Romanian Language Learners of English

I have been teaching at the British Council now in Bucharest for about three months and have throughly enjoyed this period so far.  Naturally, I have learnt various areas of teaching and extended my knowledge and experience of teaching closed groups of monolingual learners.  Prior to arriving in Bucharest, I had very little experience of teaching Romanian learners and had no previous contact with Romania.  Nevertheless, it has been an incredibly interesting and educational period having decided to take a risk and teach a new group of nationalities.

The biggest thing that I have noticed, with to regards to learner expectation, and I do not wish to tarnish all Romanian language learners with the same brush, is that there is a tendency between selected learners having pre-conceived ideas of how a language lesson should be directed/taught/focused.  For example, with a particular group of learners, there is one learner that is constantly willing to vocalise that they wish for more fluency based speaking, yet in 5 minutes the same learner is asking questions about grammar and accuracy.  However, many students are very accommodating and are keen to develop their language learning, are readily available to take risks with English and are genuinely communicative.  The Young Learners that I have been teaching are incredibly enthusiastic and a joy to teach.  They are keen to please the teacher and have some basic grasp of English.  Compared to adult learners, Young Learners are wiling to try various activities but I have noticed one thing about the acquisition of the English alphabet when it comes to Romanians.

Young Learners have a tendency to spell particular words with the Romanian alphabet.  The Romanian alphabet is phonetic with each individual word pronounced.  Romanian spelling sounds very similar when I was learning the English alphabet as a child and even more so when my son was learning to spell.  In English, children learn to spell in two different ways: one variation would be (for A, B, C) aye, bee, see, etc and another would be ahh, bu, su, etc (hopefully you recognise the point I am getting at).  So when I hear Romanians spell in English, with some interference from Romanian, it sounds very strange and just like a very young child.  It is interesting to hear how quickly Romanians can spell words: I heard one student spell a word in half a second.  For English speakers, it would take a little longer to spell the same word.  Naturally, there are some errors between letters (which are more common from other European languages): Romanian learners have a tendency to get confused between 'g' and 'j', 'o' and 'u', or 'e' and 'i', some problematic letters include 'h' (and they pronounce like the French 'h' - 'hash'), 'y' (pronounced again like the French or Spanish).  It was interesting today, I had an intermediate adult learner ask how to spell a particular word and after spelling it (albeit quite slowly), there was still some hesitation about the spelling and the selection of particular letters.

Nevertheless, I have noticed that Romanian learners have previous experience of English language learning but was informed that within the public schooling in Romania that learners are often taught in teacher-centred classrooms, focus more on grammar and less on fluency and have also had experience of a grammar-translation method of language learning.  Saying that though, some Romanians have experience of learning English through the medium of television.  For example, there is the Cartoon Network that is aired (I believe this is still the case) within Romania and the cartoons shown keep with the original audio. Thus, there are selected learners that have greater listening skills, a wide breadth of vocabulary but have little formal teaching of the English language and expect grammar to be taught explicitly.  Naturally, with any learners, there is a balance between satisfying learner expectation and balancing between fluency and accuracy in the classroom.  When I went to a conference at the Romanian American University last week, I had a Romanian English teacher who I chatted to for about 20 minutes about language learning and she offered these wise words about teaching Romanian learners: "I was always told that English teaching is more creative than other traditional subjects but there is an expectation for English to be taught much like traditional subjects".

Finally, the experience that I have gained so far inside and outside the classroom has offered me a new perspective with language learning and teaching.  I am starting to learn in more detail how a 'balanced approach' to learner expectation could develop into something more progressive in the future.  One thing that I have not considered, or read in much detail, is learner expectation of the teacher.  It would be really useful to undertake some form of action research to gain a greater understanding of learner expectation of teachers in Romania, the students' experiences of language learning as well as develop a personal and greater awareness of the individual learners in the classroom.

Further Reflections on the Delivery of Lessons

Last week, whilst trialling English Unlimited with an Intermediate class and I received some learner feedback regarding this particular class and essentially wanted more "interaction, grammar and more direction in the classroom".  Interestingly, the class diverted back to Cutting Edge after a week of trialling English Unlimited and the next topic was related to 2nd Conditionals.

