Humanistic Teaching

An approach to learning English

Chris Hunt

The Wise Hat

According to The Beatles It was twenty years ago today that Sergeant Pepper taught the band to play. According to my wavering memory it is twenty years ago today that the Exxon Valdez sank in Prince William Sound. Easy to remember when the date happens to be one's birthday.

Actually, that could make for an interesting research project for older teenagers and adults - find out what famous events from history happen to share your birthday and talk about them. Or alternatively, if the event is really famous, prepare some clues so that others may guess what it is. But that's by the by. What I want to touch on this time is how we teachers make decisions.

If we hadn't just begun our Spring break then it is quite possible that I would be doing a class or two about the Exxon Valdex disaster based upon showing the Free Range Graphics Flash Video Not Another Valdez. One way of using the video is to prepare questions on strips of paper. Each student takes a question and after checking any problems with meaning watches the video to find the answer. Students can then quiz each other and teach each other the questions and answers. The video is a little dated since it features George Bush Junior and he is no longer President. It is also advocacy, which is a nice way to say propaganda, in that it combines factoids with humour to lead people to reject the idea of drilling for oil in Alaska. That's a position I agree with. Would I be so ready to use it if the position was reversed and it was promoting drilling. Probably not, though I am toying with the idea of using the promotional video by Israeli arms manufacturer "Raphael" which is truly stupendous in ways that have to be heard and seen to be believed. Have a look and see how many times you can spot the product that it's selling.

Dinga Dinga Dee!

Should language teachers shy away from using material that is political, religious or sexist? To what extent is it necessary to consider the cultural background of students or if we know them well, their own interests and foibles? Of course, these questions assume that it is the teacher who decides what material is used, but to what extent should this really be the teacher's call? Certainly, with complete beginners, options are limited. Focus on the language itself is almost inevitable, though the more students learn, the more options become available. But even at a very basic level content shapes the experience. Very few text books use stick figures as illustrations and if colourful illustrations stimulate interest why not go a step further and use proprietary characters - Mickey meet Ultraman, anyone?

I think that using well know characters to peddle interest in learning English is political. There are inbuilt assumptions in this act about what is acceptable within society and also about how society should run. The choice can be a popular one, however. I've dabbled in it myself. At one time I used to use Pikachu cards to teach the idea of same and different. Each pair of Pikachus had some difference, usually in the tail. I've also used Thomas, Snoopy and Miffy jigsaws in classes though nowadays I prefer giant floor puzzles such as those from Orchard Games.

Just because material is popular does that mean we should use it?. Junk food sells well but it isn't exactly healthy. Conversely, is lack of interest a reason to avoid material. Does a teacher have the right to force, or at least push an activity on students if it will do them or their learning good? This leads me to a hypothetical. If a scientist created a technique that caused students intense emotional discomfort but gave them an extra two hundred points in the Toeic Test how many teachers would want to use it? Suppose instead of emotional discomfort it involved physical pain, would that make a difference? How about if the gain were only 50 points? Would it still be worth it? I think it nonsense to accept that a teacher has the right to make that kind of choice, or indeed one person for another. Note, though, that the original question isn't actually that absurd, apart from the guaranteed good results. I once had a teacher who used fear and ridicule as a way to push students to do better. I think he did this because he was interested in finding students he could train to take the Oxford and Cambridge entrance exams. But that's a story for another time.

More and more these days I'm becoming less and less comfortable with making decisions for students, especially children. It is easier for adults to vote with their feet and in general adults are much better at articulating what they want and what they don't want so a walk out need never arise.. In general, compulsory education teaches children to be passive when it comes to doing what adults tell them to do. I feel that actually stores up trouble for society and eventually I hope to be able to articulate why I think so. For now, while I accept that good teachers have a great deal of knowledge and experience about how to learn their subject efficiently, I'm not convinced that gives them the right to control the lesson content.

One idea I've used a few times with adult classes at community centres is to present them with a list of topics and then get them to vote for their favourites. You can download a sample here. The first couple of lessons are usually spent getting to know each other and establish rapport. After that I hand out the sheet and go through it carefully to make sure everyone has grasped the vocabulary and understands what to do. After the vote I tally the results and in the following week present a summary. We then work our way through the topics selected but not in rank order. To do so would leave the least popular topics to last. Instead, I handle the selection taking factors such as variety and language content into account. But I do make sure that the top five topics are covered during the course.

This do it yourself curriculum approach has the effect of balancing teacher power with student interest. The teacher creates the initial set of choices but the students get to decide which of these choices to accept. It is important to have more choices than can be accommodated in the time available otherwise there is no real choice at all. Inevitably a list will reflect the interests of the teacher but that is by no means a bad thing unless the teacher totally rejects variety when drawing up the list. Teaching language is in essence about communication and it makes sense to focus on what we are passionate about or have strong interest in. This is far removed from pushing any particular agenda on students. Having said this, I think the job of the educator is to get students asking questions about their society and culture. What do you think? Should a language teacher stick solely to the topic of teaching language and nothing else? Is that even possible?

While I was writing this, an email plopped into my inbox from Greg Palast. It seems he hasn't forgotten the anniversary either. And it seems at least some of the oil from the spill is still there. As I put at the foot of one handout I made for my students, "Who do you buy your petrol from?"

Share this:

Tweet

Permalink | Leave a comment (1)

Shell, goes farther, burns cleaner!
Great article, refreshing as I am starting up my own class at home and I need this kind of incentive to create a flexible if not sturdy format for all to enjoy.

Dave Haynes | April 21, 2009 9:32 PM

Post a comment

=================================================================
Note: Please use your real name (first and family) when submitting comments.
=================================================================

Your Name:

Your Email:

Website:

Your Comment:

Security Image:

Security Code:

Notify me when new comments are posted:

Tick to activate. You can unsubscribe any time later

 

Comment Preview

• I had a dream...
• Turning Fifty
• Yada!

• Turning Fifty
    - Alex Case
    - Todd Pratum
  
• New Year Resolutions
    - Robert Sieveking
    - Chris (Hunt)
    - Steven Williams
    - Chris (Hunt)
    - Steven Williams
    - Robert Sieveking
  
• The Keyword Game
    - Brett Iimura
    - Renae
    - Steven Williams
    - Chris (Hunt)
  
• Yada!
    - michelle
    - stash
    - Chris (Hunt)
  
• Quitting
    - Jon Otto
    - Chris (Hunt)
  
• Improvisation
    - Dr. Michael Cubbin
  
• Violence
    - Jon Otto
    - Chris (Hunt)
    - Jon Otto
  
• Ambivalence
    - Ben Shearon
  
• Negotiated Syllabi
    - Harry
    - Phil
  
• Mitigating Quietness
    - Alison Miyake
  

• Festivals (1)
• Murmurs (9)
• Quick Activities (10)
• Untried Ideas (5)
• Worksheets (2)