Sunday, November 24, 2013

12: thinking out loud on EFL video lessons

I've never been terribly efficient at using Google, but I usually eventually can find what I'm looking for. Not so with good EFL websites. It seems that good EFL journals exist, and there are some competent EFL websites, but the thing I have never been able to find is an example of a good EFL video lesson.

This is important because it seems that online education is going to be a Big Thing in this 21st century of ours. Khan Academy officially kicked things off several years ago with math and science videos. Nowadays you can find educational videos on just about any subject from dancing to how to think artistically about mathematics to crash courses on history, literature, and science.

You can also find EFL videos out there, but I haven't been able to find anything out there that's impressive. (If there's a reader out there who knows, please link me to something good if you would.)

So far the material I've seen has been a series of virtual copies (literally and figuratively) of the classroom experience, right down to a teacher standing between a stationary student (bound in place by the stationary camera) and a whiteboard. There's no physicality to the videos, nothing interactive or even interesting about these lessons. I think there will eventually be interesting EFL videos produced, but in this min-era before that happens I think there's probably a lot of doubt even if interesting interactive content can be produced in a video whose student base can neither listen or speak very smoothly.

EFL videos are necessarily different from ESL videos. ESL students live in countries where people speak English. Even if there immediate neighborhood isn't an English-speaking community, they should be able to experience people speaking English on a daily basis. ESL videos are, in other words, just videos. They watch TV and study a bit and their brain pieces the information together with stuff they absorb in their day-to-day lives. EFL students, on the other hand, are for the most part, except for multimedia outlets, cut off from an English speaking world.