When planning the lesson on Monday, the main thing that kept coming back to me was the line "more direction" and so decided that my lesson was going to be focusing on form with the opportunity to practice with supporting tasks.  I started off the lesson by showing various pictures on the IWB (an obese person, a bald head, Kevin Costner in Water World as well as a few others) and I got learners to choose a picture (which was covered) and then revealed this picture.  I asked these learners "What would you do if you were bald/could breath underwater/etc?" and guided their response with the classic 2nd Conditional form.  Next, I boarded answers that were initially provided on the IWB and I elicited the form of the 2nd Conditional.

Once the form and context was delivered during the lesson, I decided to focus on meaning with the use of a Pass The Paper game (which was inspired by David Deubelbeiss) and created my own 2nd Conditional PowerPoint version.  The prompt was provided on the slide with the "if clause": "If I could fly, ..." and the learners had to complete the prompts.  This part of the lesson was quite interactional and the learners were (from my perception) having fun during this task.  There was a lot of target language being generated from the learners.

After the Pass The Paper game, there was a quick dictation exercise related to modal verbs and the 2nd Conditional as well as percentage figures.  I handed out a text which had the percentage figures missing from it.  I got learners to guess the percentage value and it was related to Britons and Europeans.  After some ideas were elicited, I read out the complete text and got learners to listen in on the values mentioned to see if their predictions were the same as well as focus in on common mistakes (80% and 18%, 30% and 13%, etc) and pronunciation.  After this very short activity, students got together into their groups again and opened their coursebooks for the first time.  The text was one that I had lifted from the coursebook and the grammar that we looked at the beginning of the lesson was also covered on the first page.  So we moved onto a couple of coursebook activities.

The first coursebook activity involved learners completing a survey ("Would you travel on a train without a ticket?" sort of task with possible answers such as "Yes", "No" and "It Depends").  Once all students had completed the survey, they had to compare their answers with the person next to them and discuss any differences as well as reason why they would or wouldn't do a particular thing.  There was a lot of discussion between the groups and some of the target language was being generated during their interaction.  I was at hand to help the learners if required and was just monitoring their discussion.  Once the discussion slowed down a bit, the second task was arranged.  This second task involved a gap fill exercise which focused on the Second Conditional.  Learners had no difficulty completing this task and when they had finished, we checked the answers on the IWB.

The final activity was a discussion activity (again) and I first got learners to look at the questions ("When would ever you steal from a shop?", etc) and jot down possible answers.  Once learners were ready, I paired different students together and got them to ask and answer each other as well as focus on the Second Conditional ("I'd steal from a shop, if my family were starving").  I monitored learners and checked comprehension.  The learners again had no problems generating the Second Conditional and were again quite interactive (one group got on to shopping in English and telling each other where they usually go shopping: more speaking practice for them).  I quite impressed that so many learners were keen to share their opinions.

Nearer the end of the lesson, I handed out the homework which was a grammar exercise on the Second Conditional and another hand out on the comparisons of First and Second Conditional.  The class finished five minutes later than expected but one student came up me at the end of class and mentioned "Thanks for today's lesson, I learnt something today."  So I am now left wondering again what the best approach might be for learners and how to deliver a lesson.  I suppose it does not matter how you deliver the content of the lesson if the aim is the same: to understand the form and practice the Second Conditional.  The main thing to consider is whether learners are happy with the approach that teachers employ during the lesson.  As I mentioned in my previous post about more humanistic forms of teaching, it might require learner training should learners be acquainted to more directional and prescriptive forms of teaching.  On the flip side, the teacher should train him or herself to become more accustomed to different methods and approaches to language teaching.  Yet, I find myself returning back to my original assertion that all good teachers should find a balance in the classroom that is accepted and respected by students.

What is your experience of structured and more eclectic and humanistic forms of teaching?  Which do you prefer and why?  Do you think that grammar should be 'uncovered'?  Why or why not?

Reflecting on Criticisms of Dogme ELT

Thank you to James Taylor that blogged about his reflections regarding my IATEFL talk.  It was interesting to read about his own views and opinions that developed during the talk in Glasgow.  James' blog post has inspired me to reflect more on the criticisms that are voiced with Dogme ELT and possible resolutions to them.

