thoughts on task 2.2
MET: Unit 2 Task 2 discussion | Jerry Talandis Jr. | November 16th, 2001
Hello METs,
Jerry here. I'm doing the tasks for Unit 2 and thought I'd put #2 out there in public for discussion. Any feedback would be welcome.
1. Is it enough to engage learners in meaningful tasks and activities?
I think that has to be the main thing, but some focus on form or on improving meta-linguistic awareness is very helpful. At my school here in Japan, the students take all kinds of courses related to English, including reading, writing, pronunciation, grammar, etc. I teach the communicative bits, so I'm always thinking how I can get them to increase their English output. I have the luxury of not having to worry about form, because I know they get enough of that in other classes.
I've found that my students talk a lot more if they have interesting topics that are meaningful to them. Without that, focus on form would be like torture and I don't know how much they'd get out of it. Once they are motivated to say something, it becomes possible to focus on grammar or whatever. So, I think it's enough to engage in meaningful tasks because that is what the Ss want. But, it's not ideal, because some work on accuracy is needed in order to improve overall proficiency.
2. Is it necessary to draw attention to, or explicitly practice, micro-skills and strategies, especially those that are part of fluent communication?
I think doing so is ideal, but I would stop short of saying it is NECESSARY. Almost so, but not quite. If the tasks are good, and people are engaged, then I would say that's good enough. But, to get to the next level, or to help solve certain problems, teaching communication strategies would be the way to go. I'm currently experimenting with some in my discussion classes.
That brings me to a related question: does anyone know of any good book on teaching communication strategies?
3. How do we specify the linguistic content base of CLT? To what extent is it necessary to draw learner's attention to language form? How should this be done? Should this be done before or after use?
I don't understand the first part of this question. What does it mean to "specify the linguistic content base?"
For the second part, I alluded to this above. I think that focusing on form is important and should be a part of a communication class, but not the major part. Of course, if I were the only teacher working with a particular student (like I am with my private students), then of course you need to do more form-focus. How much? I don't know. 40% of the time? Perhaps. I think it's more important to engage Ss into meaningful communication. That's my first priority, always. Focusing on form too much leads to a drop in fluency, I've found, as Ss are using their brains to remember rules and patterns. If you focus on form, it should be done in such a way as to not interrupt the flow of conversation. I like the way TBL goes about it- talk first, ask questions later.
Another way is to help Ss notice more what they are doing. For my MET assignment, I'm planning on videotaping my Ss doing conversations and then have them watch and transcribe their performances. This seems to allow them to go full hog wild during their conversations, then give them concentrated noticing time. I could look at a number of things from that data. My current idea is to focus on the moments when they code-switch back to their L1. Why do they do it? What did they say? Could they say that in English? So, to answer the last part of the question, I think that doing the form-focus stuff comes best at the end. Then again, what do you do if you have beginners?
Jerry
with 
and 
