Pier editing to Eliel -- EnglishtextsM

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 15:30:47 06/18/07 Mon
Author: Martinelly Martins
Subject: Pier editing to Eliel
In reply to: Eliel Soares 's message, "Eliel's text task 4" on 14:41:45 06/18/07 Mon

>Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais
>Faculdade de Letras
>Text production
>Adriana Tenuta
>Eliel Soares de Jesus
>
>Task 4
>
>Communicative and Structuralist approaches: What are
>the routes for productive language learning, and what
>is the best of them?
>
>One day(P)a Linguistics Professor told his students how
>he had learnt English. He said the classes he used to
>attend (V) would always be too boring, since the students
>were supposed to know the word lists from the previous
>classes all by heart and they were asked to repeat
>them at the end of the class. That story caused such a
>surprise in the class that students could say nothing
>for a while. It was true that the professor did not
>have such a good English, but all those students liked
>him, he was not an English professor as well.
> �How is it possible to learn to speak a language like
>a parrot?� Said one of those students somewhere in the
>classroom, referring to the drills the professor had
>mentioned.
> �What is the best way to learn a language?� Calmly
>asked the professor with no air of discomfort.
>Actually, that question was made to whoever in the
>classroom wanted to give an answer� Nobody did�
>
>But that question still resounds through those
>students` minds�
>
> Since the 1950�s there has been too much discussion
>on Linguistic, as a consequence, substantial changes
>have happened to the way experts perceive and treat
>knowledge in the field of language studies and its
>teaching. Meanwhile by observing the routes of English
>teaching throughout the world some evidences point to
>the conclusion that Communicative approach, in
>contrast to Structuralist approach, is the best
>alternative to successful Language teaching.
> Activity proposals in the Structuralist approach are
>based on drills, full of repetition, and detached of
>reality. That kind of activity stimulates memory, but
>that is not sufficient to achieve a deeper level of
>assimilation. Evidence can be given by people which (Ww)
>return to English courses nowadays and who had studied
>the language during the 50�s and 60�s. Those people
>may be able to repeat entire lists of words, but
>usually they tend to present difficulties to formulate
>spontaneous utterances. Yet, activities on
>communicative approach are based on contextualized
>learning, less repetitive due to real context
>simulations are often present and there is always a
>relation established with students� reality too.
>Activities like those make students feel themselves as
>part of what they are learning. The point is that,
>both approaches contrasted in this text have their
>specific aims. That is why their activities follow
>such specific models. Automatism and autonomy, what
>contrast one to the other, and self-commitment, what
>they have in common, are the aims of each one.
> If in one hand Structuralist approach aim is that by
>the end the students have automatism (even though
>Structuralist approach presumes that repetition brings
>proficiency), but one of the final aims is automatism.
>Another target proposed by the approach is
>self-commitment, hence all activities demand time to
>be done, by that way students are instructed to look
>for their own improvement, once the practice is
>charged to them alone most of the time. If doubts are
>found, there is always a grammar book as a reference.
>Yet, on the other hand, communicative approach affords
>students to learn by themselves. But this happens in a
>way that students are taught how to think about their
>knowledge construction and also how to criticize it.
>This conjunct of factors generates autonomy. Similar
>to the Structuralist approach, it is mandatory that
>students research and try to overcome their
>difficulties. That is self-commitment. It is true
>that, if they need, the teacher will be a reference to
>help them to solve their doubts and, teachers may not
>only correct their mistakes or give the answer, but
>also they will lead them to other ways of thinking on
>the problems they find. After all, an important remark
>on this point is required. It is necessary to let
>students walk but they will often need a support. In
>other words, the teacher cannot take a stand as if
>he/she possessed all the knowledge, on the contrary,
>he/ she will serve as a facilitator in the process.
>As the third point to be mentioned, considering
>Structuralist approach, the results obtained with the
>kind of teaching in this approach are that students
>may have the contents in their memories. Once memory
>needs exercise, if those students may have problems if
>they stay a long time without contact with the
>language. So it is possible to conclude the final
>result to this approach is reproduction. Students are
>able to copy patterns of sentences with no deep
>reflection at first. The cases in which people who
>learned from this approach acquire skillful language
>are those in which people spend (Wv) some time in intense
>contact with the language, when they assimilate the
>features of the language learnt during the course with
>their use in real situation. And on the other side,
>the results obtained from communicative approach are
>stronger. Students are put in contact with language
>the same way of language acquisition process since the
>beginning of their courses. This approach enables
>students to acquire language in a more natural way, so
>it is harder to have it forgotten and if they stay
>long times without contact with the language, they can
>still understand it and its recuperation occur easier.
>The result obtained from reflection on the practice of
>the language is construction of knowledge, which
>remains for the entire life of people.
>To sum up, to teach someone to speak a foreign
>language is not an easy task and contrasting those two
>approaches, the differences between both of them are
>remarkable. So it is necessary to choose the best
>tools available in order not to have the work lost.
>The contrast proposed in this essay took in to (Sp) (into)
>consideration the main conflicting factors between the
>two methodologies. And finally, it is noticeable that
>Communicative approach resembles natural language
>acquisition, what is a clear evidence of its
>possibility of success.

COMMENT:
Eliel, congratulations! I've really liked your essay, even though there are few mistakes and you haven't put a bibliography for reference. But your ideas were well organized and you managed to discuss them clearly. I have also liked the beginning when you started the essay telling a story, it was very interesting. Was it a turnabout introduction, wasn't it? To conclude, I don't think you will have to do many changes in your essay. See you, Martinelly.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]