Dogme ELT, also known as Teaching Unplugged, seems to be gaining more and more interest at conferences as well as provoking quite a bit of debate.  I remember attending Jeremy Harmer's talk at the BETLE Conference last year and Jeremy gave a very interesting and energetic talk introducing the concept of teaching unplugged.  Jeremy introduced some videos from teachers sharing their experiences of Dogme ELT.  It was a wonderful decision and made the whole talk much more interactive.  Obviously, there has been an extensive blog post about the criticisms of Dogme ELT and is available to read which looks at various issues.

Some common criticisms include the assertion that Dogme ELT is a lazy form of teaching.  Included, there is the assumption that students will also consider a teacher was under-prepared if the teacher decided to incorporate a 'Dogme lesson'.  In order to look at this assertion critically, one needs to consider the role of the teacher in the classroom.  Harmer suggests in his book "The Practice of English Language Teaching" that there are various roles of the teacher including 'facilitator', 'controller', 'organiser' and 'assessor'.  For those teachers that are incorporating Dogme ELT in the classroom, teachers are required to incorporate many of the teacher roles above and reacting to exploratory moments in the language classroom.  As a teacher that "intersperses their teaching with 'Dogme moments'", I am always monitoring learner production with language in the classroom and then, if the situation is necessary, scaffolding language and drilling appropriately.

In reflection, I have become more flexible in my approach to teaching and have developed techniques which prompt learners to authentically interact (whether material is imported into the classroom with the use of the coursebook or otherwise).  More often than not, I have been required to use a coursebook in class and with this flexibility to incorporate a 'balanced approach', I am not bound by the text on the page and am willing to go on a journey with my learners.  This decision to flexibly apply the key tenets of 'Dogme ELT' (also known as good teaching), is anything but lazy.  It is not necessarily making my life easier but it is stretching my knowledge and understanding of language learning and the appropriacy of this technique in the classroom.  When teachers decide to sprinkle in Dogme ELT in their classroom and used effectively, it is a difficult task.  Teachers are required to develop techniques which maintain learner interest and purpose for when teachers respond to opportunistic areas of language learning.

Such techniques include improving drilling, elicitation techniques, feedback activities, monitoring as well as activities that could prompt learners to interact effectively with minimal teacher influence.  I have developed elicitation, feedback and monitoring activities and found the development a long process requiring constant reflection and experimentation.  However, there have been cases in the UK whereby learners were discussing a topic and this developed into quite a debate.  My main role in this case was as 'assessor' and I was boarding language, monitoring for error correction and contributing to the debate.  Nevertheless, as I mentioned earlier, the role of the teacher is not set in stone and the teacher could take on many different roles during the lesson.

So I return back to the question, why is Dogme ELT a lazy form of teaching?  Well granted learners could view teachers that incorporate Dogme-esque moments in the lesson as lazy: "He just let us talk.  Why didn't the teacher teach us something?"  I suppose an important aspect whenever incorporating a learner-centred approach to teaching is learner training.  Tudor (1996) suggests that learner training assists "learners to acquire the knowledge and skills they need in order to assume a self-directive role in their language study" (p.40-41).  In other words, teaching any learner-centred approach respects an equal relationship between the learners and the teacher.  However, if a structured course is delivered over a period of time, the teacher is seen as directing the show and learners are quickly trained to become passive learners.  Some teachers may find it challenging to implement a more 'facilitatory' role in their classroom.  Tudor (1996) encapsulates this idea more accurately:

On the one hand, some teachers may find it difficult to let go of what they have been trained to see as their role of decision-maker, and may feel uneasy about transferring responsibility for pedagogic decisions to their students.  Equally well, however, a teacher who is strongly committed to fostering self-direction may find that her students are resistant to assuming an independent role in their learning, and may want the teacher to play a more directive or possibly even a more authoritarian role than she might wish to. (Tudor 1996, p.41).

In my opinion, lazy teaching is one where teachers are essentially delivering the 'fast food' of language education: delivering chunks of grammar, being on autopilot and walking out of a lesson having difficulty remembering what had been taught, as well as just going through the motions and teaching the coursebook, not the learners.  A good example I came across included the idea that some teachers which teach at a summer school at the same place and deliver the same lesson are essentially repeating the same experience.  Thus, they have 1 year experience but it is repeated 10 times.  A professional yet active teacher would be doing the opposite and in my opinion incorporating elements of Dogme ELT or other forms of humanistic elements of teaching.  It is interesting to note that the main criticism of laziness does not really question "Is Dogme ELT good for learning?" but focuses solely on the teacher rather than the learners.  Nevertheless, this leads me on to my next point.

