Topics:A. The Memorization Question
B. Points in Favor of Memorization
C. Hesitations About Use of Memorization
D. Memorization Techniques
E. Is FL Learning Recall or Memorization?
F. Memorization and Research
G. Personal Experiences with Memorization
Apparently most FL Teachers have had to memorize in FL instruction.
Many
enjoyed the experience and feel that it was important in their progress
with the FL. Others, while often expressing some enjoyment or profit
from mandatory memorization from their own student days, spurn its
use
in FL instruction except for very minor roles.
Setting the question for us are three letters: one asking for ideas
about how to best accomplish the memorization of dialogues (in a
situation where that was specifically required by superiors), while
the
second asking the old, old question of why any FL teacher should bother
with memorization of dialogues. Finally, one teacher sets forth some
doubts about what some of her best students can do, when compared with
her daughter, whose teacher relies upon memory training.
======================
95/09 From -> Laura <kimotol@hawaii.edu>
Subject: dialogue memorization
Hi folks,
Does anyone have any good ideas on how to have a class of 20+ students
present memorized dialogues from a textbook? For accuracy's sake, I'd
prefer to have each one come to me in pairs, but to save time it might
be better to have them (all of them) do the dialogue at the same time,
while I circulate around the classroom checking to see if they've done
it.
This isn't exactly my favorite part of our lessons, but it is required.
Any ideas would be appreciated.
laura kimoto
======================
95/09 From -> "Frank B. \"Pete\" Brooks" <fbrooks@garnet.acns.fsu.edu>
Subject: Re: dialogue memorization
What's the point of dialog memorization? Is it for it's own sake, just
to make sure that it is done? What are students supposed to learn via
memorizing a dialog out of the textbook?
An idea would be to have them write scenarios (a la Robert DiPietro)
and
then use them as presentations. At least there's some creativity in
this
and the students "own" the work. Moreover, there's more of a variety.
Frank B. "Pete" Brooks
======================
96/09 From-> Laura Wuerdeman <wuerd@rockland.net>
Subject: Re: Memorization and Recall
>A rose by any other name would smell as sweet! Why are so many
educators opposed to memorization? The bottom line of any type learning
must certainly include a fair amount of memorization or a variation
thereof.
Otherwise, why have such a large brain with its innumerable connections?
Isn't recall memorization? Isn't repetition in language classes used
to induce
memorization? If we don't work hard to learn (memorize, recall, infer,
etc.)
how are we expected to retain knowledge? Does learning have to be fun?
I'd like to jump in on this exchange if you don't mind. It's something
I've been thinking about a lot lately.
In my Spanish III class I have been disappointed by the fact that my
students have not been able to apply the language skills they have
learned over the past three years. (Our level I takes two years). I
recently showed them a video from another text (level II!!) The
characters were native speakers and they spoke more slowly. I gave
them
comprehension questions which we discussed in class and which they
also
answered in writing. Simple questions like "¿Qué crees
que....?" " "¿Por
qué va a hacer Carlos...?, etc. were incomprehensible to them.
They had
difficulty with the listening comprehension, also, until I repeated
certain segments. I had to walk them through the whole thing.
I understand that a certain amount of this is normal, but these are
supposed to be honors students and I feel one possibility here is that
they are so used to "getting it" immediately that they give up and
assume that it is too hard if they don't get it right away.
On the other hand, I wonder if I should be drilling vocabulary and verbs
more in class. I always gave that as a studying activity at home. If
I
talked about it in class or presented it there, I told them to study
it
at home. In my French IV/AP class we do readings and listening
comprehension activity also, but I don't give them a vocabulary list
to
memorize before.
My daughter's French teacher drills vocabulary in class constantly.
This
was presented to us at Back to School Night. It seems dry and boring
to
me (and to my daughter as well), but I am wondering if it is, in fact,
more effective. In her class they don't converse and read, but they
are
mastering vocab, which is helpful for SAT II and reading comp, among
other things). My daughter seems bored, but I wonder if she is better
prepared.
Which is the better way to go? Any opinions out there?
Laura Wuerdeman
B. Points in Favor of Memorization
95/09 From -> "Dr. Lucinda Hart-Gonzalez (Cindy H-G)"<LHART@VMS1.GMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: dialogue memorization
I LIKE MEMORIZING DIALOGUES.
Maybe it is the old theatre background in me. I always found the
memorized dialogue to be a way to "try on" another persona, a
FL-speaking persona who said things like I was saying without any
effort, because they meant something to me, not because I'd figured
out
how to say them.
Memorized dialogues were a chance to practice the pronunciation and
get
it really into my mouth, without having to think about what I was
saying, but long enough to require really saying it, with accent and
everything.
Also, whatever Chomsky says about language being creative, there are
certainly some fairly high-frequency expressions and the like that
dialogues tend to get into your head, so that they occur to you when
the
moment comes.
And finally, memorized dialogues make a good jumping off point into
improvising and CREATING new speech. They raise the starting comfort
level and communication level, so that you don't start from cold trying
to say new things.
Maybe none of these things count to people now, certainly pronunciation
gets short shrift lately, or maybe memorized dialogues don't work as
effectively in these ways for people who don't have a theatre
background, used to memorizing scripts and then developing characters.
Maybe all it takes is SHOWING people how to make good use of them.
Cindy H-G
======================
95/09 From -> "Robert D. Peckham" <bobp@UTM.Edu>
Subject: Re: dialogue memorization
I really think that the problems with dialogs was that
1) students were not dealing with authentic discourse (one might ask
if
today's books do a whole lot better).
2) the teachers who used them sometimes thought that their students
were
speaking French when they recited them (and it was impressive if parents
heard the students).
3) The tape models from which they learned were clinically clean of
background noise.
4) If they were overused, students had increased difficulty in
functioning outside of them.
5) Frequently teachers who were not themselves very prepared had their
students spend most of their time on the dialogues, leaving little
time
for other things.
There are alternatives in memorization. The students could make up short
paragraphs that would naturally be monologues within a conversation.
There are the skits that we hear of all the time. Also, students could
alter a dialogue with personally applicable and structurally /
semantically appropriate substitutions in key places. Or expand
discourse from a bare-bones dialogue (sort of like the expansions in
the
J. Rassias French textbook).
The problems I have with the doctrinaire never-memorize-dialogues point
of view are that
1) there are times where, within the normal variation of classroom
routines, students may find this fun (as long as it doesn't look like
the teacher is pinning his reputation on it).
2) Working on a dialogue in pairs, etc. provides an occasion where
the
teacher has relatively little to say, students get lots of practice
where each one in a group must pull his/her weight. 3) At the "novice"
stage, does the ACTFL description not say "learned phrases and
expressions" (or something on that order)?
4) I would be a bit more inclined to dislike dialogues if I could see
an
extensive and reliable control-group study showing them to be
universally ineffective.
5) What if it seems you are getting great results with dialogues.
One of the keys here as always is my favorite tune: OUTCOMES.
What do you want students to be able to do after spending a certain
amount of time in your classroom? I would add to this another question.
In what way do I see this activity contributing toward my anticipated
set of final outcomes, and how does it contribute to the goals being
set
up in our profession?
TennesseeBob
======================
95/09 From -> "Marilyn V.J. Barrueta" <mbarruet@pen.k12.va.us>
Subject: Memorization
Add another who thinks some memorization has value. I won't repeat an
anecdote of mine from some months ago, but I regularly run into former
students who have a tale to tell about how they used in real life some
line from an old ALM dialog.
IMHO the problem was not so much the memorization used at that time
but
the failure of some to go beyond pure memorization to adaptation and
creation. We regularly ask students to memorize -- vocabulary, grammar
rules, whatever; memorizing something that combines them all seems
more
efficient and productive than as isolates.
Cindy connects this with acting -- seems to me that's pretty much what
we all do to some extent in our classrooms, isn't it?
Maybe the issue isn't so much memorization per se, but what, how, and
for what purpose?
Marilyn
======================
95/09 From -> Donald P Webb <dwebb@uoguelph.ca>
Subject: Re: dialogue memorization
>>I LIKE MEMORIZING DIALOGUES. Maybe it is the old theatre
background in me. I always found the memorized dialogue to be a way
to
"try on" another persona, a FL-speaking persona who said things like
I was
saying without any effort, because they meant some- thing to me, not
because
I'd figured out how to say them.
I think the concept of theater adds a lot to dialogues. You can start
with a kind of "cold" run-through and then ham it up, invite the
students to improvise on the script if not actually ad lib. >Also there
are certainly some fairly high-frequency expressions and the like that
dialogues tend to get into your head, so that they occur to you when
the
moment comes.
I like memorizing poems and songs, myself. But others may like jokes.
In
fact, I think humor is one of the most unexploited areas in language
teaching. Based as it is on necessarily unspoken cultural and/or
linguistic assumptions, humor may have to be explained. Which is a
lesson in culture, no? But you know how it goes: "This textbook has
some
really fun stuff in it! But we'd better not adopt it, lest our humorless
colleagues think we're not Serious."
>And finally, memorized dialogues make a good jumping off point into
improvising and CREATING new speech. They raise the starting comfort
level and communication level, so that you don't start from cold trying
to
say new things.
Right... one doesn't create language out of whole cloth, rather, one
uses language to create new contexts, which occur from moment to moment.
The point is, any unrehearsed utterance is creative use of the language.
As corollaries to that, I would point out first that a dictation is
not
an "unrehearsed utterance," hence the questions about its being
pedagogically appropriate. I still think dictations have their place,
though, for reasons analogous to your liking memorized dialogues.
On the other hand, Moliere's creative use of language, for example,
consisted in writing plays. His actors' creativity (himself included,
notably) consisted in stagecraft, the interpretation of those scripts
on
the stage. In fact, wasn't it Moliere who introduced "blocking" to
the
theater?
Students, now, can use memorized dialogues as a take-off for scripts
of
their own, and in my experience, the more humorous they are, the more
fun they'll have with them.
Don W.
======================
95/09 From -> Dana Paramskas <danap@uoguelph.ca>
Subject: Re: dialogue memorization
>Memorized dialogues were a chance to practice the pronunciation and
get
it really into my mouth, without having to think about what I was saying,
but
long enough to require really saying it, with accent and everything.
Heh... brings back memories of Dostert's manual in German with all those
dialogues to be memorized! But I, like Cindy, liked them. They gave
me a
feel for structure, and a set of fixed expressions I could drag out
of
memory and apply to (hopefully) pertinent situations.
Pronunciation control was a factor as well, but I discovered a much
easier way of acquiring pronunciation, intonation and various
suprasegmentals by memorising and singing (off key) songs in German.
I
still recommend learning songs to my students (in French, since I don't
teach German), although no current textbook seems to recommend it.
Poetry is another means to the same end.
