How can we teach grammar in classroom?
Deductive or inductive? I guess inductive way is better one. Deductive way is somewhat traditional way of teaching English grammar. Teacher’s explanation is a main method of deductive way. However, students are normally bored when they are just listening to teacher’s explanation. What is more, grammar is boring subject itself. Students became less motivated.
So, to motivate student intrinsically and not to be bored, students have to participate in the class. Inductive way is the method that students find grammatical knowledge themselves in CLT based class. If students find knowledge themselves, they can remember it longer. Normally, inductive way is mixed with other techniques, such as discussion, game, etc. By integrating with other activities, students will be interested in participation. By participating in the activities, they can discover the grammatical knowledge themselves, they can learn the knowledge.
Of course, I would like to emphasize again that grammar teaching should be integrated with other activities. Grammar only is not an ideal situation, because it is not very fascinating subject to students.
Therefore, I assert teaching and learning grammar should follow integrated inductive way.
2009년 12월 15일 화요일
2009년 12월 1일 화요일
My ideas about teaching reading and vocabulary...
I think we have to focus on meaning while we are teaching reading to students. For that, silent reading may be better. I think 'reading aloud' is not much worth. We can check students' pronunciation by teaching speaking.
I can read Japanese characters but I don't know what the passage means. Because I've only learned how to read each characters of Japanese, Hiragana and Katakana. It is not a real reading. Purpose of teaching reading should pursue finding meaning of the text. 'Able to read loudly' doesn’t seem enough.
By the way, I think vocabulary is the basic of language as well. If you don't know the word, you can't use the word when you are writing and speaking, you can't hear when you are listening, and you can't understand the meaning of the word when you are reading. Thus, vocabulary is the highest value to teach, in my opinion.
However, vocabulary only is not good way to teach. Many Korean students use a vocabulary book or unknown word lists to memorize that. And there are many different ways to remember words. It is not very effective way. Teaching and learning vocabulary should be integrated in teaching other 4 skills. Of course, the method or approach of teaching 4 skills would be CLT.
Korean classroom is grammar-dominated. It is not much authentic. Therefore, I suggest we have to teach English in authentic context and the method may be CLT. Then, teaching vocabulary should be mixed in the CLT class.
I can read Japanese characters but I don't know what the passage means. Because I've only learned how to read each characters of Japanese, Hiragana and Katakana. It is not a real reading. Purpose of teaching reading should pursue finding meaning of the text. 'Able to read loudly' doesn’t seem enough.
By the way, I think vocabulary is the basic of language as well. If you don't know the word, you can't use the word when you are writing and speaking, you can't hear when you are listening, and you can't understand the meaning of the word when you are reading. Thus, vocabulary is the highest value to teach, in my opinion.
However, vocabulary only is not good way to teach. Many Korean students use a vocabulary book or unknown word lists to memorize that. And there are many different ways to remember words. It is not very effective way. Teaching and learning vocabulary should be integrated in teaching other 4 skills. Of course, the method or approach of teaching 4 skills would be CLT.
Korean classroom is grammar-dominated. It is not much authentic. Therefore, I suggest we have to teach English in authentic context and the method may be CLT. Then, teaching vocabulary should be mixed in the CLT class.
피드 구독하기:
글 (Atom)