John Bald/language and literacy

Three principles of language teaching and an example from the fourth lesson to Falkirk.

It has recently been suggested that there are eight principles of language teaching. I think there are three:

1. Learners must understand their work fully from the beginning. To do this we make links with what they already know in their own language (eg shared words) and give them materials, such as colours, where meaning is self-evident. We do not introduce more material in the first lessons than the pupil can fully understand.

The idea has grown up that children do not need to understand their work fully, and that frustration in the first lessons is normal. This is a big mistake. It leads to confusion, panic, frustration and failure. We don't teach children to play an instrument by immersing them in music or taking them to a concert. They need to understand what they are doing, either instinctively or through careful demonstration, explanation and practice.

2. Spoken and written language should be taught together, and their relationships explained. This ensures that all channels of communication contribute to learning, and gives pupils time to build up their understanding of grammatical structures. This approach is easy to use via Clicker 6 with speech engines. It builds the literacy skills of lower attaining pupils, reinforcing their understanding of phonic patterns and shared words, and exploits those of higher attaining pupils. It is therefore in the best interests of all.

3. Teaching should focus on vocabulary, grammar and usage at all stages. As illustrated below, this ensures that children have the words and structures they need in order to say what they wish or need to say, and that they are introduced to the ways in which speakers of the language use them. The starting point is the language as it is, both in formal and informal contexts.

Children need to understand that languages are human constructs, with human traits, virtues and foibles. Once they do understand this, and that they are not expected to know everything at once, they can approach the work with confidence, knowing that they will not fail.  As the French say, "Ce n'est pas la mer à boire."

Example,Fourth Lesson to Falkirk, pupils aged 11 and 12.

In the first three lessons, we looked at differences between French and English pronunciation, and made some positive and negative sentences. We sang the simple action song with pronouns, and began to look at shared words, gender, and the ways in which French verbs work.

In Lesson 3, we looked at these shared words, collected by Henri Seguin of Canada, and reinforced the idea of gender in words such as intelligent, élégant.

-age:    bandage, image, page, message, usage, voltage, passage

-ance: chance, balance, finance, alliance, tolérance, ambulance,

-ence: confidence, évidence, intelligence, providence, licence

-tion:  nation, action, attention, adaptation, administration + hundreds, all feminine

-al:       animal, normal,  signal, cardinal, final, original, national

-ial:      racial, social, spécial, commercial,  colonial, initial

-et:       alphabet, buffet, budget, cricket, ticket, violet, secret

-ect:     intellect, direct, correct, aspect, respect, suspect

-in:       Latin, cousin, assassin, bulletin, florin, mandarin

-ain:     gain, grain, refrain, train,  quatrain, certain, vain

-ent:   accent, récent, innocent, précédent, incident, président, différent, intelligent  (Vous êtes très intelligentes!)    ! = point d'exclamation

-ant:   vacant, élégant, éléphant, extravagant, descendant

-ive:     offensive, initiative, tentative, co-operative, intensive

-ine:     discipline, machine, morphine, Vaseline, routine, sardine

-ible:    possible, compatible, sensible, invisible, terrible.

 

Acute accent (accent aigu) An e in French is pronounced minimally, if at all. The acute accent stretches the sound, so that it is almost like having an extra letter in the alphabet.

Then an example of usage, from a Frenchman recommending his favourite spot for lunch in the Loire valley: 

Si vous cherchez un restaurant, c'est très correct, et ce n'est pas cher du tout. 

Then some more on verbs. 

Verbs are so important that each one has a name.  Grammatical term - infinitive. 

In English, the name always starts with to   to be, to have, to play, to sleep.

 

In French, the name is one word only.  Donner   Prendre   Finir    To give, to take, to finish. Lots of verbs have these endings, er, re, ir, and they are called Regular because the endings are very consistent.

Some verbs have different forms. These are either very common, or very rare. Stephen Pinker thinks that these make them resist pressure to use the same form of other verbs.

Être    avoir       to be, to have.

 Verbs reinforce our idea of time zones - here and now, what has happened, what will happen. I demonstrated some basic patterns using chercher, and we will do more on time zones next week.

 

 

 

 

 

Lesson 3, French and German, 10 and eleven year olds.