Dana Paramskas
======================
95/09 From -> "Dr. Lucinda Hart-Gonzalez (Cindy H-G)"
<LHART@VMS1.GMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: dialogue memorization
Really, from the comments I've seen so far, I think the idea of banning
memorized dialogues is a bit like throwing out the proverbial baby
with
the bath water. People have publicly and privately admitted that those
dialogues helped with pronunciation practice, modeling structures,
and
learned expressions (the early ACTFL level, as TBob points out). And
as
Marilyn notes, whether in dialogues or elsewhere, memorization is a
necessary learning skill - for vocabulary if nothing else (and that
does
not imply that the the ORDER of the vocab list has to be memorized...)
In my first post, I suggested that teacher prep to USE memorized
dialogues effectively might be more of an issue than the dialogues
themselves, and sure enough most of TBob's objections to them had to
do
with poor teacher use of them: mistaking memorized dialogues for
fluency, leaning on them for lack of prep (the same teachers without
dialogues might lean on anything -- I had a drunk, unprepared French
teacher in 6th grade who made us copy the opening vocabulary lists
out
of each lesson, while he left the room to get "refills" -- not
memorization, but equally (or more) unprepared), and not providing
opportunities to move beyond the memorized, causing later difficulty
functioning. TBob and others suggest altering and expanding dialogues,
or writing skits or monologues. All these are precisely the kind of
extension I think that memorized dialogues set the stage for, give
the
learner the grist for.
Several have mentioned songs and poetry, even real plays (though I doubt
I'd launch a beginner class on Moliere (-; )). And they are authentic
*culture*, if not necessarily natural conversational language. When
I
was learning Quechua, here in Washington DC, with no formal class,
I
picked up my guitar, landed on a group of Bolivian musicians and said
teach me your songs and I'll teach you mine. Fortunately for me, those
songs were full of very conversational expressions -- and others weren't
but showed me the poetic esthetic of the language.
TBob talks about outcomes, and some mention the "agony" of memorizing
those dialogues only to admit years later that they did help, and that
their help was precisely in: providing readily recalled models of
structure, learning "learned expressions," and pronunciation. I don't
think we need to ask memorized dialogues to do EVERYTHING in the
classroom. It would be nice to go FROM THERE to the
background noise-filled tapes of authentic speech (showing how the
things
just internalized from the dialogue really happen, albeit with altered
form and context.) And then take the further creative step of going
on
to alter and expand them yourself.
I don't think the memorized dialogue issue should be an either/or one.
I
think it is a shame to toss out a valuable tool because it is sometimes
misused or overused in the absence of other tools.
Boy, it felt good to get that off my chest. I've come out of the closet.
Cindy H-G
======================
95/09 From -> DCHRISTI <dchristi@badlands.NoDak.edu>
Subject: Re: dialogue memorization
>>Also, whatever Chomsky says about language being creative, there
are certainly some fairly high-frequency expressions and the like that
dialogues tend to get into your head, so that they occur to you when
the
moment comes.
>I like memorizing poems and songs, myself. But others may like jokes.
In fact, I think humor is one of the most unexploited areas in language
teaching.
I totally agree with the point that humor is a wonderful teaching tool.
Laughter helps students relax, and suddenly, they may view what they
are
doing as fun. We are all surrounded by colleges, administrators, and
students who haven't laughed since Noah docked his boat (one of my
dad's
expressions). If students are introduced to jokes from the culture,
in
conjunction with idioms, slang, and everyday expressions, it is MHO
that
when they get to upper level courses (especially literature courses)
they will be much more adapt at recognizing what the author was saying.
A case in point, how many of us saw the humor in Shakesphere the first
time we read his works? I remember being the only one in a class of
30
ninth graders who got one joke in one of the early acts of "Romeo and
Juliet."
>Students, now, can use memorized dialogues as a take-off for scripts
of
their own, and in my experience, the more humorous they are, the more
fun
they'll have with them.
Not only are dialogues useful in creating a comfortable starting block,
but they also set up a schema for the students to follow. As a firm
believer in schemas, scripts, and scaffolding, the best thing we can
do
is build from what the student views as familiar and go from there.
Then, as they begin to feel secure, start bringing in the new material.
I do this in any class I teach, be it beginning Norwegian or
developmental psychology. And I do it with humor and fun...and to mixed
reviews from my students.
David Christian
======================
95/09 From -> Carolyn G Fidelman <cgf@agoralang.com>
Subject: Re: Dialogue Memorization
Wow! I love this discussion about Dialogue Memorization. I can't tell
you how many times in the past 6 years I have been grilled at the end
of
a conference talk on this very point.
In the COMPONENT of language teaching that I advocate, I use
memorization as the basis for the work. This is the In the French Body
or In The German Body / Wylie Exercise. It involves memorizing not
just
the verbal but also the paralinguistic and nonverbal elements from
a
recorded video dialogue of two native speakers. Along the lines of
Lucinda's use of memorized dialogue, this draws heavily from theater
technique.
In the other defenses of the use of memorized dialogue, people have
pointed out that it was good for "ingraining" vocabulary, expressions,
phonology, even humor. The most important point that someone made was
that this was not something that ultimately squashed people's
creativity. In fact, I firmly believe that it gives them a grounding
for
later creativity. Yes, in the moment, it seems awfully "canned". But
as
someone else pointed out, students are off the hook momentarily re:
the
language production aspect. So motivation returns as students are able
to concentrate on fine-tuning other things about their communication
than the lexical/syntactical/morphological things.
Now, here's my chance to get flamed: I feel strongly that the SOURCE
of
any dialogue to be memorized should be authentic, produced originally
by
native speakers in an unrehearsed manner, then transcribed and selected
for use based on the pedagogical need.
Most of real-time human communication does not come in such nice neat
little packages, nor are they so devoid of any real meaning (not to
mention unlikely). Now if I put here a segment from the material on
the
In The French Body videodisc, it will perhaps not make so much sense
partly because the verbal component of communication DOES NOT carry
such
a great part of the meaning in face-to-face communication. But if the
students are able to memorize the following with access to the videodisc
visual and all the information provided by the faces, the hands, the
body postures, they might actually be able to experience the
communication as it might have felt for the original interactants.
So what is my point? If a student memorizes artificially-generated
dialogue the risks are that the student will learn to talk as people
write. The student will not particularly trust the material. The student
will lapse into stereotyping behavior in the absence of any direction
for what to do with their bodies and begin ingraining the wrong habits
or learning to talk with a [French] mouth and an American body. I think
we are expecting far too much from students when we use written material
as a model for spoken, face-to-face communication. They can't fill
in
the blanks that we (as experienced speakers of the target language
and
as people who have had visual contact with the target culture) can
do.
Carolyn Fidelman
======================
95/09 From -> Laura <kimotol@hawaii.edu>
Subject: Re: dialogue memorization
>And finally, memorized dialogues make a good jumping off point into
improvising and CREATING new speech. They raise the starting comfort
level and communication level, so that you don't start from cold trying
to
say new things.
Right on. I think the 'mechanical' pre-speaking activity (such as
working with memorized material) and the 'communicative' speaking
activity (i.e., CREATING with the language) go hand in hand. You really
can't have effective speaking practice without the other.
laura kimoto
======================
95/09 From -> Laura <kimotol@hawaii.edu>
Subject: Re: dialogue memorization
Let me clarify as best as I can why I must do dialogue memorization
in
my class: simply said, my supervisor has dictated that I do so. In
response to Frank "Pete” Brooks, yes it's just for it's own sake, just
to
make sure that it is done. Students, I think, are supposed to learn
to
manipulate the grammatical patterns that are presented in the dialogue
to mimic 'real' conversation.
Being that this is a very mechanical exercise, I wanted suggestions
on
how to 'get it over with' as efficiently as possible (i.e., without
losing the students' and without compromising the 'grade' I'm supposed
to give them).
Apparently, after students do their memorized / verbatim dialogue
presentation, I am to ask them questions (not about the dialogue since
it is content-poor) and have 'free conversation' with them.
I appreciated a private suggestion to me to call on students at random
to say a line or two of the dialogue. That solves having everyone say
the same dialogue over and over again, give students a reason to pay
attention, and saves time in doing this mechanical exercise. I am also
thinking of having students create something based on the dialogue
they
just memorized, to present that day in class.
Caroline Fidelman also brought up an interesting point: dialogues that
are to be memorized should be authentic. Here's my question: what to
do
with a text that *doesn't* sound authentic or like conversation at
all?
This is what the text my students have to memorize sounds like: (In
English for everyone's convenience)
A: How much are these socks?
B: 5,000 yen.
A: Is this 5,000 yen too?
B: No, that's 7,000 yen.
A: How much is that?
B: Which one?
A: That bag over there.
B: That red bag over there?
A: Yes, that's it.
B: That's 8,000 yen.
A: Okay. I'll take that.
Obviously this is a partial conversation between a salesclerk and
customer, labeled as A and B. I could have students (after their
memorization feat) create their own dialogue using the basic patterns
and perhaps substituting vocabulary, but I think that's about as
creative they will be since they are only in their 4th week of 1st
year
Beginning Japanese. Any ideas?
Laura Kimoto
======================
95/09 From -> "H. Stephen STRAIGHT"
<sstraigh@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu>
Subject: Re: Dialogue Memorization, part 2
You're probably all wondering "What does that pro-comprehension,
anti-grammar, learn-like-a-child zealot Straight think about all this
dialogue memorization stuff?" And you're right to think that the ALM,
drill-'em-till-they-drop model of language instruction makes me want
to
drive my fist through a door.
But, ... I agree with Cindy Hart-Gonzalez and most others on this one:
Dialogue memorization is just the sort of crutch a
comprehension-first-er can love to hate. As long as it's fairly
authentic (though not so much that you have to memorize the sighs and
rolling eyes), and widely applicable to common situations, a memorized
dialogue can provide just the sort of over-learned patterns that (1)
the
novice language user needs most to feel that (eventually) this language
will come and (2) the intermediate language user can mull over as
needed. In fact, contrary to the usual begin-each-lesson-with-a-dialogue
dictum, I'd strongly urge teachers to include vocabulary and structures
in memorized dialogues that do NOT appear in the "lesson" of the day,
or
even that embody metaphors, usages, and complexities that go well beyond
the capacities of the learners. They can be a treasure-trove for later
analogical interpretation and creation by the advanced learner.
With the usual warning that overlearned output can leave the
underprepared listener vulnerable to a flood of incomprehensible input
from those who will hear them and overestimate the producer's receptive
capacity, the use of memorized dialogue can be a tremendous boon and
boost to the language learner. Go for it!
Steve Straight
======================
96/09 From-> Irene Moon <irenem@imperium.net>
Subject: Re: Memorization & Circumlocution
Hola Listeros,
Just last evening I attended a conference at Kent State University for
FL teachers. The presenter, Anne Salomme and her TA from France shared
their research on teaching students to circumlocute and strategies
for
doing an even better job of circumlocuting.
