Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Developing materials for speaking skill

    Uploaded by

    Minh Sang Nguyễn
    1 views18 pages
    Developing materials for speaking skill

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Developing materials for speaking skill

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    1 views18 pages

    Developing materials for speaking skill

    Uploaded by

    Minh Sang Nguyễn
    Developing materials for speaking skill

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 18
    20 Developing Materials for Speaking Skills Dat Bao his chapter first highlights some prevalent methodological trends that have T. influenced and shaped many essential components in the development of material design for spoken language. Second, a practical framework is proposed for designing materials for speaking skills. Then, the chapter presents a rational for effective instructional materials for the discussed skills, proposes a set of criteria for evaluating materials for speaking, and finally throws light on some methodological aspects that deserve further scholarly attention. Overview Setting the scene: Speaking skills and the need for relevant materials One way to understand the notion of speaking skills, as suggested by Bygate (1987 pp. 5-6), is by viewing them in two basic aspects: motorreceptive skills and interaction skills. The former involves a mastering of sounds and structures not necessarily in any particular context. The latter involves making decisions about what and how to say things in specific communicative situations to convey the right intentions or maintain relationships. This perception can be further understood by observing that these two sets of skills must not represent ‘clearcut distinctions’ (Littlewood, 1981, p. 16) or ‘two-stage operations’, but from the start structure must be taught in relation to use (Wohnson, 1982, p. 22). Moreover, much research on language awareness also suggests that the teaching sequence does not have to be structures before communication of 408 DEVELOPING MATERIALS FOR LANGUAGE TEACHING meanings, but content-based activities can organize for learners to experience and respond to meanings first. Arguably, speaking skills are best developed when learners. learn to eventually take control of their own performance from an insider perspective (e.g. from the learnen), rather than being constantly dictated by external manipulation (e.g. by the teacher). Second language materials, as viewed by Tomlinson (2010, 2011), should be created not only by writers but also by teachers and learners, in a creative process which stretches to the real classroom. Tomlinson’s perception coincides nicely with Nunan’s. (1989) view that teaching communication should be seen as a process rather than a set of products. It is also closely related to what Breen (1984, p. 47) calls the ‘process syllabus’. According to this syllabus, when materials are scripted by a writer, they appear in the form of a predesigned plan rather than the final production and are open to reinterpretation by the users of that plan, for example teachers and learners. Both the designer's original construction and the users’ reinterpretation of this plan have the right to join each other in a creative process shaped by participant experiences, attitudes and knowledge. It is through such interaction that predesigned sketches can be best processed and earn conditions to develop into appropriate materials that, promote language learning. In other words, task implementation in the classroom serves as a practical tool for relevant materials to be jointly created. This understanding helps explain why many coursebook activities composed from the writer's own assumptions while disregarding the users of the books often have problems working in the real classroom. It also explains why adaptation of coursebooks. is constantly called into play, especially when the writer's vision of classroom process fails to harmonize with the teacher's vision, the learner's needs and the local contexts. Ideally, if materials are constructed for speaking skills, the interactive process by the designer and the users should take place through speaking, since it would be ntealistic for participants to simply sit there and silently imagine how talk might work from a written script. Section 4 of this chapter will return to this issue with proposals. for assessing the quality of materials for speaking, Trends in materials for speaking skills Arguably, trends in material design progress in parallel with trends in methodology. This should not surprise us since activities in coursebooks are precisely where principle and practice are brought together. In fact, materials published over the past five decades have been clear indicators of how the key principles of communicative approaches are incorporated into speaking activities. Although