See below for lessons one and two.  Lesson Three, with one  pupil, aged 11, and two pupils (learning French), aged 9 and 12.

We revised the content of Lesson 2, and Suzi had had a nice comment from her teacher in her school diary for doing extra work. We began with the pronoun song. Suzi had some sentences and vocabulary to learn, so we looked over the sentences and I explained how they were written as they were. We then made some simple sentences with the new vocabulary, and I was grateful to a friendly head of department for picking out a couple of errors. Here is the result

Ich bin Schottin und ich habe einen Bruder und keine Schwester. Ich habe viele Haustiere. Ich habe zwei Hünde, einen Hamster, viele Fische und zwei Kaninchen.

Ich finde Deutsch etwas schwierig, aber nicht zu schwierig.  Ich mag Badminton spielen. Ich mag Geografie nicht, weil wir zu wenig machen. Ich hasse Bohnen, aber ich liebe Alles außer dem Schmerz. 

The big change from current teaching in the former national curriculum and in most schools is the emphasis on complete accuracy in writing and speaking, and in practising until this is achieved. 

It is made possible by using simple and familiar content with meaning to the child - she doesn't have a dog, but two dogs. She really does have one brother and no sisters. The bridge between language and reality is actual, and not imaginary. So it's easy, and we find a dative introduced at this stage, and in one gender, because it is needed to say what she wants to say. We finished the lesson by starting to look at the weather in German, and I sent this picture by email, for Suzi to try to puzzle out.

 

 

 

The approach with French was similar, but taking account of the different changes in thinking that are required - spoken language must flow, written language must be precise. New sentences icluded:

J'aime faire la cuisine, notamment les cookies.

Je ne vais pas à l'école

Je n'aime pas les choux de Bruxelles.

J'aime jouer au ping pong.

J'aime jouer au basket.

Vous faites la cuisine.

I explained the contraction of à le to au in the last sentence and the girls understood. We also discussed the origin of the circumflex accent, verbs, and the "name" of a verb (infinitive).

 

"The intellect is developed quite naturally, without being forced." A compliment unpacked.

This, from a parent in Falkirk, is as fine a compliment as a teacher can receive, and gives an insight into the principles behind successful teaching. It is easy to explain, and, once the principles are understood, easy to put into practice. Here's how:

Once we understand that learning is based on the formation of networks in the brain, we can use discussion and analysis of children's written work to see what they do and don't know and understand, and what they may be able to learn next. We use this knowledge to design materials and teaching - it does not always need to be written down.

Around what children already know, we can choose from many routes. Some will involve practice to strengthen existing netwoks - part of this is developing memory - and give children quicker access to what they know. This is important in mathematics, where children need to apply their knowledge in solving problems, and in English, where they need to be able to spell quickly and accurately in order to concentrate  on what they want to say.

Some will introduce new material, and this gives important choices. Some will simply add new material, such as facts or data. Some will open up new networks. In languages, learning vocabulary on a thematic basis is an example of the former. Learning patterns in the construction of words, and developing an understanding of words shared with the learner's first language is an example of the latter. It includes facts and data, but also leads to new networks. Just learning, say, the words for the contents of a classroom or a pencil case, has no application beyond itself. Seeing how a word may have moved from one language to another, with some alterations, or how a verb pattern may keep recurring when we want to say different things, builds networks which extend themselves - as we use more verbs - and also reinforce themselves, as the same patterns keep recurring.

Working with individual children, we can, unless we are obliged to follow some government "strategy", make a judgement on what the child needs to learn next, and exploit their own interests as source material. We are constrained in this only by our own knowledge, which we need to keep extending. With classes, we have the difficulty of hitting more targets at once, but this can be made manageable by grouping children according to their learning needs, and tracking progress by building it into a scheme of work.

All of the teaching here, including the German, is based on these ideas.

 

Second Lesson in French.

My ten year old friend in Falkirk had her second French lesson just now, and her twelve year old sister her first. Here are the sentences we made. Introducing the negative at this stage is one of the main ideas of my primary toolkit, as it is the basis of requiring children to answer questions in sentences rather than parroting. We also looked at the pattern of x in a plural following u, at companion words (articles), at shared words, and at the letters at the ends of words that are not pronounced.