A couple of points made were:
1. Students who can circumlocute, generally have higher proficiency
scores
2. In order to be able to circumlocute, a student has to have a
reservoir of vocabulary (generally learned for recall)
Students who do not have a reasonably good vocabulary are the first
to
slip into English, Spanglish etc. Simply because they don't have enough
vocabulary with which to do anything. And I believe that does mean
more
than days of the week, months, numbers. Best argument I've heard for
teaching vocabulary!
Irene Moon
======================
96/09 From-> Jim Reid <jhreid@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu>
Subject: Memorization and Learning
My experience teaching on the high school and college levels has tended
to confirm that rote memorization plays an important role in language
teaching, although it must generally be kept subordinate to the
contextualization and active production of the target language that
I
was taught to respect by my student teaching in 1969 and that is now
being championed by partisans of the communicative method.
The advantages of rote memorization can be seen on the college level
when we receive students, mostly from different high schools, who have
been taught by different methods. Students of teachers who rigidly
use
contextualization and active production in the language, and who reject
rote memorization and grammar teaching, have tended to be strong in
oral
expression, strong in oral comprehension when it involves their limited
vocabulary, but weak in oral comprehension when it involves a larger
vocabulary, and weak in reading. Of course, students of teachers who
only teach memorization, grammar, and reading, tend to be strong only
in
reading and writing.
My best students have come from teachers who use both rote memorization
and contextualization, who encourage students to actively use the
language in class, but also teach them the basics of grammar (often
in
English). The reasons for the strengths of these students, in my
opinion, is that their teachers have tried to use the limited classroom
time and the student's varied mental capacities to maximal benefit.
If
we only teach vocabulary and grammar in context, then students have
contact with only a limited number of vocabulary items and grammar
structures during short class periods. We ignore the human mind's
capacity for rote memorization, which increases the student's ability
to
comprehend orally and to read, if (and only if) it is accompanied by
an
emphasis on reading and oral comprehension techniques. Rote memorization
greatly increases the student's comprehension by increasing his or
recognition vocabulary. And repeated contact with this recognition
vocabulary really does turn some of it into active vocabulary.
I thus agree with those who see the greatest obstacle to good teaching
to be the rigid application of one method or another and rigid
distinctions between good and bad methods. All methods have something
to
offer as do all teachers. The point is for each teacher to judge them
critically, to take what works for him or her, to reject the rest,
and
to stay open to new ideas and methods.
For 20 years I refused to use English in the classroom. But experience
and repeated comments from high school teachers finally made me conclude
that time constraints make it impractical to teach grammar in the target
language, and that a short digression into English reassures the
students, teaches them more, and gives them more confidence when they
return to the target language.
Rote memorization is a highly useful tool. It can be tested easily
without putting words in context and need not be drilled in the
classroom. It is indeed insufficient in itself as a teaching method,
but
this does not mean that its strengths have to be rejected altogether.
Jim Reid
======================
96/11 From-> Chuck <eobrien@castles.com>
Subject: Re: Memorization
ARGH!~!!!!
Yes, I had to memorize lists of info in school (all the Presidents,
planets, oceans, continents, etc.) and I STILL remember them (after
almost 40 years). I also learned the multiplication tables and that
stuff (which is why I can still figure percentages in my head faster
than kids can on their calculators when they get back a graded paper).
I don't think that this has "harmed" me, and I am certainly a heck of
a
lot better prepared to go on Jeopardy than they are. I find nothing
wrong with memorizing vocabulary lists or anything else. How did those
of us over the age of 40 ever succeed with all this BAD stuff that
was
"forced" upon us????
If we want those who will be paying for our retirement to get menial,
low paying jobs, then we won't do anything. I, personally, want them
to
get great jobs, earn a lot of $$, and pay taxes to support my
retirement. If they don't know anything, they can't do it!!!
Also, being able to research stuff is great, but you'll never do diddly
at a party where all are conversing. Without a "data base" stored in
your head, how can you do anything? I think it is ridiculous to not
require memor---the M word.
Chuck (the 64K memory dinosaur) O'Brien
======================
96/11 From-> Robert Ponterio <PONTERIOR@SNYCORVA.CORTLAND.EDU>
Subject: Re: Memorization
I think there is memorization and memorization. Language becomes useful
only when and to the extent that it is meaningful. Memorized rules
are
crutches, but sometimes a crutch is useful for a time. On the other
hand, the brain is a powerful tool for manipulating information that
it
contains, not that it can find in a book given enough time. When we
know
a lot of "things", these "things" become a part of us, allowing us
to
see relationships that would be invisible to an ignorant mind. But
these
"things" that we know must be meaningful.
When I was writing my dissertation, one of the books I read about how
to
write a dissertation suggested that you should take copious notes and
read them, reread them, then reread them some more, until they become
so
much a part of you that you are not just manipulating data, you are
having intuitive insights that only come from knowing your subject
like
the back of your hand. I guess that I don't think memorization is
important because it is good for you, it is important because you can't
think about something that is not in your mind.
Memorizing lists of words, however, seems like a very inefficient way
to
try to associate language with meaning. It doesn't seem to correspond
at
all to the way we use language on a day to day basis. Yet it is an
easy
task to define and to test, so it has a certain attraction for both
students and teachers. Individual teachers need to do what they believe
in. Our own confidence in what we do is probably more important than
whether today's research supports us, and that is also supported by
research ;-)
Bob Ponterio
======================
96/11 From-> Mike Osborn <ozzieo@halcyon.com>
Subject: Re: Memorization
I just finished having my middle schoolers memorize and recite
"L'Automne", par Victor Hugo.
They loved it and learned a great deal! Now I'm on the hunt for
comparable winter, spring, and summer poems. Can any of you suggest
some?
What fun it was to analyze a French poem and find a metaphor, for
example (in the last line of the poem). As well, the kids thought it
was
neat to figure out the meaning of "jaunissent" by tying it to the
adjective color, yellow, which they'd already learned! Higher level
thinking skills at work here! Fabulous exercise! I think memorizing
is a
great learning tool!
Sue Osborn
======================
96/11 From-> Richard Lee <rlee@bloomington.in.us>
Subject: Re: Memorization
I certainly believe that there is a need for memorization in language
learning (one might debate just what is the most effective strategy,
but
the need for memorization seems inescapable), however that obviously
is
not enough. Individual vocabulary items must be learned by memory.
I
believe that this can be facilitated by context, clusters (synonyms,
antonyms, different parts of speech from common root, etc.) presentation
in complete "meaningful" sentences, etc., but in the end, in order
to
achieve a wide enough vocabulary for relatively effective and fluid
communication lists, flash cards, etc. also have a place.
Process learning would be the main component of grammar acquisition
because it certainly is more productive to learn how to construct
spontaneous sentences rather than attempt to memorize every sentence
that one might ever utter or hear, in the hope that one might cover
every eventuality in some dialogue line. Since the universe of all
potential sentences is essentially an infinite corpus, memory which
seems to accommodate a finite number of items would not be sufficient
for
the productive generation of all utterances.
On the other hand, memory does play a role here as well since some there
are some items (irregular verb forms, fixed idiomatic phrases,
prepositional usage patterns, etc.) which are not predictable from
a
manageable body of rules. I think that language learning is a rather
unique pedagogical experience. It has the data acquisition aspects
of
social studies and other like disciplines, the training in certain
specific forms of physical dexterity much like typing or music, and
the
reasoning and process oriented activities not unlike math. I believe
that it is the blending of a variety of learning experiences which
produces the most effective learning strategies.
Any doctrinaire approach which assumes that one technique is the "magic
bullet", or which arbitrarily excludes certain approaches because they
don't conform to a particular dogma which may currently be in vogue,
is
unnecessarily restrictive and less likely to bear fruit than a more
eclectic approach which assesses each activity as it contributes to
the
whole in a more pragmatic fashion. I am particularly suspicious of
new
theories and methods which focus strongly on the exclusion of practices
that its adherents find to be unorthodox.
Over the years I have seen teachers do things that I thought were
positively bizarre, yet for them they worked. There certainly is more
than one way to skin a cat, and the most effective technique for a
left
handed cat skinner might not be the most desirable one for a right
handed cat skinner.
Richard Lee
======================
96/11 From-> "Interact Travel Inc." <interact@netnet.net>
Subject: Re: Memorization
When we learn our first language, many times we memorize short phrases
and words. It is a part of the learning process. Eventually we learned
how to associate these words with meaning and objects. It is not
uncommon for a child to mimic his parent, and not understand what it
means.
I have found that it is also valuable to use direct association. For
example, instead if teaching apple = manzana, use the real object.
Sadly
to say, for me, that means that if I learn a new word and understand
it
in Spanish, sometimes I really don't know what the word should be in
English.
Peggy Koss
======================
96/11 From-> "Marilyn V.J. Barrueta" <mbarruet@pen.k12.va.us>
Subject: Re: Memorization
>The type of memorization I'm asking about is lists of vocabulary
words & verb paradigms etc. These are the areas where I believe
we
must bridge from simple memorization and parroting to meaningful
communication.
IMHO, one memorizes 1)information that must be easily called up quickly,
2) useful information that it's not practical to have to always go
look
up, and 3) in order to put on a performance.
In the first category we have things like the multiplication tables,
mathematical manipulations we deal with every day. Sure we could look
that information up, but it's so woven into our daily lives that it
would be a monumental waste of time to have to look it up each time
we
need it. The linguistic equivalent would be a basic communicative
vocabulary and syntax, which are normally acquired in L1 not so much
by
memorizing as by imitation and repetition.
Since in classroom learning of L2 the time factor does not allow for
the
trial and error and amount of imitation and repetition spent on L1,
it
follows that some deliberate and active memorization must take place.
I
would think that basic vocabulary would be one category. I personally
don't like lists, but I'm not against it starting out that way,
*provided* that it doesn't stay that way, but ends of contextualized
in
some meaningful communication. Verb paradigms? I have never seen a
need
to be able to recite verb paradigms per se -- but the learner does
need
to be able to recall quickly basic verb forms in order to communicate,
and at least some will have to be initially deliberately memorized,
given the time factors again. The question is whether that memorization
is most efficiently accomplished by some type of organized paradigm,
or
by isolates as they come up. I suspect that the answer to that is that
it varies according to the individual learner's learning style -- but
that a certain amount of active memorization still has to take place.
In the second category comes to mind information like how many ounces
in
a pound, inches in a foot, what H2O means, and the type of information
that Hirsch defines as cultural literacy. The latter kind of information
is normally absorbed over the years within the normal process of living
in the L1 -- and again, the time factor for classroom learning of L2
will probably require some conscious memorization of basic information.
The third category can be the optional one -- the memorizing of poems,
dramatic parts, speeches, etc. Several people have spoken to its
validity or lack thereof, and I think that's a personal decision.
