Speech-fronted program to teach English

Asantha U. Attanayake

When I started implementing the plan I had in my mind to teach our students English speech, I thought of introducing a different set of modules/lesson materials. This 'different type' made a difference to the teachers as well: that there is no teacher's guide as in a stereotype program. The modules/materials contain detailed instructions for students as to how to go about an activity and as a result, there is no need to provide teachers a guideline to get the work done.

The overall aim of the course is to develop student confidence via speech activities with teaching other skills as supportive of the speech program. Detailed instructions in the modules are given to achieve the following objectives:

1. To promote self learning to develop student confidence.

When detailed instructions are given in modules, students are aware of all the steps of the procedure to go about an activity. Eventually they will perform the activities as per the guidelines given in the modules without depending on the teacher, though at the initial stages, they may need teacher's support in reading and understanding the guidelines.

2. The teaching methods designed to use are centred on Cooperative Language Learning which advocates cooperation among students.

Cooperative Language Learning requires students working together in groups to accomplish a task. To develop cooperation, students need to know what is expected of them in a given task, so that they can promote collaboration in accomplishing an activity.

3. To avoid competition

When students work in groups with instructions at hand, they can always refer to the modules for further clarification to carry out the task. When they do not understand certain parts of the instruction, they can seek support from their peers first without having to go to the teacher. Therefore, the kind of competitive nature that can emerge while listening to the teacher to follow instructions is not possible. A counter argument in this regard could be that a competitive nature is important in the classroom for motivating the students. Yet, considering the main aim of the program, i.e. build student confidence via making them speak in English, cooperation should be promoted and not competition as we need to create a safe zone within the four walls of the classroom for our students to use the language . The advantage using of mix ability groups

4. As the target student population is a mix ability group (level one and two) it is expected they would support each other in understanding the process of learning with detailed instructions.

I believe we make a mistake by grouping students to learn English as per their proficiency in English at the placement test at the entry point to the university. With Communicative Approach (CA) and its many developments -especially, the eclectic approach which owes great deal of its methods to the CA- to be used as the teaching method today, and CA's advocacy of promoting information gap activities and the like, a class should consist of a mix ability group to manifest its multi-facetedness and support learning. In relation to the program under discussion, that is the Speech-fronted Program to teach English, a mix ability group is a must with Cooperative Language Learning as the teaching method. As we witnessed in the English Language classrooms in the Arts Faculty, Colombo University for the past three weeks with students belonging to two levels, i.e. 1 and 2, the contribution of the peers in accomplishing a group activity has been a major feature.

Herein, another point needs to be stressed. Using mix ability groups in a classroom should not be threatening for students with a low proficiency in English.

Therefore, students with higher proficiency levels (E.g.: 3 and 4) should not be mixed with students in one and two levels. Instead, they (higher levels) can be put together.

This in turn would pave way for more advanced learning activities to be implemented with a different aim for such groups. Krashen (1981) speaks about an input which is I + 1, that is explained as a comprehensible input slightly higher than what the learner already possesses as an enhancement to learning. Using two levels of students whose language proficiency levels are slightly different, such a comprehensible input can be achievable in the language classroom.

5. The transparency of the instructions would make students feel that learning a language is a process where their own interaction with the material is important.

With allegations made on the teaching-learning process in all spheres of our education today as spoon-feeding nature, we have already made the teacher the most important figure in the classroom, with the 'spoon' in his/her hand. The manifestations of such a spoon-feeding environment in the second language classroom are; teacher reading out the instructions already given in the book/exercise to students; hiding (not necessarily in the negative sense) some segment/s of the instructions in the teacher's guide, so that students are made to feel that there are some parts of learning that should be known to the 'teacher only' and that they need to wait for them on the teacher; lecture method; giving all would-be-required vocabulary and language structures much before students feel the need to have them to carry out a task so that students do not get the opportunity to think what is required for a given situation. In contrast to this, detailed instructions given to students in a straight forward manner would make them feel that they need to read the instructions to carry out the task. Thus they feel the need to interact with the materials and responsible for their own learning. Such a process has a by-effect as well: it automatically acclimatizes students to reading, which we as teachers complain that our students do not do.

6. The transparency of the instructions will make them feel that teaching English is close to their learning English. This would make them feel confident in learning English.

English has been distanced from our rural students in a number of ways: among them, making students feel that Queen's English is the only aspiration we need to have in learning to speak in English, making mistakes in using English is a crime (thereby having a connoted notion that making mistakes in our own mother tongues is something to be proud of), what is coming from the West or Europe is superior and what is ours is inferior. Therefore, apart from teaching English in a novel way, we need to think of bringing English close to our students which should be done as the primary task. One way to achieve this is to make them feel that teaching English and learning English are not distinct and far distant discourses, but similar and close. Giving detailed instructions to students in their materials would make the teaching-learning endeavour transparent thereby making students feel that teaching English is within their reach (of learning it).

7. To limit students' expectations of teacher intervention in learning, so that they will feel responsible for their own learning. This in turn would make them feel confident with the entrusted responsibility.

As discussed above, the spoon-feeding nature of our education has made our students depend on the teacher more than needed. When detailed instructions are given to students, there is very little to expect from the teacher to carry out the task. Therein, students would feel that they have been entrusted with the responsibility of reading and following the instruction by themselves because they are capable of doing so.

The writer is Lecturer in English Language, ELTU, University of Colombo