One of the most misleading facts of Dogme ELT is the idea that teachers that wish to incorporate Dogme have to throw the coursebook out of the window, or as others have suggested is that the coursebook should be burnt.  This probably stems from the idea that 'materials light' is reducing all materials and working with whatever the learners bring into the classroom.  However, 'materials light' is not, as some others point out, 'materials free'.  Granted, the original 10 Vows of Chastity was used as a template for those willing to practice a new form of teaching.  Nevertheless, within Teaching Unplugged materials are required such as newspapers, post-it notes, books, etc and so developed into something less rigid and more flexible in due course.

As a teacher, I am required to use the coursebook as students pay a lot of money for their course as well as all supporting material, and expect the course to be delivered with reference to their coursebook.  I suppose the advantage for many teachers to refer to the coursebook is that it provides a safety net, a sense of structure and allows newly certified or less experimental teachers the opportunity to deliver a structured lesson.  Another advantage for learners or teachers is that there is a sense of predictability, learners are able to track their progress and study what had been delivered in the classroom.  One final advantage is that grammar is delivered in what is perceived as required by publishing experts and is reinforced with controlled practice.

However, the disadvantages of the coursebook could include that lessons are too prescriptive, grammar is literally forced down the throat of the learners and until they start to spit it back, the tasks are predictable and test learner knowledge/understanding rather than learner acquisition.  Furthermore, when teachers decide to deliver a lesson based on the material presented in the coursebook rather than reacting and delivering a lesson what learners actually require, these decisions 'deskill' teachers (Hall 2011 p.214).  Should teachers decide to just base their lesson on the material or a particular coursebook, it hinders the potential for exploratory teaching.  I suppose there is the opportunity to find a middle-ground or balance between coursebook usage and more humanistic forms of teaching in the classroom.  I suppose I have questioned why those teachers that decide to incorporate Dogme ELT in their lessons cannot use the coursebook.  For critics, the easy option is for them to either criticise the lack of coursebook in the classroom or criticise on the perceived 'double standards' that Dogme-ticians could have.  However, as I mentioned before, why can't teachers decide to do both?

Finally, what I propose for teachers that either support or criticise the principles of Dogme ELT is what I refer to as a 'balanced approach'.  I would rather deliver a 'balanced' lesson that recognises opportunities to exploit 'emergent language' as well as learner expectation.  With this 'balanced approach', there is nothing wrong with teachers deciding to incorporate a coursebook in the lesson but equally there is nothing wrong with incorporating a lighter approach to language teaching.  Teachers may say that they already do this but I suggest offering a title for good teaching.  Further information regarding this proposed 'balanced approached' can be read in my MA dissertation and I hope that this blog post answers some of the lingering questions or queries that were raised during my IATEFL talk and supports those also raised with James' Taylors blog post.

What's The Best Approach?

This evening, I decided to trial English Unlimited (which is published by Cambridge University Press) with my Intermediate learners.  Interestingly, I was studying my MA at the University of Sussex with one coauthor of the series of English Unlimited and she gave a wonderful talk about the process of writing and developing a course book.  Nevertheless, today the trial chapter that I decided to incorporate in my lesson was about money.  Chapter 6 of English Unlimited starts off very topical and there is some natural grammar that emerges during the initial stages of the lesson.  For example, students were required to share ideas about saving money and this included phrases such as "instead of ...", "whenever ...", etc.  These phrases are reinforced later in the lesson and find the course book incredibly useful.  It makes a change to the whole PPP module of Cutting Edge and grammar in English Unlimited is not necessarily explicit which allows teachers (as well as learners) to uncover grammar when required.  Personally, my pet hate is teaching grammar explicitly and then allowing learners controlled practice with target language/grammar. Firstly, it is unnatural and secondly it is not appropriate for learners wishing to connect with the language that they are learning.

Nevertheless, the lesson was rather interactional (in my opinion) and learners were willing to communicate with their partners.  I didn't re-group learners in the classroom and the students were quite happy to sit where they were.  I suppose I wondered: why try to change something that isn't broken?  The first stage of the lesson developed naturally: I boarded some common phrases associated with money for example, "Money is the root of all evil", "Money makes the world go round", etc.  Students were discussing the meaning of six phrases and whether they agreed or disagreed with them.  This offered a context for the topic of the lesson and I handed out the trial material for the lesson.  The first part of the course book was about a lady who decided to survive on £1 per day.  It was an interesting topic and provoked a lot of debate.  The initial reading offered learners to share their opinions (so more talking and interaction) and then we moved on to the next stage of the lesson.