There's no question in my own mind that memorizing material that
contains difficult or important syntactical structures in the L2 is
of
help to the student in re-creating variations of those structures,
aside
from simply the "performance" aspect. As an analogy with piano playing,
I like being able to play music from memory, so that I don't always
have
to carry the printed music around with me (yes, I know, in this society
someone who can sit down and play the piano is more of an entertainer
at
a party than someone who can recite a poem, but recitation is admired
in
other cultures).
I once heard a principal say that she was against requiring any and
all
memorization. I think that's as foolish as going to the other extreme.
It seems to me that the question is not should the learner memorize,
but
rather what, how much, in what form, and to what purpose. Like every
other thing that we do in our classrooms, we have to thoughtfully
examine what we are requiring for memorization, and for what reason.
>What roll should memorization play in the 21st century?
For me, the same role that it plays now. Sorry, but I don't think that
the century is the issue, at least until we get so technologically
advanced that everyone carries around a pocket computer programmed
with
all the information we need!
Marilyn V.J. Barrueta
======================
96/11 From-> Mary Young <reospeeder@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: memorizing
I agree with Denise Lasky that there is a place for memorization in
FL.
Maybe we threw out the baby twenty years ago when we gave up on it
for
more holistic learning. Last week in my niece's college French class
the
teacher tested numbers by asking the date of the American Revolution.
My
niece thought she was pretty close with 1442. Actually, if we were
grading on the curve she might pass with that. Other answers ranged
from
1630 to 1950. Hello? Judicious memorization is beginning to look pretty
good.
BTW, last year I had students memorize passages (one sentence from the
cultural picture captions in Amsco in French I, edited paragraphs of
cultural info in French II, poems in French III). They recited these
every week at first, later I dropped back to every other week. This
year
my French II kids have commented on how comfortable they feel speaking
and how much they remember from last year. The memorization was the
only
significant difference in what I had them do for speaking. I think
memorizing something within a context is very useful.
Mary Young
======================
97/08 From-> Mary Young <youngm@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: memorizing poetry
Andrya makes yet another good point, this time on memorization. The
best
thing is being able to let it *flow* and dazzle your friends! Especially
when you can say something very appropriate to a situation.
About memorized mispronunciations and inflections -- OUCH! How can we
prevent that? I still want to have kids memorize, but it seems to miss
the point if they (a) don't know what they are saying or (b) can't
make
it sound right. How do you provide for accuracy in the memorization
process?
These things come to mind -- I'm seeking your reactions to and additions
to/deletions from this list:
- Have them memorize from a tape. (Time consuming and expensive to make
tapes for everyone... Maybe just the ones who have problems.)
- Sketch out a "topography" of the lines -- where to pause, where to
lift, what to stress.
- Parse. I know, but maybe they will understand better how each word
contributes to the sentence if they see it diagrammed. And the diagram
could be kept pretty simple as long as it makes sense out of the
sentences. May be a waste of time for many, however.
- Repeat it together out loud in class every day, 2-3 times.
- Add gestures, like a conductor, to help get the rhythm in a visual,
physical way. (My voice teacher asks me to do this to shape a phrase
I'm
not getting, and I hate it! I would do it in front of my class to teach
the phrase in French, though. Maybe kids will hate doing this in front
of their friends -- especially the boys! ;-) ) We have used made-up
"sign-language" for memory cues, but this doesn't help pronunciation
or
inflection. Interpretive dance, maybe? (not serious)
- Videotape a native speaker (who is a good reader) saying the poem.
Run
the tape once or twice each day for several days until it is ingrained.
The consistency of rhythm, intonation and pronunciation in a repeated
(taped) performance could help get it into their heads.
Comments? Other ideas? Other problems with what I've listed above? Are
any of you asking kids to memorize poems?
Mary Young
C.
Hesitations About Use of Memorization
Not only is the notion of most dialogue memorization as antithetical
to
FL instruction brought up here; teachers also are concerned about the
authenticity of the dialogues and the less than useful way that some
classroom teachers make them a part of instruction.
95/09 From -> "Samantha S. Earp" <Samantha_Earp@cpcc.cc.nc.us>
Subject: Re: Dialogue memorization
What a great discussion!
Well, thanks to you, I've changed my mind about dialogues. I must
grudgingly admit that the moments of terror spent reciting various
jewels of French poetry to Mme Watkins as an undergrad were helpful.
But
since arriving here, I've been campaigning against the type of
memorization done by my other French colleagues: students memorize
the
dialogue at the beginning of the chapter (actually one half of the
dialogue), then they get up in pairs and recite in front of the entire
class. It takes up to 25 minutes of class time a week in an already
hectic schedule (here I can relate to Laura Kimoto's concern about
lesson pace: "use of the language introduced is limited to their
dialogue memorization"). To put it mildly, theatricality has not been
encouraged, and students have seemed to view the whole exercise as
a
race to see who can get through most quickly!
Samantha Earp
======================
95/09 From -> "Samantha S. Earp" <Samantha_Earp@cpcc.cc.nc.us>
Subject: Re: Dialogue Memorization, part 2
One of my other concerns about dialogue memorization as used in some
cases is that it does not take into account variations in register.
For
example, one of the dialogues memorized in beginning French here is
a
conversation between two friends planning a vacation. Based on the
tape,
(and sadly, what some instructors tell them), the students learn to
pronounce it as if they were speaking to Jacques Chirac rather than
their best friend - miss one instance of enchainement or liaison and
that's one point off, buddy. You get the idea.
For this reason I would much prefer to use more *realistic* examples.
Samantha Earp
======================
95/09 From -> Zev bar-Lev <zbarlev@mail.sdsu.edu>
Subject: Re: dialogue memorization
I remember dialogues as being tremendously powerful, in both Indonesian
and Russian. in Russian, I was coming from a grammar-translation program
where the best of us didn't speak till the third year. boy, was i
impressed with the way students could speak fight away!
In Indonesian, there we were speaking. I can still recite fluently (some
30 years later) "pukul berapa kapal-terbang trangkat ke Surabaya? --
at
what time does the plane leave for Surabaya?"
Having said all this, let me now note that I am thoroughly opposed to
the use of dialogue memorization, with a limited exception. the limited
exception is very short dialogues that are literally usable without
change. (almost what I mean can be found in the current Russian text
Golosa.) for ex., "hello, how are you?" "fine thanks and you" "I’m
fine
too".
students all find the memorization to be just that: boring memorization,
learning by rote. why is this any better than old style, e.g. "how
quickly can you name all the conjunctions that take the subjunctive?"
teachers may answer: this is directly applicable to speaking. this is
so
for the very short dialogues mentioned, if written and used wisely.
generations of Spanish students know "Hola, Paco, ¿qué/
tal?" (forgive
the innovative form of the punctuation, for e-mail) -- but are unable
to
change "Paco" to anything else. similarly, it would take me almost
pulling out a pencil and paper to say "What time does the plane leave
for Djakarta?" in Indonesian.
some will object, well, of course if the teacher doesn't do the needed
pattern drill ... I suggest that pattern-drill is not as effective
after
the dialogue has been memorized.
to give a metaphor for the effect, imagine trying to dial someone whose
telephone number is the same as yours, except for one number. the very
"fluency" that you're looking for is lost as soon as you try to extend
it. in the end, you may know two phone numbers, but you don't create
a
pattern.
my point is that pre-fab samples give an artificial fluency with fixed
sentences (or, still worse, with fixed conversations), which cannot
be
easily extended to creative speech. creative speech requires learning
to
put together the "bricks" from the beginning. dialogues provide a level
of accuracy, pronunciation, and complexity that are more likely to
intimidate the beginner than to guide him. (I think the reason that
i
liked the Russian dialogues back then is that, as a TA who already
knew
the language, they were the appropriate level for me!)
when I teach creative speech from the beginning, students have no
artificial sample of a fluency that they cannot match, but rather build
up their own fluency gradually, always with "creative" use of language
(i.e. creating their own sentences from the beginning).
think how hard it is to memorize 50 sentences in a new language. but
50
words, if they are of the right parts of speech, combine to form
hundreds of sentences. the pleasure that students get from being able
to
to this, with ever increasing ease and fluency, and growing vocabulary
and grammar, is a pleasure to behold.
zev bar-Lev
======================
95/09 From -> MIKE WATSON <WATSONM@TEN-NASH.TEN.K12.TN.US>
Subject: Re: Dialogue Memorization, part 2
Isn't there some research that shows that we naturally learn words in
"chunks" rather than individually? I know that I have seen such
research. This would support the idea of dialog use (I won't say
memorization).
I have seen exchange students (and I've done it myself) repeat phrases
that they've picked up from other students, a text or the TV. Some
kids
will use a handy phrase until it becomes irritating! The point is,
they
learned a phrase--not a word or list of disjointed words. If a dialog
is
a good one and is well used, then it supplies these chunks of words
that
students would normally learn in a natural setting.
This also makes me think of Homer. The poem is so formulaic and presents
so many repeated elements because as an oral (at least originally and/or
partially oral) poem these repeated elements aided the memory. Think
of
how formulaic our speech and our correspondence is. Americans are
probably freer from this than many other cultures. Memorized segments
of
speech or written language are not only useful--they're natural!
Mike Watson
======================
96/09 From-> "Jessica A. Roberts" <JRobe82544@aol.com>
Subject: Re: the value of memorization or the lack thereof
I must say I agree with the communicative approach. I am so annoyed
at
entering classrooms to observe with the hope of interacting with
students. Instead, students are given written exercises for the hour,
or
the teacher simply speaks at them for an hour. I thought we were
teaching foreign languages. How are students supposed to communicate
(even at a very basic level) if they never speak or interact? I would
hate to create a classroom of students who have to write things down
to
communicate. They won't get very far that way.
I know that proper grammar is important, but if our students have the
opportunity to use the language, I would bet it is more likely they
will
be in a speaking situation as opposed to a written one.
Jessica Roberts
======================
96/10 From-> Nancy Frumkin <NFrumkin@aol.com>
Subject: Re: the value of memorization or the lack thereof
David Coberly wrote:
>Sorry to continue to hammer away at this point, but it is SO intuitively
obvious that
I think it bears repeating. Every non-native language teacher I know
(admittedly a small
number) learned their FL's from an ALMer or a grammar-translationist.
And as my prof
of second language acquisition (an avid communicative approacher) aptly
noted, it didn't
hurt any of them (us) any! This is the chief personal experience to
which I refer. . .
But how few of us stuck with it. Most people who "took" a language in
high school say the same thing: "I can't remember a thing."
Actually, after studying French, Italian, Spanish, and German, I
absolutely overdosed on the whole thing and dropped language study
for
16 years. I knew how to say stuff, but I had nothing to say. I could
conjugate all my verbs, but I was dying to learn something substantive.
If we can at least DO something with the language as we go along, it
helps keep the students --and the teachers!!-- going.
