory and Methods of TESL week 3After having done the readings, I learned some useful ideas about L1 and L2 acquisition and some theories about diversity among English language learners and ways to successfully deal with them. However, there were some points in the reading that I could not notice while reading the texts. The activities we did in the class after the presentation and the game helped me understand some part of the readings that I didn’t understand or noticed while reading. I liked the group work because when we were discussing the task, I learnt some important definitions of the hypothesis such as Krashen’s ‘monitor model’. Moreover, the variety of activities had good impact. One, it prevented students to get bored. Second, it reinforced the readings. Finally, before the end we shared some of our experiences of the second language Learning relating to Affective Filter Hypothesis.
the first two chapters of How languages are learned
Language larning in Early Childhood & Explaining Second Language Learning
As I read the the two chapters of How Languages are learned most of the linguists who are searching on the topic are considering one aspect of the language learning. For example, the behaviourists accepts the environment as the source of learning, the Innatists believe the innate language ability of the children as a foundation for learning, and the
Interactionists/developmental believe that both the remarkable innate ability in children and the environment are the two sources that contribute in learning a language, while no need to focus on the specific part of the brain that acquire the language, or to say it is only the environment from where children learn the language. Thus, I basically think that each reasoning they do can be considered as a part of the whole long journey through which learning of a language takes place.
As I heard from a medical doctor, when a baby is of 3 months before birth, they start to have the ability of hearing things, let a lone when they come to the world. undoubtedly, as soon as they are in this world they hear things from the surroundings. The brain has that amazing ability to acquire language or learn anything. Besides, this is the environment that makes it possible to activate and use that part of the brain. Moreover, I believe it is not only the innate ability of the child to acquire language it is also the stimulus and response characteristics that makes the brain make sense out of each single thing happening to the children and in their surroundings which makes the them react and communicate purposefully.
I liked the idea of Connectionism. As the connectionists believe the way the language is learned is through connection of sounds to words or phrases, words or phrases to things (including feelings) things to meanings meanings to contexts, contexts to needs and senses, and all of them to the concepts and meanings that already existed in the brain or were learned first.
We can rarely acquire or learn any new concept unless we associate its meaning to the meanings that we already have in our minds. In childhood I think this is a very common way of learning but later in adulthood I think there is enough meanings to make sense out of most of the new things that we cannot even notice it. I think that is why it is recommended to learn language in thought groups or chunks for one thing can remind us of other related things.
One of the reasons simultaneous bilingual children don't mix the two languages is as a result of connections of the sounds and patterns specific to one language. However, I think, when two languages are too close to each other in terms of sounds, patterns and structures, then it is more likely to get mixed by simultaneous bilingual learners.
As I read the the two chapters of How Languages are learned most of the linguists who are searching on the topic are considering one aspect of the language learning. For example, the behaviourists accepts the environment as the source of learning, the Innatists believe the innate language ability of the children as a foundation for learning, and the
Interactionists/developmental believe that both the remarkable innate ability in children and the environment are the two sources that contribute in learning a language, while no need to focus on the specific part of the brain that acquire the language, or to say it is only the environment from where children learn the language. Thus, I basically think that each reasoning they do can be considered as a part of the whole long journey through which learning of a language takes place.
As I heard from a medical doctor, when a baby is of 3 months before birth, they start to have the ability of hearing things, let a lone when they come to the world. undoubtedly, as soon as they are in this world they hear things from the surroundings. The brain has that amazing ability to acquire language or learn anything. Besides, this is the environment that makes it possible to activate and use that part of the brain. Moreover, I believe it is not only the innate ability of the child to acquire language it is also the stimulus and response characteristics that makes the brain make sense out of each single thing happening to the children and in their surroundings which makes the them react and communicate purposefully.
I liked the idea of Connectionism. As the connectionists believe the way the language is learned is through connection of sounds to words or phrases, words or phrases to things (including feelings) things to meanings meanings to contexts, contexts to needs and senses, and all of them to the concepts and meanings that already existed in the brain or were learned first.
We can rarely acquire or learn any new concept unless we associate its meaning to the meanings that we already have in our minds. In childhood I think this is a very common way of learning but later in adulthood I think there is enough meanings to make sense out of most of the new things that we cannot even notice it. I think that is why it is recommended to learn language in thought groups or chunks for one thing can remind us of other related things.
One of the reasons simultaneous bilingual children don't mix the two languages is as a result of connections of the sounds and patterns specific to one language. However, I think, when two languages are too close to each other in terms of sounds, patterns and structures, then it is more likely to get mixed by simultaneous bilingual learners.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)