"Life-changing breakthrough" - notes from a parent in Scotland.

After lesson 1, by skype, from Linton, Cambridgeshire, to Falkirk, Stirlingshire.

I wanted to extend my thanks for what can only be described as a life-changing breakthrough for both my daughters. 

Your ability to break down spelling into understandable chunks, in an historical context, has made all the difference.  S. now understands she is not an idiot.  She is walking on air today and is even enjoying maths - all because she now knows that she is not inadequate in any way.  The psychological knot in her mind is being loosened.  She feels that she IS able to learn.

 You are the first person who has been able to explain why our language and spelling system operates the way it does, in a simple (but not simplistic) way that and 11 year old can understand.  Most important was your teaching about word groupings and how groups of letters can sound quite different to their individual parts and even make similar sounds, such as 'sh' as in 'ship' and then 'ti' as in 'patient'.  No one had told S. that before.

 Don't get me wrong: I can see the utility of phonics and it helped my children in the basics of reading but alas, beyond a certain level of complexity, it a bit like trying to complete a jigsaw with one third of the pieces missing.  It's possible to formulate a reasonable guess as to what the finished puzzle will look like but much of the detail will be lost. 

 John, you have shown me that's it time to stop blaming the pupils and even the teachers (who can teach what they do not know?) and to put a system in place that is simple in its delivery but comprehensive in its scope.  I hope that those in positions of power start to listen to you.

 

After lesson 3.

 

Wow!  The children were ecstatic after their seesion with you yesterday and I wanted to let you know what a difference you are making to them (and me).  

 

Firstly, their comments:

"I feel as though I'm making a massive improvement."  

"I have a much clearer view of grammar. "What really made the difference was the combination of simple, clear explanations combined with a greater degree of depth that we have been taught before.  Understanding why things were this way."

 "It was really helpful to get the historical backstory.  It satisfied my curiosity and made things make more sense because they were put in context."

"My maths confidence is through the roof.  I feel now that I CAN do it.  It was just that my teachers at school didn't really teach me a system that is quick and gets right results.  John helped me to see patterns in numbers that I'd never noticed and this has made arithmetic a lot easier."

 

And finally:

"The biggest change is that we feel we can do it.  That we are capable of understanding.  It's like a whole world is being decoded for us.   John is better than any teacher we've ever had - we are light years ahead of where we previously were."  "... and it's nice to be made to feel intelligent, to be praised.  I'm starting to believe..."

 

Not much needs to be added to these statements about the effectiveness of your teaching methods.  My children both INSISTED that they dictate their comments to me - I can assure you it wasn't my idea.  That shows how happy they are, how confident they feel about moving forward.  It is clear that what works is a clear focus, simple and clear instruction whilst elucidating a logical pattern of events so that the children can see how, for example, grammar naturally works that way, or that sentences flow better this way etc.  Understanding the provenance of words (in the absence of Latin and Greek) really opened up a whole world of interest.  My daughter commented that she felt ignorant to believe a 'Utopia' was a paradisical, imaginary world after you'd talked to them about Thomas More.  This has made them want to read 'Utopia' out of sheer interest.  And so the intellect is developed quite naturally without being forced.  I have noticed how interested my children become when you talk to them as if they were intellectually capable as opposed to spoon-feeding snippets of data to be regurgitated in an exam or test.  Now they are willing learners.  What more could parent ask for?

 

You have drawn out the joy of learning which is particularly impressive in S. who was told she was probably dyslexic, engaged in over a year of Reading Recovery to little effect and who disliked school so intensely (apart from the social side) that I had to remove her little over a year ago.  Now, she studies for nine hours per day, much of that self-taught, and voluntarily uses a dictionary, writes stories and volunteers to work maths problems at the board.  Most importantly, her growing confidence is allowing her to 'self-correct'.  She will stop herself, notice that an error has been made and happily fix it.

 

All in all, wonderful results.  I really feel there is an argument for this style of teaching in the classroom.  It may seem like more work but when the time has been taken to explain concepts in depth - the why of things - children make the connections which grow exponentially, across subject areas.

 

We're all over the moon and looking forward to experiencing these same principles applied to French grammar!

 

PS. The first French lesson is here.