How much do we learn in spite of our teachers??
Abrazos,
Nancy Frumkin
======================
96/10 From-> Chuck <eobrien@castles.com>
Subject: Re: the value of memorization or the lack thereof
Nancy Frumkin wrote:
Most people who "took" a language in high
>school say the same thing: "I can't remember a thing."
>Actually, after studying French, Italian, Spanish, and German, I
absolutely overdosed on the whole thing and dropped language study
for
16 years. I knew how to say stuff, but I had nothing to say. I could
conjugate
all my verbs, but I was dying to learn something substantive. If we
can
at least DO something with the language as we go along, it helps keep
the students --and the teachers!!-- going.
>How much do we learn in spite of our teachers??
Geez, I don't know. I remember studying French and Spanish
simultaneously in high school in NY, and having to take the Regent's
test for both during the same time block (yes, I passed both). And
also
studying Italian and German, and loved it all. I am certainly not fluent
in those non-American languages, but I can hold my own in the country
of
origin.
Many parents (the Neanderthals), come in and say "I took...." and don't
remember anything".
Great. Now slip in math, chemistry, whatever, and you'll get the same
response.
Chuck (the dinosaur) O'Brien
======================
96/11 From-> Irene Moon <irenem@imperium.net>
Subject: Memorization
I know that we've discussed, indirectly, the need for memorization of
vocabulary, but this evening at our Dept. Head Mtg. there was discussion
of memorization as a necessary strategy.
It seems from all I've read and what we've talked about, there is
purposeful memorization and then there is the old fashioned type..
"it's
a discipline the mind needs, it's good for you.." In our biology
classes kids still "blank sheet" ...they memorize all the parts of
the
shark, including one that "has no known function."
At a recent in-service on strategies, our presenter said that a reporter
once tried to trip up Einstein and asked him "Quick, what's the speed
of
light?" to which he replied that if he needed that info, it was over
there in that blue book on the shelf."
Running parallel is what we on this list seem to be saying: Learning
occurs when the context is meaningful, above and beyond memorizing.
What do you think? Have or are things switching ? Are we, should we
be
teaching memorization as a stand alone skill or should we be teaching
how to access the info and how to do the processing?
Irene Moon
======================
96/11 From-> Pat Barrett <PBarr21106@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Memorization
Why is there a big question about memorization? We can memorize
vocabulary and paradigms, but it is only when we use them that we
acquire them. So, the question for the teacher is, how do I introduce
the material: by providing personalized and contextualized formats
or by
setting up fun and/or punitive activities for memorization and then
providing material in the TL on which the student can bring this
memorized material to bear?
Many of us learned the latter way. I am convinced that I would have
learned the languages I know if I had been in a communicative class,
but
I think I would have learned faster because the activities I provided
for myself would have been provided in the classroom. More people might
learn a language, too, because not too many people are motivated to
throw themselves into a situation where they are linguistically one
down, i.e. not speaking the group's dominant language, nor do they
have
the obsession to constantly talk to themselves in the TL (I remember
being a busboy and trying to repeat everything I overheard in the TL).
Pat Barrett
======================
96/11 From-> Irene Moon <irenem@imperium.net>
Subject: Re: Memorization
Several listeros have referred to having students memorize poems and
saying that that is a justifiable use for memorization. I agree…there
is nothing more beautiful in my mind than hearing students recite a
poem
of significance, one on which they've worked on fricatives, intonation
etc.
The type of memorization I'm asking about is lists of vocabulary words
&
verb paradigms etc. These are the areas where I believe we must bridge
from simple memorization and parroting to meaningful communication.
Our HS is looking at study skills for North Central evaluation goals
Across the curriculum, (and I doubt that our school is much different
than yours) I see students worn thin by insistence on memorizing...what
is often useless information or information that could be found in
a
reference. What roll should memorization play in the 21st century?
MY
feeling is a less prominent role than in the past. Continued use as
a
strategy, means we must spend more time "linking" and helping students
"make connections" not just learn lists. If we as language teachers
are
saying this, that this is how we really learn, shouldn't we be doing
this across the curriculum?
Irene Moon
======================
96/11 From-> "J. Vincent H. Morrissette" <gvincent@mbay.net>
Subject: memorization
>This seems to me to be beyond dispute. The real question we are left
with is what is "meaningful". ... I suspect that this is where the
battle lines
are truly drawn, regardless of the methods preferred. ... I do think
that I
recognize competence in Spanish within a defined lexical context. For
the
individual confronted with the need to speak about a traffic accident
in a
Spanish speaking environment, the fact that he may be very competent
to
discuss bull fights and Latin American cuisine may be a very small
consolation.
That is precisely the point. I would find all three topics mentioned
(traffic accidents, bull fighting and Latin American cuisine) of no
relevance to me. In its proper context, however, any or all of the
three
could become "meaningful", for instance, as that part of a story I
am
engaged in, as a personal experience, as preparation for a trip, etc.
On
that score, it struck me last week that students were delighting in
learning the vocabulary for handcuffs, a military transfer, firing
an
employee, etc. (in terms that I would not "test" for) because it was
part of the film that we were watching and they felt they needed to
know
to discuss that particular episode; it was fun watching them master
these words they found "meaningful".
At the secondary level "meaningful" memorization is dictated to us from
above. Since CA has a proficiency-based framework supported by its
university system our hands are tied in terms of content. At least
the
content that is mandated is of interest, i.e. "meaningful", to students
(and not necessarily to me). This beats the Grammar-Translation, ALM,
,
natural method, patterned drill and sundry other approaches I've had
to
serve my students over the decades. "Meaningful" to whom? Meaningful
to
the learner who exhibits interest and who must go on to the university.
That is my reference point as I repeat what I wrote earlier:
Meaningful
memorization, yes! Meaningless memorization, never!
J. Vincent H. Morrissette
======================
96/11 From-> Jonathan Centner <jcentner@hamptons.com>
Subject: Memorization
Mary Young wrote:
>Maybe we threw out the baby twenty years ago when we gave up on it for more holistic learning.
Now that we have come full circle I want to say something about this.
Human communication is _componential_.
Animal communication is _holistic_.
_A lion is coming_ represents the mapping onto a set of concepts the
perceptual phenomenon of a rapidly growing image of a lion, .
[Bickerton]. _Coming_ has no perceptual reality. An animal could simply
utter a _holistic_ call and the behavioural responses will be
equivalent: "Let's hit the road!".
The irony in this is that the A-LM, through whatever mechanism I don't
know, resulted in the fact that FL was learned as if language were
holistic, not componential.
Joanne Wilson wrote last spring to this list a joke about this, which
I
paraphrase "The A-LM was great except the French didn't know their
half
of the dialog!"
Memorisation seems fine to me (a la behavioural). But the needs of
talking in an FL with verismo requires that the speaker integrate
meaning from components.
Okay. Teach behaviourally, to refine phonology, morphology, syntax...
But you will need to break it all down again.
Jon Centner
95/09 From -> Chris Buck <cbuck@nadn.navy.mil>
Subject: Re: dialogue memorization
I studied Russian at DLI many years ago, and Japanese more recently
via
the Jorden text/method. In both cases, I found that a lot of the dialog
material stuck, shaping my own speech and my behavior and my
interpretation of others' behavior, in the case of Russian, long after
I
had become fluent in the language.
I have also experienced plenty of other teaching and texts that use
dialogs. Most are real duds, either because the dialogs are
embarrassingly artificial or inanely banal (or both) or because they
really are not an integral part of the course. (You can just see the
author saying to him/herself, "Let's see... how can I get an
instrumental plural or two into an invitation to a birthday party?")
Three observations:
One, there are good and bad dialogs, as several others have pointed
out;
I agree entirely with the criteria that were mentioned but would add
that the really good dialogs are the ones where there is something
entertaining, outrageous, unusual, or the like, that makes the material
stick.
Two, the students should ACT out the dialogs, from memory as much as
possible, improvising (if they can) if they forget the exact words.
Yes,
the front of the classroom should be the stage. Props should be
available if needed, but imagined or improvised ones are fine. (There
may be a problem here breaking down inhibitions, especially at the
secondary level. Probably best to start at the beginning and lay down
rules.)
Three, like everything else that's done in the classroom, the success
of
this activity depends on the teacher, his/her rapport with the class,
and the way (s)he fits this activity into the whole program of language
learning. (Jorden calls them "core conversations".) In the situations
above I had super teachers who were committed to the method, had a
great
sense of humor, and were able to develop the dialogs into more extended
situations requiring students to use more and more of what they knew
and
were learning.
Chris Buck
======================
95/09 From -> Laura <kimotol@hawaii.edu>
Subject: Re: dialogue memorization--tried it!
Martha (sbihari@ashland.edu) suggested that to save time yet capture
everyone's attention when doing dialogue memorizations, I
>call on a couple to begin, another two to continue, and so on? Then
start over. Or, to keep
all of them listening, tell them that they are to continue the lines
where the previous student
was interrupted.
>It must be done in random order, so they couldn't expect their turn!
Well, I tried it out yesterday. A class of 21 students and a dialogue
that was only 6 lines long. Ideally every student should be called
on 3
times. I explained the procedure to students: I would call on a student
to say the first line, then another student to say the second line.
Pauses of more than 2 seconds wouldn't be accepted. Also, the second
student called would have to listen to what the other students said,
because if the first student said something wrong, student #2 would
have
to re do that line correctly, without me telling them to do so.
Result? All students were attentive and we could 'get this over with'
in
under 10 minutes.
Evaluation? I made little tallies next to each students' name. As soon
as they got 3 'plusses' I no longer called on them. The others who
made
mistakes asked to be called on again (randomly) to make up for their
errors.
I admit, this wasn't *the way* to benefit fully from memorization and
dramatic techniques which others had offered as ideas, but it sufficed
for the ultimate purpose of this activity in our class and curriculum.
After doing this quite mechanical exercise, I could have students use
the same dialogue they memorized as a basic structure in an
information-gap activity that they did in three's.
laura kimoto
======================
96/09 From-> "Marilyn V.J. Barrueta" <mbarruet@pen.k12.va.us>
Subject: Re: Memorization and Recall
>My daughter's French teacher drills vocabulary in class constantly.
This was presented
to us at Back to School Night. It seems dry and boring to me (and to
my daughter as well),
but I am wondering if it is, in fact, more effective. In her class
they don't converse and read,
but they are mastering vocab, which is helpful for SAT II and reading
comp, among other
things). My daughter seems bored, but I wonder if she is better prepared.
>Which is the better way to go? Any opinions out there?
This is not an either / or proposition. I, too, "drill" vocabulary
virtually every day -- but not in drill form. The key is to USE the
vocabulary over and over again in some meaningful communication to
make
it stick.