The second stage of the lesson I got learners to write their own ideas on how to save money.  Students were quite interested in this topic and were starting to write down a number of ideas.  After a few minutes, I got learners to share their opinions and debate again whether their ideas were practical and appropriate.  There were some interesting ideas emerging and I got learners to share their ideas by coming up to the board and writing their opinions on the board.  Instead of nominating learners, I got learners to nominate themselves (why should the teacher decide who to nominate?).  Nonetheless, after a while there were a number of ideas and there were a few which required correction.  Students were offered an opportunity to correct in their own time.

The next part of the lesson required learners to complete sentences associated with money but also with clauses: "instead of", "whenever", "if", etc.  I showed learners their own sentences from the beginning of the lesson to demonstrate grammar that had emerged from the class earlier and that they had to complete the sentences with particular phrases such as "Re-use shopping bags ...", "You should walk or hitchhike ...", etc.  Obviously, some language emerged from these sentences and learners were aware of the rules required to construct appropriate sentences by use of the prompts in the course book.  I should mention that English Unlimited is the first course book that I have felt comfortable with when teaching in the classroom.  Normally with course books, I am required to supplement heavily but with English Unlimited it requires minimal preparation and encourages conversation and interaction.

Nevertheless, the next part of the lesson focused on a reading activity.  I got learners to read about a lady that survived on £1 per day and underline/highlight vocabulary that they were unaware of.  Some vocabulary that emerged during this activity included "drag out", "mates", etc.  After a few minutes describing the meanings of particular words, I got learners to read the text and answer questions about the text.  The learners were quite focused and I had nearly finished the class with about 10 minutes to spare.  So I decided to incorporate a debate int he classroom (or so I had envisaged).  I wrote the following:

Discuss in your group the following advantages or disadvantages and mention whether you agree or disagree:
1. Credit cards
2. Mortgages
3. Loans
4. Charity shops
5. Haggling


The learners were debating in their groups and they were quite happy to focus on the above.  Some wonderful language emerged including: "interest rates", "deposit", etc.  Learners were quite happy to share their opinions and the classroom was getting more and more vocal.  By the end of the lesson, learners appeared to be quite happy and I handed out the supplementary material to support the trial course book and requested learners to complete particular activities for homework.  As learners were packing up to head off home, I was called over to one table.  As learners were drifting out of the classroom, I decided to speak to a particular table.  I was then told by these learners that they were not necessarily content with the lesson and that they wanted to have more speaking, interaction, grammar and more direction in the classroom.  Retrospectively, these learners are all new at the British Council and I told them that if they wanted more time with the teacher, I would be required to share about 5 minutes per student on average to ensure that that each learner had an opportunity to interact with the teacher.  Next, the issue of grammar was raised and I requested learners to tell me what grammar that we had looked at.  Predictably, they showed that they demonstrated awareness of what had been taught in the lesson and showed me that they had covered clauses.  Next, they proceeded to debate about vocabulary but then I got these learners to share vocabulary that had been covered in the lesson that they had learnt.  Predictably, learners showed awareness of this and decided to demonstrate knowledge by telling lexis related to the above lesson.

I suppose this is the first time (perhaps in a very long time) that I have had groups of learners debating about the methodology incorporated in the classroom.  Pedagogically, I would not wish to put learners on the spot and prefer to give them space so that they can have enough space to gather their thoughts and construct their ideas into formation, whether it is written or orally.  Personally, I gave space to learners to interact with one another as well as to write down vocabulary.  It was a structured lesson but with the possibility for flexibility and this was shown in the language that emerged during the lesson.  Personally, I am rather gutted that selected learners decided to debate the pedagogy that I incorporated in the classroom and could possibly not see the benefit.  Fortunately, on Thursday I have a class observation and I am hoping that the observer confirms that I am actually incorporating a method/approach that is conducive for language learning.  I am planning to use a 'dictogloss' activity in the classroom as well as mix up the class a little bit so that they are not sitting next to their usual classmates.  Perhaps the predictability and expected classroom layout breed contempt for the teacher.  It is interesting to note that traditionally in Romania, English was usually taught through the use of grammar translation (perhaps not as different to South Korea), and the teacher is usually seen as the pilot of a airplane, thereby students expect some direction to be given to their learning.  As a Dogme-tician, I try to develop a lesson that is conducive not only to communicative opportunity but focus on possible emergent language.