I think it must be possible. I mean, everything's possible, right? It's just got to be worked at until it's figured out. I'm working on it presently, and so here are some notes I have towards what an interesting EFL video would look like:
  1. Whereas most educational videos are rational and artistic/interesting, a good EFL video lesson has got to be patterned and artistic/interesting, because the majority of the student base can't understand rambling, no matter how intelligent.
  2. Rambling might be useful for students' listening, though, since it is very common in typical conversation but hardly ever seen in the movies or music students get most of their English exposure from. So there probably should be rambling, but it's got to be controlled and for the students benefit. It's got to be intentional rambling, set up so that over the course of a course students could get used to the teacher's style of ramble and be able to follow him through it.
  3. Speaking of which, lessons should probably not be self-contained. Students can access information on grammar points or common phrases freely using online dictionaries or the textbooks that they likely already own. Since the only practical information self-contained videos offer are these kinds of disconnected bits of trivia, it would be best to avoid them in favor of strings of lessons that build not a point of knowledge, but rather a skill. Most Japanese students of English know very well how to give their name and ask someone how they're feeling, but very few of them can smoothly start and end such a conversation in a friendly manner. The videos should strive to fix communicative shortcomings like that.
  4. I don't know about EFL students, but as a JSL student I have a hell of a time reading anything more complex than manga or business letters. It might be worthwhile to do a chain of lessons analyzing a piece of poetry, or a prose style, or even just a very beautiful albeit complex sentence, slowly breaking the English down into bits and pieces and, at the end, putting it back together again. Hopefully this would, after several examples, teach students how to feel their way through a piece of prose more methodically and masterfully than they had been able to do before. (In fact you know what, if you're fluent in Japanese and want me to subscribe to your YouTube channel, you might make a few videos to help me get through a 村上春樹 book. ;)
  5. Unless you're absolutely awesome, nobody wants to sit through ten or more minutes of you talking, especially if they're there to study. Short, 3~7-minute videos have become popular with vloggers like #zefrank and the #vlogbrothers, but they cut their total time down by becoming information-dense and cutting out all their breaths. This isn't as easily done in an EFL video lesson, but it shouldn't be impossible (see #2). Or we could attack the problem from a different angle: instead of making the videos short by cutting out all the pesky breaths and talking really fast, we might instead rely on rigidity of structure and scripting, so that the students can quickly understand where we are in an episode and generally what we'll be talking about. This is what typical TV shows do, and even well-produced vlogs like Crash Course. (Maybe it seems obvious to point stuff like this out, but unless you draw the lines where you've been you might not know which direction to go. We be not meddling with these ideas in a small room, but rather in the vastness of the whole of imagination, laddies and ladies.)
  6. Accents are kind of a political dividing line in the world of second language acquisition. Opinions are wild and wide here: there are people who think adopting a more native-sounding accent at all is tantamount to throwing the shiny god-seed that is Your True Self under the bus of Mere Progress. There are others who think that the accent bestowed upon them by their mother tongue makes them, them, more than any other colony of human on the face of the earth, inept speakers of English.
       Well, those opinions are both extreme and silly, but the problem remains that accents are a significant source of anxiety for EFL students, and this anxiety is only outmatched in scale by the lengths to which EFL students will go to not properly fix the problem for themselves.
       I should clarify my own opinion on the issue: there are no proper or improper accents in the same way that there is no proper or improper way of sitting in a chair. Some people (usually teachers or parents) will get very passionate indeed if they see someone over which they have power sitting in a wrong way, but it is my unreserved opinion that there have in the history of the human race been terribly intelligent, hardworking people who changed the world for the better who also happened to slouch or cross their legs. There is no proper way to sit...but there are ways to sit which would make things easier for your body in the long run. Those ways of sitting also tend to be really difficult to maintain for long periods of time, which leads to slouching, leg-crossing, etc. Actually, the best bet is just not to sit for too long...says I, slouching here at my desk for the last 80 minutes or so.
       Accents are essentially the same. There is a common way to speak in your neighborhood and over time people generally fall into the same patterns. It's like birdsong, but with a kerjillion more sound-pattern possibilities. If you're trying to learn a new pattern, though, your tongue will have a hard time jiving at first. For the people who work at their accent, many of them give up after becoming "good enough." That's fine in general, but for businesspeople, actors, or anyone who has to deal with customers in a foreign language, it would benefit them to work more on sounding like All the Other Folk. There are conformity benefits to this, socially speaking, but for the purposes of EFL, accent training trains not just your tongue, but also your ear and your mind. If you can speak English like an Australian, you're not likely to find the Australian accent (which makes today sound like to die and makes Japanese and Chinese EFL students giggle endlessly) very challenging anymore. It's also a confidence booster: the more quickly I can move my tongue to speak Japanese, the faster I can read; the faster I can read, the faster I can sing at Japanese karaoke; the faster I can sing at Japanese karaoke, the happier boy I be.
       So: shadowing and repetition would also be a good bit of thing to incorporate into an EFL video lesson course. Again, the method needs to be considered: saying a sentence and then staring at the screen, waiting for an invisible student to repeat you is creepy. It's creepy when Dora the Explorer does it and it would be even creepier when you do it: so think of something better.
That's all for now, I think. If anyone interested in EFL teaching is reading this I'd be happy to hear from you. Do you have any other ideas? Have you ever seen a decent EFL video lesson? Let me know.