Marilyn Barrueta
======================
96/09 From-> Denise Paige Way <4Ways@InfoAve.Net>
Subject: Re: Memorization and Recall
>My daughter's French teacher drills vocabulary in class constantly.
This was presented to us at Back to School Night. It seems dry and
boring
to me (and to my daughter as well), but I am wondering if it is, in
fact, more
effective. In her class they don't converse and read, but they are
mastering
vocab, which is helpful for SAT II and reading comp, among other things).
My daughter seems bored, but I wonder if she is better prepared.
I'd like to leap into this conversation as well. I am currently doing
research in the area of FL writing for my dissertation, and I have
found
an interesting study done by Keiko Koda (1993) on task-induced
variability in FL writing. One of the interesting findings I gleaned
from her study is that vocabulary is the primary predictive factor
in
overall composition quality. Koda calls vocabulary the "linguistic
scaffolding" for communication.
Perhaps, I pulled that out her of study because I, too, feel strongly
that vocabulary is extremely important along with verbs. I drill
vocabulary, and it doesn't have to be boring. Students like
transparencies, picture prompts, and many use flashcards and quiz each
other. I have found that as long as colleges' and universities'
placement tests stress discrete-point grammar, reading comprehension,
and listening in a multiple choice format, my job is to prepare them
for
that so that they may place out of their language requirement or place
in a higher level thereby earning credits for the lower levels as well.
Articulation between secondary and higher ed is a prime problem.
Universities might profess to be proficiency oriented, but their
placement tests would indicate otherwise.
Laura asked which way is better. Why do we always have to reduce
ourselves to such a binary, either/or system? Many of you have espoused
the need to be eclectic and use whatever methods seem to be effective;
many of you follow the research and adjust your methods as you see
fit.
I welcome all suggestions whether research-based or products of
personal experience which is, in essence, action research in the
classroom. We are all researchers in that respect, and we can all learn
from each other. I cannot tell you how many postings I have made copies
of since joining the list in August. Thanks to all!
Denise Paige Way
======================
96/09 From-> david coberly <dlc8184@mailer.fsu.edu>
Subject: Re: the value of memorization or the lack thereof
>DC> The "research" is mixed, and anybody
>> knows there's more than one successful style for FLTeaching, if
not from
>> the research (where evidence can indeed be found), then from our
own
>> experiences.
Sorry to continue to hammer away at this point, but it is SO intuitively
obvious that I think it bears repeating. Every non-native language
teacher
I know (admittedly a small number) learned their FL's from an ALMer
or a
grammar-translationist. And as my prof of second language acquisition
(an
avid communicative approacher) aptly noted, it didn't hurt any of them
(us) any! This is the chief personal experience to which I refer.
. .
>DC> I'll bet
>> you dollars to donuts a variation on behaviorism will be back in
style
>> within 25 years. The more things change, the more they stay
the same.
>
>- No way! The idea that language is acquired the way your dog learns
that
>certain noises mean you're about to take him out or feed him is dead
and
>buried and will never be revived.
Like I said, I'll take that bet. . .
>DC> And
>> I'd take a "gifted" grammar-translationist to a poor communicative
>> approacher any day of the week. (I'm not suggesting, however,
that one is
>> more or less likely to be gifted than the other...)
>- Yes, but I'd take a good communicative teacher over a good old-fashioned
>grammarian any day!
>R Boswell
To each his own. I wouldn't. Maybe that's because I've never
had one of
the former, but I've had four of the latter! I'd love to have
a good
communicative teacher -- maybe if I get around to taking German or
Italian
one of these days??
David L. Coberly
======================
96/09 From-> Marilyn Hannan <mhannan@omnifest.uwm.edu>
Subject: Re: memorization and vocabulary
Does anyone still do the daily short vocabulary quizzes? I started doing
daily 2 point (2 word) quick vocab quizzes again at the beginning of
class just after taking attendance. I give the students 4 words the
day
before from their chapter, they find out the meaning; they use them
in
sentences. They are to know what they mean in English and how to spell
them in Spanish for the next day.
Our other Spanish and German teachers are doing similar quizzes (some
have done this for 20 years) and have found them quite effective in
adding vocabulary to their middle and high school age students'
reperatoire. At least if they have a "Daily Quiz" to look forward to
perhaps 50% to 75% of them might actually study the 4 little words
they
are given. Homework is often copied or done in the few minutes before
the bell rings.
When I taught French we used to do a short "dicte'" every day to get
the
students to be able listen to a French sentence, understand and spell
it. It kept them on their toes.
Unfortunately, in high school, you can't wait to give them one quiz
a
week or one test per unit (every 21 days or so). Many of the students
do
not know how to study and pace themselves day by day. I ask those who
are having difficulties to make flash cards for themselves to practice.
Isn't developing a good memory important anymore in any subject area?
Some of you seem not to think so. What do the rest think?
( I teach in a suburban blue collar high school from which perhaps 50%
of the students go on to any kind of post high education.)
Marilyn Hannan
======================
96/11 From-> "J. Vincent H. Morrissette" <gvincent@mbay.net>
Subject: memorization
After vocabulary has been clearly presented in terms of pronunciation,
mnemonic devices, games and derivatives (comprehensible input), students
are assigned to copy (yes, copy) the TL vocabulary in the first column
of a binder sheet and the English equivalent in the second column;
they
are to memorize the vocabulary since it forms the basis of subsequent
class activities; and, the assignment before a quiz requires that they
fold under the first column, look at the English, fill in the third
column with the TL word/expression and then compare it to the first
column. They must correct mistakes in a different color and learn
(through simple memorization or through repeated rewriting) the words
and expressions they did not master 100%. Such memorization makes for
better class participation and better quiz grades. This system applies
to the first two levels of the language. Thereafter, students make
up
their personal lists and are tested on them.
When poetry is introduced in the beginning years it is presented in
a
living, dramatic context; I prefer presenting poems orally in segments.
Those students who are auditory learners seem to memorize the segments
as they are presented; non-auditory learners climb walls (and now they
experience what auditory and kinesthetic learners must go through
everyday in class!). Once the individual poems are fully presented
and
understood by all, they are memorized, discussed and quizzed. Such
memorization helps build the memory, vocabulary and pronunciation /
intonation... and self-confidence.
In my AP Lit class, students are expected to make a publishable
translation of a poem that we have not read from each of the poets
on
the reading list. In addition they must memorize the poem that they
liked the best of all the poems we studied of a particular poet.
Students report back after the AP exam or even years later that the
best
parts of the course were the translations and the memorized poems.
They
could quote passages in their AP essays. And those who write years
after
the AP course say they can still recite the poems... just as I can
still, almost fifty years later, recite monologues from Corneille,
Racine, Caesar and Cicero. Somehow I can't recite any of the geometry
or
physics that we memorized, French style. Isn't memory part of one's
cultural heritage? Isn't it in remembering that we know the family,
ethnic, psychological, individual roots of our being? Why neglect this
faculty (excuse my scholastic training).
I will not, if I can help it, ask students to memorize meaningless lists
and information; maybe that's the reason I can't remember the geometric
theorems and proofs nor the physical laws of nature after all these
years. They were never made meaningful to *me*. They are meaningful
and
if teachers had shown them to be meaningful I might still remember
them
and my life would be that much richer in understanding today.
Meaningful memorization, yes! Meaningless memorization, never!
Vincent
======================
96/11 From-> "Rosemary A. Zurawel" <rzurawel@nh.ultranet.com>
Subject: Re: Memorization
Should anyone these last thirty or more years have seen a lone female
driver somewhere on Route 95 between the Maine border and southeastern
Massachusetts mumbling to herself repeatedly...yes, I was rehearsing
in
a TL. The closer I came to the snarl of Boston traffic, the more useful
I found creative cursing (subjunctive rears its ugly head again!).
All
this to agree that rehearsal and memorization have continuing roles
in
my language(s) development.
With my students, I often have given them a snippet, and told them that
it was their password for class the next day. Mnemonic devices are
tools, and useful ones. When I give students a new mnemonic device,
or
tool, I tell them that there are two ways of banging in a nail: 1)
with
their forehead, or 2) with a tool. Their choice. The second is a lot
less painful.
Rosemary A. Zurawel
======================
96/11 From-> Amy Lynn Bergquist <emmak@phc.lib.umn.edu>
Subject: Re: Memorization
>>My literature students are memorizing a poem. I believe in this: old fashion and d* proud of it!!
>I totally agree! I just finished having my middle schoolers memorize
and recite "L'Automne",
par Victor Hugo.
>They loved it and learned a great deal! Now I'm on the hunt for comparable
winter, spring,
and summer poems. Can any of you suggest some?
>What fun it was to analyze a French poem and find a metaphor, for example
(in the last line
of the poem). As well, the kids thought it was neat to figure out the
meaning of "jaunissent" by
tying it to the adjective color, yellow, which they'd already learned!
Higher level thinking skills
at work here! Fabulous exercise! I think memorizing is a great learning
tool!
I have done this with my Russian students...this year I followed the
following steps:
List of "essential" vocabulary that they probably won't be able to
figure out from context.
Group creative writing (poem or short story) using that vocabulary
Dictation (for fun) of the poem (they may use the essential vocabulary
list)
Color coding the poem for parts of speech or other grammatical things
Memorization and performance.
The kids like it and 3 weeks later can still say a 12 line poem from
memory. I'm impressed!
Amy Lynn Bergquist (aka Emma Karlovna)
======================
97/08 From-> Walsh Cindy <CWALSH127@aol.com>
Subject: Re: memorizing poetry
About poetry recitation--this past year I learned Itsy Bitsy Spider
from
FLTEACH. I wrote it on the board for my Sp2 classes. They loved it!
One
thing they especially liked doing was dividing the class in two and
having each half say I line. I played with them and acted like a
conductor with them--it was fun, they learned it, and they also quickly
pointed out the preterit verbs!
One class was very competitive and liked seeing which side could recite
it louder, faster, better, etc. They laughed at my attempts to sing
and
we all laughed at each other, but they asked for it periodically and
left class happy. This was also my best homework class!
Being in a public school I can't teach them the Hail Mary, etc. which
I
learned in French in Catholic school, which I can still recite....
Cindy Walsh
======================
97/08 From-> Nancy Hudson <MaggieH105@aol.com>
Subject: Re: memorizing poetry
I've had fairly good luck with poems by doing them 2-3-4 lines a day:
First day - 2 lines
Second day - first 2 lines, plus next 2 or 3 ( wherever it's a good
stopping place)
Third day - first 4-5 lines, plus next 2 or 3, etc.
Also, we "reveal" the meaning of the poem as we work on each new set
of
lines. (Sort of like a soap opera) then if the poem lends itself to
picture-drawing, I draw dumb pictures on the board, but they can JUST
say the lines or partial lines that I draw - only AFTER I draw them.
(And they'd better watch out, because I might draw something that has
nothing to do with the poem.)