I should note that I was assured that some new learners have a tendency to complain about particular aspects of teaching in our Centre and I suppose I should try to incorporate some learner training so that students are aware of the reasons why I use particular techniques in the classroom.  The British Council teachers that were supportive were wonderful and I feel a real sense of accomplishment when sharing experiences with fellow teachers.  It would be wonderful to hear other teachers' stories of complaints from the classroom.

The Experience of the TYLEC Course

Coffee and Trainee Handbook handed out on the first day.

The TYLEC Course (also known as the Trinity Young Learners Extension Course) is designed to offer experienced teachers further professional development.  The course itself offers teachers the opportunity to share ideas, offer advice as well as provide the foundation to develop as a teacher with Young Learners.  I was given the opportunity to undertake a part-time 12 week TYLEC Course at the British Council Bucharest and am now in my fifth week of the course.

There are about twelve teachers taking the course (all of which have varying degrees of experience, qualifications, and qualities).  I decided to take the TYLEC Course primarily as the last time I had taught very young learners was about five years ago in South Korea and I was aware that it was expected that some teachers at the British Council in Bucharest are required to teacher this age group.  When I was in Korea, it was incredibly rewarding teaching YLs and even more rewarding noticing their development in English.  The British Council's primary client base around the world is Young Learners (henceforth YL).  Thus, it makes professional sense to develop oneself in YL teaching and education.

Nevertheless, the first week of the course was the usual GTKY activity and an introduction into SLA (Second Language Acquisition) Theory.  Although this area of language theory was echoed in my MA course, there was some personal benefit to attend this session and to learn the relationship of SLA theory with YL language education.  All trainees were given an itinerary of class observations as well as scheduled days for trainers to observe trainees.  The observations include watching selected videos.  Watching teachers (either on video or live in the classroom) is something that I regard as invaluable for any possible development in the classroom.  For example, I was watching the video lessons the other day (albeit a little late due to other commitments) and was watching a particular lesson being taught to a group of elementary YLs.  I found the lesson staging, setup and activities quite inspiring and have now planned a lesson for a group of absolute beginners using the various techniques that she employed during the lesson.

In reflection, teaching very YLs is quite different to teaching adult learners in as much that children are always seeking to please the teacher, are intrinsically motivated (instead of being motivated to learn a language in order to achieve a promotion) and also lose interest much quicker.  When planning lessons with YLs (outside the remit of the TYLEC Course), the main aim of the lesson is to teach a particular language item but it is divided by many smaller activities.  If the lesson was seen as a boat, the activities raise the YL's interest, settle them down with controlled activities, pick their interest with another activity and then settle them down with another relaxed activity.  However, teaching teenagers is another 'kettle of fish'.

Last week, the training included aspects to teaching vocabulary.  It was quite an interesting area and something that I have developed with all learners through the use of Wordle, word search puzzles and crosswords.  An additional aspect to the previous week's TYLEC Course included learning more about learner styles.  This obviously introduced varying degrees of learner capability.  It was interesting and something that I have not really considered previously but was aware of it.  Nonetheless, tomorrow's session will undoubtedly be invaluable and will develop knowledge and understanding of YL education.

Finally, it is incredibly rewarding to incorporate various activities, ideas and techniques that was inspired from the course.  For example, I have never really found it quite comfortable to use chants or songs in the YL classroom.  I have forced myself to incorporate songs or chants in the classroom and play them as background music whilst learners are completing tasks or projects.  It is nice to hear the children sing along to the chants/songs during the lesson.  Later this month, I have some lessons to observe with fellow trainees and experienced YL teachers and cannot wait.  However, I still have much to learn and look forward to developing myself as a Young Learner Teacher.