Wednesday, November 13, 2013

11: A Sisyphean Grammar

I just perused the textbook closet for the English department here at school. Here’s what I found:
  • Every textbook marked “English Communication Course” was actually just a reading course with a small bit of writing attached at the end of each 5-part chapter.
  • The grammar textbooks all used the same abbreviations: S, V, O, and C to show the grammar patterns of English. I could identify 主語 (S, subject), 動詞 (V, verb), and 目的語 (O, object), but I don’t remember ever learning about 補語 (C, complement).
  • If the grammar textbooks were battleships, they would be fearsomely well armed. They would not, however, float.
  • Because these grammar textbooks are filled to the brim with bits and bytes of grammar information, which the teacher is required to take into his or her beak, swallow and partially digest, and then regurgitate into the brains of his or her students.
  • The teacher is required to do this because the students are in high school for primarily two reasons, which are in order:
    1. To learn enough bits of information to pass periodic examinations culminating in the college entrance examination of the student’s choice, and
    2. To prepare the students to be mature, functioning adults.
  • The first requirement is satisfied by class, the second is satisfied by discipline in class and club activities.
  • (That’s overly simplistic and unfair, but this is a microblog not a book, so there.)
  • What is missing here is play. The students are sat down at the beginning of the year and set upload as many grammar rocks into their solid-state brains as time allows for. And after this ball gets rolling, the teachers are up to their necks in writing tests, correcting homework, and coaching their respective sports teams or clubs to make time to innovate.
  • And so the bland process continues until, occasionally, a teacher as a great idea that they manage to implement.
  • For myself, I’d like to approach things like my gym teacher used to do: give us the balls first and let us play around—afterwards there would be time for the teaching of technical details and the testing of specific skills. It might be a worthwhile idea to throw kids into the so-called “deep end” of untethered communication, and only afterward settle down and teach them the reasons they’re saying what they’re saying.
  • That might be considered madness in some circles. I mean, how can a student really know what they’re saying in a language they’ve never spoken before unless it’s taught to them specifically and in logical, laid-out stages?
  • We all learned our mother tongue this way, so I’d say it’s worth a shot. It would be incredibly difficult to plan a class around this method, but incorporating a few ideas here and there might be just the thing to restore a bit of fun (and the resultant motivation) into EFL classes around the country.

Monday, November 11, 2013

10: November 1913

So think about this: If it were 100 years ago today instead of 100 years from now a hundred years ago today (?_?), this would be our frame of reference:
Things that had just happened within the last five years:
Within the next year World War I would begin, kicking off for what many would consider to be one of the defining opening moments of the 20th century. From this year on major events are widely covered in middle and high school history textbooks, so let's focus in on just advancements that have had a direct or lasting impact on education:
  • In 1920 commercial radio got its start.
  • In 1923 "talking movies" debuted.
  • In 1928 the first Oxford English Dictionary was published.
  • And so was sliced bread...which has defined school lunch for millions ever since.
  • In 1942 t-shirts went on sale for the first time.
  • And in 1944 ballpoint pens did.
  • In 1945 ENIAC was built. (This is after the Manhattan project produced the first nuclear bomb, mind.)
  • In 1951 TV became color.
  • 1971: VCRs
  • 1972: pocket calculators
  • In 1975 Microsoft was founded.
  • 1979: Sony Walkman
  • 1993: The Internet becomes big.
  • 2003: Myspace makes social networks important.
  • 2007: iPhone launches the smartphone market.
  • 2010: iPad launches the tablet market.
I took these factoids nearly at random from About.com's 20th century timeline. I'm sure there are lots of important education historical landmarks that aren't listed here--
  • When did the modern backpack come into style?
  • Or easily tearable notebook paper?
  • And whiteboards?
  • And non-one-room schoolhouses?
  • And textbook corporations?
  • And standardized tests?
  • And the first irrational political panic-laced push towards more standardized testing?
  • etc.
--but the pattern I noticed here is that, technology-wise, a lot of the things that we take for granted wrt learning (especially self-directed learning) came about in the past century. If you think about 19th century education, you (or at least I) imagine one-room schoolhouses on pristine hills in very sparsely populated towns.When I think 20th century I think graded public schools and the introducing of technology to the classroom--or even more, the educational effect of technology at home.
We learn a lot (good and bad) from TV; there are tons of good educational programs on the radio (and via the radio-esque podcast); and only very recently has the Internet, social networking, and portable access to both become a reality. We're only just starting out here in the 21st century. In a hundred years' time, people might consider these past 13 or so opening years of the 2000s cultural relics of the 20th century, with the 21st century only coming into its own later (hopefully not, this time, through the gates of a major war). Is it likely that our current, much maligned public systems of education will dissolve into or be greatly changed as time trudges forward? I think so.
I'm not sure what's coming, but it's exciting to think that despite all the innovation we've been seeing the past 15 years, we're still quite unaware of what kind of thing we're holding. With 21st education, we're really just getting started.