It's fun, and it just takes a few minutes at the first of each class.
I've always started the year with Le Corbeau et Le Renard. (Any of
La
Fontaine's poems would work well with this.) I always intend to do
more
of this, but then I get sidetracked, well, you know... Nancy Hudson
Maggie Hudson
======================
97/08 From-> Merle Albers <ralbers@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: MEMORIZING POETRY
I too sometimes have students memorize poems, usually as an alternative
evaluation - but I insist that they know the meaning in English. I
seem
to remember the ability to recite poetry on festive occasions as a
part
of some Hispanic cultures - Caribbean, including Colombia, Venezuela,
Mexico?
I think I've also read that when Fidelito makes a five hour speech and
pauses for a glass of water, that someone else recites some verses
so
that the audience may be refreshed also. Does anyone else remember
these
features? And what about Spain?
Merle Albers
E. Is FL
Learning Recall or Memorization?
95/09 From -> Linda Zimmerman <LZatWHS@aol.com>
Subject: Re: dialogue memorization
Dear Cindy, If it works for you, who cares what others say? So many
teaching techniques depend on the teacher's personality. We can all
find
many productive techniques that are suited to us personally. That's
a
great idea about bringing in the idea of theater.
Linda Zimmerman
======================
95/09 From -> Robert Ponterio <PONTERIOR@SNYCORVA.CORTLAND.EDU>
Subject: Re: Dialogue Memorization
>For this reason I would much prefer to use more *realistic* dialogues.
Any comments?
I don't use dialog memorization per se but I do have students repeat
dialog from the video in my French in Action intensive
elementary/intermediate class. I usually take expressions from the
video
and weave then in to a 5-6 line mini-conversation. I do one quick choral
repetition then I perform the "dialog" with one student, modifying
it to
make it personal. I then tell the students to talk to each other in
pairs and often to pair up twice so they get to "perform" their
mini-dialog twice, preferably a bit differently each time. Ideally,
the
first choral repetition gives them some confidence and, my changing
the
"text" as I model what I want them to do shows them that they should
make it their own. I try to listen to all 30 students at once (ha!)
and
if I hear something awkward (forms, pronunciation, intonation), I might
try to work on that as well.
I get to listen to tapes that the student hand in once each week (not
the tapes that are sold with the book, just a short exercise that the
student reads.). That is where I give careful feedback about
pronunciation. By working this way, the students get to talk a lot
more
than they would if each group presented the dialog (BTW They do write
and memorize skits that they perform before the class, but that's a
different kind of activity.) I figure that if they talk one at a time,
while one is talking, 29 are not, and it is more important for them
to
talk than for me to verify everything that they say.
What about having the students memorize the dialog and perform it on
tape? You could then spot check in class to be sure they have really
memorized it. You might also have them do the recording in a lab under
supervision if memorization is really important, but my students can
use
any tape recorder to prepare their tapes. What about dividing the
students into groups of 4. In each group 2 could perform while the
other
2 check. This would let you get through the memorized work more quickly.
That way you could use more class time to go beyond the dialog by doing
more communicative activities using what they have learned.
Bob Ponterio
======================
95/09 From -> Patricia Calkins <PCalkins%ForL%IUSB@vines.iusb.edu>
Subject: Re: dialogue memorization
I still sometimes make my students perform dialogues, but never memorize
them. However, one thing that I like to have them do at the start of
the
year is to repeat the same dialog but using a different persona: two
spies trying to pass confidential info, Arnold Schwarzenegger talking
to
the Swedish Chef, Prince Charles and Lady Di (with their lawyers
present) or any two people they come up with. I had two students do
this
this semester with Beavis and Butthead.
Unfortunately I have never seen the show, but after the first sentence
the students were all screaming with pleasure about the
characterizations and all yelled "Beavis and Butthead" at the end.
This
is one exercise that keeps their attention. And the underlying idea
behind it for me is that words can mean different things depending
on
how they are said and what people do as they say them. And it's a lot
of
fun.
Tricia Calkins
======================
95/09 From -> "Dr. Lucinda Hart-Gonzalez (Cindy H-G)"
<LHART@VMS1.GMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Dialogue Memorization, part 2
I would suggest that your concerns are still with the POOR use of
dialogue memorization, and not with dialogue memorization itself. I
think a key point is not to STOP with memorization, but to use the
memorized dialogue as a comfortable jumping off point for more creative
work, e.g.
-- Concerned about register, Samantha, how about changing the characters
and seeing how that affects the speech patterns. Bob Ponterio was saying
that he does his little dialogues with a student (teacher-student)
and
then has them do them (student-student), and how about parent-child?
boss-worker? How do these different relationships affect how the "same"
communication takes place, including the nonverbal elements of posture,
gesture, and expression?
-- Zev, if you, like so many of us, found the ALM so successful, then
why are you/we resisting it now? I would disagree that memorizing fifty
words or ten phone numbers is at all the same as memorizing a dialogue.
IF IT'S A HALFWAY DECENT DIALOGUE (and again, I would argue that bad
materials don't mean the activity itself is bad, just as poor teacher
preparation to use the activity doesn't make the activity bad), anyway,
with a halfway decent dialogue memorizing it is like learning a story
(something kids, those masters of unselfconscious language learning,
love to do). Memorizing a list of words gives me no feel for the words,
not even one little example of how they're used, which a dialogue gives.
In dialogues the words are woven together with syntax and discourse;
a
wordlist is disparate, disconnected elements that I have to search
out
some connection for. In a dialogue, I don't even have to study the
meaning of the words, because I've learned the story, so the meaning
flows from there.
I seem to be the one that raised the pro-memorization banner. Let me
emphasize that I would NEVER want to see any learning STOP with
memorization. But I do think that WHEN WELL HANDLED WITH
GOOD MATERIAL, it is a useful base- building tool (modeling vocab,
structure, style, and pronunciation) for launching into more creative
work
(with additional vocabulary, registers, etc).
I have yet to hear any argument as to why memorization IN AND OF ITSELF
is harmful or actually for some reason fails to do the modeling and
comforting things we have talked about here. Come on, folks, if you
don't come up with them I will, e.g. what about the student who is
absolutely incompetent at memorizing things? What about the one who
is
excruciatingly uncomfortable getting into someone else's shoes, as
a
dialogue requires? What about the ones who are agonizingly shy about
"performing" in front of a class? Some of these problems would be
problems for just about any language class activity, but could be
especially difficult for memorized dialogues.
Cindy H-G
======================
96/09 From-> "Richard E. Boswell" <boswell@binghamton.edu>
Subject: Memorization and Recall
>Please explain why memorization is bad in some people's view, and what
is to
take its place in vocabulary acquisition.
The problem is that you are assuming that memorization is the basis
for
language learning and that it necessarily precedes communication when
we
all know that in nature it has nothing to do with one's competence
in a
language.
Maybe you are identifying 'memorization' with 'recall'. Of course you
have to recall linguistic material in order to use language but that
doesn't mean you have learned it through rote memorization.
R Boswell
======================
96/09 From-> North Port High School <npths@plix.com>
Subject: Re: Memorization and Recall
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet! Why are so many educators
opposed to memorization? The bottom line of any type learning must
certainly include a fair amount of memorization or a variation thereof.
Otherwise, why have such a large brain with its innumerable connections?
Isn't recall memorization? Isn't repetition in language classes used
to
induce memorization? If we don't work hard to learn (memorize, recall,
infer, etc.) how are we expected to retain knowledge? Does learning
have
to be fun? I think we should emphasize the hard work and long hours
involved in learning vs. the learning has to be fun aspect. There are
too many learning theories without facts to support them.
Ferdinand Velez
======================
96/09 From-> jcentner@hamptons.com (Jonathan Centner)
Subject: Communicative stuff
Ferdinand Velez wrote:
>Isn't recall memorization?
Hmmm..., maybe: there is a difference between it and recognition. This
much is obvious to anyone who does crossword puzzles. Memory is involved
in recognition, but this type of memory is not accessible by structuring
it.
This was the problem I had with the A-LM program: the language I
learned was very slow to rally around my intentions, although
I remain
to this day a very good reader and pronouncer (after some twenty years)
of the languages I studied using the A-LM.
I do like the A-LM concept of overlearning (as opposed to rote
memorization): and although I hardly recommend A-L orthodoxy, it seems
to point in the right direction as to what must happen in the FL
classroom in order to produce L2 competency.
Overlearning could be just what Richard Boswell means when he says that
listening is so very important in the early stages of SLA. I think
the
current professional climate, which favors the use of authentic
materials and situations to aid L2 acquisition and eschews the
scholasticisation of SLA is a plus.
Although memory seems to be inextricable from the interpolative aspects
of our day to day awareness (as in attention and concentration and
so
on), it really has nothing to do with awareness, outside of the fact
of volition (I will practice this until I have acquired it...). Krashen
is right: language is done for us... not by us.
One of the striking things for me about Krashen is the very strong
behaviouralist approach he takes in his theory, but most of the
communicative backlash against the A-LM was for its automatonism (
there
are pragmatic reasons for this, but also philosophical reasons).
Jon Centner
======================
96/09 From-> "Richard E. Boswell" <boswell@binghamton.edu>
Subject: Re: the value of memorization or the lack thereof
DC> The "research" is mixed, and anybody knows there's more than one
successful style for FLTeaching, if not from the research (where
evidence can indeed be found), then from our own experiences.
- Personal experience is a hard thing to deal with. Of course it is
important for people to follow ideas that are intuitively correct
because they gibe with their personal experience, but it is also
possible for teachers to fool themselves into thinking something is
working because they want to think that and they haven't really set
up
an experiment in a fair and objective way.
DC> I'll bet you dollars to donuts a variation on behaviorism will be
back in style within 25 years. The more things change, the more they
stay the same.
- No way! The idea that language is acquired the way your dog learns
that certain noises mean you're about to take him out or feed him is
dead and buried and will never be revived. Just as we are not likely
ever going back to bleeding people to remove poisons from their system
as was done currently 200 years ago.
DC> And I'd take a "gifted" grammar-translationist to a poor
communicative approacher any day of the week. (I'm not suggesting,
however, that one is more or less likely to be gifted than the other...)
- Yes, but I'd take a good communicative teacher over a good
old-fashioned grammarian any day!
R Boswell
96/09 From-> david coberly <dlc8184@mailer.fsu.edu>
Subject: the value of memorization or the lack thereof
>>For an answer to your question about why so many educators are opposed
to memorization, you might read the relevant research that the rest
of us have.
If you do not think that the research is worthwhile, which seems to
be the case
since you call theories unsupported, then none of this applies to you.
You teach
the way you want, and those of us who value research teach the way
we want.
The "research" is mixed, and anybody knows there's more than one
successful style for FLTeaching, if not from the research (where
evidence can indeed be found), then from our own experiences.