IATEFL 2012: Horror in the Classroom by Lucy Williams

On the flight to Glasgow

Having arrived safely in Glasgow for my IATEFL talk tomorrow, I had a chance to attend one of the last talks for Thursday.  Having looked at the schedule, I decided to attend the talk given by Lucy Williams named "An ELT Horror Story".  My initial feeling was that this talk was about a teacher's experience in a particular country and suggested recommendations to limit 'horror stories' from emerging within one's career.  However, when I walked in to the conference room about 15 people had turned up for the talk and it was about incorporating horror in the classroom aimed for possible teenagers or young adults.  The talk was to hold about 100 people, but possible reasoning why it was not that popular could be related to some other big names giving a talk at the same time.  It was liberating to show some support for the small fish in the big pond of ELT, yet I have never incorporated horror in the classroom and I can't wait to exploit this in the classroom.

Adjectives used to describe horror movies

Nevertheless, the talk was supported by Macmillan and their website OnestopEnglish.  They were promoting their new developments of the horror reading and listening series on their teachers' website.  All attendees were given some access to the material which is to be published in the next few months.  Lucy gave an energetic and humorous talk about horror and generated interest by getting attendees to share their experiences of horror stories from their own country.  All I could muster was to refer to "The Lady in Black" and "Jack The Ripper".  This was supported by guess the movie title by showing corresponding movie posters.  She showed a word cloud of various adjectives used to describe horror movies.

Next attendees were introduced to a new listening activity which supports and develops the "Live in London" series of podcasts, the 2012 Olympics, etc.  This listening series introduces students to different areas of London through the use of a "Ghost Guide to London" (which should be available for download on the OnestopEnglish website in the next few months).  Lucy played the initial introduction of the Ghost Guide and I was impressed by the sound effects, the atmosphere that it creates and the voice actor is wonderful.  I immediately started to think how this could be incorporated in the classroom and some ideas were to get students to close their eyes, dim the lights, and get them to listen to the Ghost Guide.  After listening, you could get students to draw what they saw and describe/share this with other learners.  I can't wait to incorporate this in the classroom and it is great to see how OnestopEnglish is developing with new material.

The next part of the talk was about the story series and attendees were given a listening worksheet to complete (as part of a pre-listening activity) and fill or predict what to write in the gaps.  This was related to a spooky borror story and it was wonderful.  There are various lessons and materials to be exploited with teenagers, young adults and selected adults.  The story was split into chapters with extra material available to download such as the audio, multimedia websites, video as well as blogs.  The technology really exploits and encourages learners to immerse themselves in the story.  This got me thinking about how iPads and eBooks could be used to develop immersive and engaging lessons.  It would be wonderful to create to a lesson for learners to follow that is accessible on the iPad to gauge how effective it will be in the language classroom.

The SECC where IATEFL is this year

Finally, things were wrapped up and that was the end of the talk and it was great to be introduced to various lesson ideas as well as possible material to be available at a later date.  I can't wait to attend more talks tomorrow, but tomorrow is the big day with my talk about Dogme ELT, so I might not be able to see as many as I would like.  Unfortunately, I haven't had much chance to meet many people (as compared to last year) but I hope that tomorrow I am able to meet more people.  I hope everyone is having a great time in Glasgow and looking forward to reading more about the talks various people have attended.

Packing for my Flight

At the moment, I am organising my things for the IATEFL Conference and packing everything that I need for my week back in the UK.  I will be seeing family and friends for the first part of the week and obviously be catching up with all the IATEFL news from the website.  My plan is to fly into Glasgow on Thursday, watch a couple of talks, meet some friends and fellow teachers.  The following day is the big day for me: it is my first big talk for IATEFL.  Naturally I am nervous but I have trialled the talk the past few months and I am pretty sure everything will work.

However, my wife treated me to a new Macbook Air before I went to Romania and I have prepared my talk with Keynote but I realised that I needed a projector adapter.  This has been ordered but it has been delivered to my address in the UK.  Unfortunately, I haven't had a chance to try the new adapter so I am keeping my fingers crossed that it will deliver my presentation with no hiccups.  If there are any hiccups, I will have to do it Dogme style.  I am hoping to try out the presentation to ensure everything is working the day before.  At least this will settle any doubts.  Nevertheless, I am looking forward to meeting some great people at the conference.  I can't believe that it was only last year that I was working as a steward at the IATEFL Brighton.  It was a wonderful opportunity to meet some fellow teachers.

I hope everyone that is travelling to the conference has a safe journey to Glasgow and the pictures that I have seen, as well as the chatter, on Twitter suggests that it could be a great conference.  Happy networking and hope to see you all soon.