Toohey and Wong

In Toohey's article "'Breaking Them Up, Taking Them Away': ESL Students in Grade 1," I somewhat disagreed with the seating arrangement that the teacher initially had.  I understand that by placing the L2 learners towards the front, they would benefit by being closer to the teacher, allowing for a better learning experience.  However, I think that by being able to interact with the other students that the L2 learners would have an easier time learning the language as well as learning the culture.  Although I think that it is important to allow students to verbally interact with each other, I also think that it is important that new students are able to feel as though as they are a part of the group; by having all of the L2 learners sitting close to each other, they would be able to get a better sense of community amongst themselves and not feel so different than the other students.

A lot of the practices observed in the article focused on individual practice as opposed to group learning/interaction.  While I definitely think that it is good for someone to practice their new target language on their own, they also need to have interaction in order to pick up other social cues that they may not be able to get from a book.  I also think that by interacting, L2 learners will be able to better understand the culture that they are surrounded by, making it easier for them to learn.

"Critical and dialogic teachers can address bullying by uncovering assumptions and attitudes towards those who come from different communities" (Wong 67).

I think that bullying is an issue that is overlooked when thinking about L2 learners.  There are so many times when misconceptions and stereotypes rule student dialogue that L2 learners are often left feeling alone and outcast.  By having the teachers be more understanding and knowledgeable of an L2 learner they may have in their class, they will be able to better prepare when/if student harassing/bullying is to occur.  By being educated themselves, teachers will be able to also give their students a new perspective on their fellow classmates.

Political and Philosophical Roots of TESOL

One thing that really stuck out to me was the Grammar Translation Approach as a TESOL method: "In this approach, sentences are translated from the foreign language into English.  The mother tongue is used as the medium of instruction, and speaking the target language is not a major aim of instruction."  For those who speak a different language, one of the first things (that I have noticed) they want to know is the direct translation of words.  An example of this is when I am speaking to my grandmother.  Although she does know a little bit of English, we mainly speak to each other in Korean.  When I cannot think of a specific word in Korean, I say it in English, which then has her asking what the word means.  When it comes to my grandmother (and many other non-native speakers), Wong states it perfectly when she says that "speaking the target language is not a major aim of instruction."  Those who want to know the direct translations usually only want to know key sentences such as "Hello, how are you?"  or "Where can I find _______?"  They choose the most useful sentences that will help them throughout their day, instead of wanting to learn the language as a whole.  They often do not try to practice speaking the target language and when they do practice, it is the sentences that they have translated.

One thing I found interesting was that Wong doesn't mention anything about culture.  While learning the language/linguistics of a certain language is important, it is also important that teachers and students of TESOL alike are aware of the cultural differences that they may come across.  I think that not only is it important to learn about TESOL methods, but it is also important to be able to know how to react to a student if they may not be used to our customs.

"Oh, are you an international student?"

I couldn't help but laugh when I read the Characteristics of foreigner talk on page 106 in the Introducing Second Language Acquisition textbook.  It reminded me of a lot of times when my parents are literally yelled at by Americans, thinking that they cannot speak or understand English.  I find it humorous that many people think that raising one's voice will get their ideas across to a non-native speaker.  I also find that many people who do speak to non-native speakers (or think they are speaking to non-native speakers) also simplify their vocabulary and their grammatical structure.  There was one time my freshman year when four of my girlfriends and I decided to visit a church in Normal.  Normal not being a very diverse town, the church was also predominantly Caucasian.  When the pastor told us to greet our neighbors around us, a Caucasian woman turned around to us and said, "HELLO!  NICE MEET YOU!  ARE YOU INTERNATIONAL STUDENT?!"  Needless to say, all four of us were offended by her ignorance and replied in perfect English, "No.  We were all born here and some of us have never been out of the country.  Good morning to you, too."  There is definitely a huge difference as to how native speakers may talk to non-native speakers.  However, I think there is also a huge difference between understanding and ignorance.  Just because someone yells or "dumbs down" their English does not mean that the non-native speaker will understand them any better.