David Coberly
======================
96/09 From-> Patrick Barrett <PBarr21106@aol.com>
Subject: Re: the value of memorization or the lack thereof
Everyone I have encountered who believes that language learning is a
matter of hard work and memorization has scoffed at the idea of people
doing research. They go by how they learned and by their teaching
experiences. That is their right, but a lot of us believe that research
can show us ways to raise the number of students who wind up actually
using the FL we teach and that we do not have a basis for discussing
the
matter with people who do not think that research has any meaning.
Also, I do not see that the research is so murky that results cancel
each other out so that we can all pretty much do what we want; but
I can
certainly understand someone who thinks that it is. And I totally agree
that a good grammar-translation teacher is to be preferred over a bad
communicative teacher. When our department hired, I made sure the
principal understood that he was not to screen out so-called traditional
teachers just because several of us in the department try (with great
difficulty) to teach communicatively.
Pat Barrett
======================
96/11 From-> Ania Lian <ania@lingua.cltr.uq.oz.au>
Subject: Re: Memorization
>Memorizing lists of words, however, seems like a very inefficient way
to try to associate language with meaning. It doesn't seem to correspond
at
all to the way we use language on a day to day basis. Yet it is an
easy task
to define and to test, so it has a certain attraction for both students
and teachers.
Individual teachers need to do what they believe in.
It seems to me that the last words of Bob's have really hit the issue
on
the nail. What is at stake in this discussion, I would ask? Reflecting
on the notion of "memorisation" or reflecting on the pros and cons
as to
whether to teach by telling students to memorise?
While the former is about enriching our understanding as to processing
info, the latter is more about arguing for the truth-value as to what
should work. I can imagine though that there will be a difference in
students' ways of relating and dealing with information thus possibly
creating a situation where teaching either towards memorisation of
whatever there can be memorised or teaching toward some other goals
will
be right or wrong to some students.
The choices that we have to make are then these of selecting between
approaches which call for methodology of:
(a) "rough tuning" (Ellis, 1991, :40 or so, Widdowson, 1990, and many
others, like Breen, Nunan, "task based teaching" etc) or
(b) making no decisions on behalf of the learners as to the what, how,
and when (Lian, 1983, 1985, 1987 etc).
Language teaching traditions always go for the first model:
- direct method: "first things come first: Diller, 1971 (ab. :80)
- ALM you only know the language when you know its grammar structures
with a bit of vocab to support your learning : Lado, Fries (Lado, 1968).
- structural syllabuses: organisation of theirs according to arbitrary
criteria of sequencing: frequency, "difficulty", coverage etc
(cf
White, R.1991)
- Task Based Teaching: with a "careful sequencing" without a
justification as to why to sequence at all other than a common sense
or
rather possibly what common sense really is i.e. socialisation as to
conceptualisation of things.
>Our own confidence in what we do is probably more important than
whether today's research supports us, and that is also supported by
research ;-)
But we cannot also ignore this research. So what I would suggest is
that
what we may look for is a critical framework which would help us to
sieve through what is relevant and what is not.
Ania Lian
======================
96/11 From-> Jonathan Centner <jcentner@HAMPTONS.COM>
Subject: Re: Memorisation
>But we cannot also ignore this research. So what I would suggest is
that we may
look for is a critical framework which would help us to sieve through
what is relevant
and what is not.
Would such a sieve look like this:
Model --> Hypothesis/Theory --> Data
|
^ v
| | <-- New Model
v ^
|
Application Model --> instruction --> results
This model I propose has optional insertion points, and the symbols
have
more the characteristic of mathematical operations, than mere serial
or
directional indicators. (It even obliges a point where SLA-ers and
FLTeachers can get together to spit, name-call and throw things).
I think using this process (or sieve) it would be possible to do some
meaningful (albeit moot) transformations on Chuck O'Brien's model,
the
_stored data-base_.
I don't think his affectively laded presentation of it obscures its
merit. For example, his model is a representational model of language,
not communicative; second, his model is a static model, not a process
model.
Jon Centner
======================
96/11 From-> "Richard E. Boswell" <boswell@BINGHAMTON.EDU>
Subject: Re: Memorization
Right! We should never give up trying to integrate our practical
experience into a single theory of language learning and language
teaching. Just saying "it works for me" is intellectually dishonest.
Statements about how "I learned my French through ALM and it didn't
do
me any harm" and so forth do not address any important questions.
Richard Boswell
======================
96/11 From-> Timothy Mason <mason@cie.fr>
Subject: Memorization
Between research, the applicability of which to the classroom is not
always clear, and anecdotal evidence, which so often does little more
than to comfort a pedagogical traditionalism which has allowed millions
of children to quit after eleven years or so of schooling with very
little more knowledge than they went in with, whither to turn? I want
to
suggest that both the research and the anecdote can be enlightening,
but
only if we are willing to push them to their limits - to accept that
both modes of knowing often oversimplify and distort.
Timothy Mason
======================
96/11 From-> Ania Lian <ania@lingua.cltr.uq.oz.au>
Subject: Re: Memorization
>Right! We should never give up trying to integrate our practical
experience into a single theory of language learning and language
teaching. Just saying "it works for me" is intellectually dishonest.
Statements about how "I learned my French through ALM and it didn't
do me any harm" and so forth do not address any important questions.
This was exactly my point, especially since we have to communicate to
one another our experiences rather than let us be pushed by so called
"researchers" to an area which is called "local" research and which
implies that the value of what teachers do is only particular to the
particular "classroom". Such conceptualisation of our work upsets me
always as this removes any actual general value of my work and it covers
up a 1000 and one problems that emerge in the process of
learning/teaching but whose exploration is refused a general status
in
such discourses.
ania lian
G. Personal
Experiences with Memorization
95/09 From -> "Ilona M. Fox" <IVMFOX@aol.com>
Subject: Re: dialogue memorization
This discussion takes me back to 1964 when I began teaching...ALM French
which was ALL ABOUT Memorizing...Bonjour Paul, comment vas-tu? Très
bien, merci, et toi? Students memorized, "spoke" and had fabulous
accents . A teacher at my school told me about the time that he was
in
Paris and trying to buy something, and the salesperson said to him,
"Monsieur you have a beautiful accent, but no idea what you are saying".
I have also met adults who still remember those dialogues, and we recite
them together...good party fun! Still, I think students enjoy some
memorization, I use it from time to time although I don't insist on
complete word order accuracy. (I still remember poems from high school
English).
Ilona M. Fox
======================
95/09 From -> "H. Stephen STRAIGHT"<sstraigh@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu>
Subject: Re: dialogue mem.
On Tue, 12 Sep 1995, Robert D. Peckham wrote:
>>Steve: I like your idea about dialogues from outside the text. Maybe
we should all keep an electronic (better yet a hypertext file of "way
cool
dialogues". In this way we might say to ourselves "I think a dialogue
would
be nice here" and we would have an appropriate one at our fingertips.
Songs and poems can be way cool, too. "Ich, armes welsches Teufelein,
ich
kann nicht mehr marschieren, ich kann nicht mehr marschier'n. Ich hab's
verlor'n mein Feifelein aus meinem Mantelsach, aus meinem Mantelsach.
Ich glaub' ich hab's gefunden was du verloren hast, was du verloren
hast." [I, poor foreign devil, I can no longer march, I can no
longer
march. I’ve lost my pipe out of my pack, out of my pack. I think I’ve
found what you lost, what you lost.]
This song, complete with dialect vocabulary and syntax, grew steadily
in
importance to me from the time I learned it, uncomprehendingly, from
my
father, through my fleeting study of German, and on through my career
as
a linguist and anthropologist. It is a "rich" text in many ways, and
I
am lucky to have had constant access to it because of memorization.
Best. Bye. Steve
======================
96/11 From-> CASLER001@WCSUB.CTSTATEU.EDU
Subject: Re: Memorization
I have been interested in the thread about memorization, especially
since my classes have been in the process of memorizing poems and
presenting them in front of the class. My level III class did their
recitations yesterday, "Chanson d'Automne" by Paul Verlaine. (The level
I's did "Automne" by Victor Hugo.) Imagine my delight and surprise
when,
as I was chaperoning the homecoming dance last night, I kept hearing
snippets of the poem here and there!
The students protest vociferously about having to memorize a poem and
stand in front of the class and recite it, but they seem to be very
proud, when all is said and done, to KNOW a poem. I keep them in
practice by having them say it from time to time. For example, when
students are writing on the board, in order to keep those seated from
drifting off, we say the poem together. I offered a couple of bonus
points on the mid-year exam last yr. for anyone who wanted to recite
the
poem to me again. I agree with Bob that memorizing a poem is a valuable
experience. Thirty or fifty years from now their poem may be all that
is
left of their high school French experience.
Pam Casler
======================
96/11 From-> Robert Ponterio <PONTERIOR@SNYCORVA.CORTLAND.EDU>
Subject: Re: Memorization
>...the obsession to constantly talk to themselves in the TL (I remember
being a busboy and trying to repeat everything I overheard in the TL).
One of my HS French teachers told me to use this as a strategy when
I
went to France. I did, but never loud enough to be overheard by others.
The habit of having a constantly running interior monologue in French
was easy to pick up. Good practice for the highly motivated.
Bob Ponterio
======================
97/08 From-> Andrya Lewis <lewisac@itsnet.com>
Subject: memorizing poetry
In my own experience, I enjoyed memorizing poetry in high school. It
helped me solidify some grammar points and increased my vocabulary
a
little. Most of all, it made me "feel" fluent to be able to spout off
so
much French at one time. OTOH, as I got into college and re-studied
some
of that same poetry, I realized that my mispronunciations and
not-so-correct inflections had been memorized and were extremely hard
to
correct after several years had passed.
Andrya Lewis
Contributors to this subject (1995-1997):
Merle Albers
Zev bar-Lev
Patrick Barrett
Marilyn Barrueta
Amy Bergquist
Richard Boswell
Pete Brooks
Chris Buck
Patricia Calkins
Pam Casler
Jonathan Centner
David Christian
David Coberly
Samantha Earp
Carolyn Fidelman
Ilona Fox
Nancy Frumkin
Marilyn Hannan
Lucinda Hart-Gonsalez
Nancy Hudson
Laura kimoto
Peggy Koss
Richard Lee
Andrya Lewis
Ania Lian
Timothy Mason
Irene Moon
J.Vincent Morrissette
Craig Nickisch
Chuck O’Brien
Mike Osborn
Dana Paramskas
Robert Peckham
Robert Ponterio
Jim Reid
Jessica Roberts
H.Stephen Straight
Ferdinand Velez
Cindy Walsh
Mike Watson
Denise Way
Donald Webb
Laura Wuerdeman
Mary Young
Linda Zimmerman
Rosemary Zurawel
Return to [FLTEACH Main Page]
W3 page maintained by 
& 
Copyright © 1998 Jean W. LeLoup
& Robert Ponterio