this chapter limits itself to spoken language, it does not seem possible at the moment to separate general trends in materials for speaking from those for other basic skills, since these materials are all subject to similar debates. If in the mid-1960s, the learning of linguistic systems was emphasized as the main method to master a second language (Johnson, 1982), the 1970s witnessed a DEVELOPING MATERIALS FOR SPEAKING SKILLS 403 ‘communicative revolution’ (McDonough, 1993, p. 20) in which ‘meaningful activities’ (Mogkridge-Fong, 1979, p. 91) replaced mechanical language exercises. This change, however, was not perceived by many teachers and learners as a beneficial revolution at all since it took away all the confidence learners used to have thanks to what they perceived as systematic and sufficient grammatical input. In view of this, the 1980s saw attempts to make the communicative approach less extreme, so as not to put too much emphasis on use and ignore the learners’ need for linguistic knowledge (Morrow, 1983; Scott, 1983; Swan, 1983, 1985; Dubin and Olshtain, 1986). Examples of the reaction against the strong version of the communicative approach were the criticism that the new methodology was attempting to replace the structural approach {Dubin and Olshtain, 1986); the criticism that in fact the new method had not made the learning of grammatical knowledge any easier than before (Swan, 1985); and the appeal not to deny the value of a structural framework in supporting rules for use (Scott, 1983). Alongside these debates, scholarly efforts were invested in how to harmonize the opposing tendencies, by considering the fact that form and use in second language teaching should not be mutually exclusive. By virtue of this compromise view, the early 1990s saw the idea of a multidimensional syllabus becoming more explicitly and systematically addressed, which opened up new possibilities for encompassing a more comprehensive series of teaching dimensions such as functions and notions, roles and skills, themes and situations. The main purpose of this type of syllabus, as pointed out by (McDonough and Shaw, 1993, p. 50), is ‘to build on a range of communicative criteria at the same time as acknowledging the need to provide systematic practice in the formal proprieties of the language’. ‘The recognition of leamer differences and the importance of divergent responses in learning have been reflected in materials developments over the decades. Educators and materials writers alike demonstrated a tendency to resist activities in which discussions invite right and wrong answers because that would reduce learning complexity (see, for example, Turner and Patrick, 2004; Meyer and Turner, 2006; Patrick et al., 2007; Graff, 2009). Learning complexity has also been demonstrated in today’s English language teaching materials when they are no longer represented in a single textbook but come as a multidimensional package (Littlejohn, 1998; McKay and Tom, 1999; Lyons, 2003) and this expanded view is @ response to the evolving of pedagogical beliefs (Murray, 2003) as well as a reaction to the implementation of all the technological advances in the industry to the extent that it seems like a stand- alone textbook could become a thing of the past. The concept ‘textbook’ might imply that teachers are somehow ‘deficient’ in their ability and knowledge and thus have to solely rely on the textbook as their primary source of knowledge. A textbook can become a ‘tyrant’ within the classroom (Williams, 1983), demanding there be no room for deviation from it or for personalized learning, Since the classroom environment is often not heterogeneous but mixed to some degree in linguistic proficiency, interpersonal skill, age, academic background, gender, personality, language aptitude, learning style and other factors (see, for example, Woodward, 2001), one of the major concerns of language materials is the capability of 410 DEVELOPING MATERIALS FOR LANGUAGE TEACHING ‘catering for the diversity of needs which exists in most language classrooms’ (Nunan, 1991, p. 209). Language teaching is full of choices and alternatives (Dougill, 1987; Graves, 2001), and no one is totally sure of which way is right. For an example of this trend, let us examine three activity samples that deal with a similar theme, namely describing objects, taken from three English coursebooks published in 1978, 1991 and 1999. In Streamline English (Hartley and Viney, 1978, 1996), Lesson 6: A Nice Flat (see Figure 20.1) students are asked to describe a room from a given picture. There is no freedom of choice and hardly any peer interaction involved in this task since all information comes directly from the same visual. Every learner performs the same role. In Interchange — English for international Communication. Book 3, Activity ‘Same or Different?’ in Unit 12 (Richards, Hull and Proctor, 1991) students are provided with several sets of pictures depicting different object items and invited to discover how these items differ by asking each other questions. This activity utilizes the decoding and encoding of information gaps, which encourages students to exchange factual data. There is still no freedom of choice but at least learners are given the opportunity to interact for a purpose. There are two different roles to perform: information seeker and information provider. In Language in Use Pre-Intermediate (Dott and Jones, 2002), Activity 1 of Unit 3: Talking about Places (see Figure 20.2) invites learners to look at a picture of five different doors and imagine the rooms behind them. Since there are no right or wrong answers, students are encouraged to process meanings from their own experiences and perspectives. Besides providing freedom of choice, this material takes learners beyond the level of information gap into two new areas: reasoning gap, which involves deriving data by inference and perception, and opinion gap, which encourages personal feelings and attitudes. Many examples like this one can be found across coursebooks over the years. They demonstrate a shift from mechanical rehearsal of language structure to more interactive exchange of factual information, and another shift from interactive exchange of factual information to more dynamic processing of personal opinions. It has to be admitted, however, that changes in course materials do not always represent a move from the out-of-date to the latest, but may happen in reverse. For example, it is observed by Tomlinson (1998) that sometimes a coursebook sells successfully not because it has something new to offer, but because it goes back to what is old. By and large, many conscious efforts for improvement made by course-writers over the decades have enabled materials design to evolve towards increasingly sophisticated levels. Sometimes such evolution causes practitioners to feel worried about how to handle all this sophistication effectively in teaching. For example, in the 1980s, some theorists believed that the more sophisticated the syllabus, the more difficult to implement it in the classroom (Eskey, 1984). However, materials development in recent years tends to prove the opposite: as course design becomes more thoughtful, DEVELOPING MATERIALS FOR SPEAKING SKILLS an core 1 Face otin te nom, Ter it rai the Bing-room. Wte sentences wih: Telepnone 3 cupboara 2enair ‘atabie Exercise Exercises Exorcies books ragaziootabie? Wer are the bottles? Theyre onthe shat. ‘Therearesomebookson theshal. Te theea magazine onthe abe? Where'the chair? isin the vngoom. cups books/selt? ‘Answer the questions: ‘There aren'tany cupson the she. Arethereany books on the spe? —-—«‘Mamerthequesions Wire sentences with: te questions wit: 2 Whereare he gasses? T'olsees 3 magazines radoisne 43 Were are he books? Biecorss 4 bots 2 botieatabie ‘Snare’ hese? FIGURE 20.1 A nice flat. Source: Hastlet,B. and Viney, P (1996), Streamline English ~ Departure (38th edn). Oxford: Oxford University Press it also tries to make language teaching easier in the classroom by aiming for less ‘teacher preparation (e.g. by improving teachers’ manuals). Examining publishers’ claims over several decades is another way to recognize change in materials development. It shows us a gradual transfer from a strictly communicative focus towards a more balanced view in teaching both grammar and communication, justified on the grounds that form and use are not necessarily two opposing areas. For example, during the late 1960s and early 1970s, such expressions as ‘real-life contexts’, ‘functionally based’, ‘meaningful and effective communication’ are seen to fulfill publishers’ claims; then since the early 1990s, the key concepts have included ‘systematic development in combination with other three skills practice’, ‘core grammar structures’ and ‘different learning styles and teaching situations’ (McDonough and Shaw, 1993, pp. 22, 25, 46). Textbooks in today’s context, apart from being communicative, have a tendency to focus on themes of global significance and harmless topics to suit as many contexts as possible. They take care not to touch on cross-culturally sensitive and controversial topics that may cause damage to any set of cultural values (see, for example, Sampedro and Hillyard, 2004). However, in trying to be culturally harmless and free from provocation, materials often remove excitement (Leather, 2003), romanticize the world (Banegas, 2010) and introduce 412 DEVELOPING MATERIALS FOR LANGUAGE TEACHING Talking about places 1 Behind the door There are hat got 1 Look at these two doors, What rooms do you think are behind them? Read the semences ia the bor. Which room do they describe? Could any sentences desenbe both @ There # map on the wall ‘b There's an ashen, There's 4 video in the corner

    You might also like