Scribd
Upload
231 views2 pages

Teacher-Talk in The Language Class

This document discusses teacher talk in language classrooms. It argues that the quality of teacher talk is more important than the quantity. Good teacher talk engages students, provides comprehensible input, and allows students to participate through questions and comments. It also notes that students learn from their own output in addition to input. During silent periods when students are not yet speaking, high-quality teacher talk can be especially useful as the main source of input. The document also examines conditions that are favorable for language acquisition, such as providing a variety of speech acts and opportunities for clarification, and questions how some of these conditions can be realistically achieved in a classroom setting.

Uploaded by

Marianela Fabro
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
231 views2 pages

Teacher-Talk in The Language Class

This document discusses teacher talk in language classrooms. It argues that the quality of teacher talk is more important than the quantity. Good teacher talk engages students, provides comprehensible input, and allows students to participate through questions and comments. It also notes that students learn from their own output in addition to input. During silent periods when students are not yet speaking, high-quality teacher talk can be especially useful as the main source of input. The document also examines conditions that are favorable for language acquisition, such as providing a variety of speech acts and opportunities for clarification, and questions how some of these conditions can be realistically achieved in a classroom setting.

Uploaded by

Marianela Fabro
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Teacher-talk in the language class

The Myth of the Silent Teacher [Robert O'Neill - IATEFL April 1994]

I believe it is wrong to judge or assess teacher-talk only by reference to its quantity. It is just as important to assess its
quality.The question is not 'how much teacher-talk is there in a lesson?' but 'what kind of teacher-talk is there?'
I can put it a slightly different way. The question should not be 'how much time do teachers spend talking?' but rather
'How do teachers talk?' 'What do they do while they are talking to their classes?' 'When they talk, do they engage the
attention of the class, present them with comprehensible input and also allow them to interrupt, comment, ask for
clarification, and so on?' 'Is the teacher checking on comprehension as she or he talks?' 'If so, what kinds of
comprehension-checks are they using?'
I think that students learn not only through 'comprehensible input' but also their own output.
There are stages of language- development in which good teacher-talk is probably the single most important
kind of input.
All learners need 'input' and that 'negotiated input' is always essential. 'Negotiated input' means the kind of conversation,
talk or formal teaching in which the teacher and the student or students together 'negotiate' both what they are talking
about and the language that is used to talk about it. Students or learners 'negotiate' by showing whether they understand
or not, by asking questions, by showing through body-language, facial expression and verbal means. The person
providing the negotiates by being sensitive to these signals and adjusting the input accordingly.
Learners typically go through 'silent periods' while they are learning. It is especially during these 'silent periods'
that 'good teacher-talk' of the kind I have in mind is especially useful.
I believe James R. Nord was one of the first to point out and make us aware of the importance of these 'silent periods'.
He also pointed out, among other things, that forcing students to speak in the L2 before they were ready to do was very
counter-productive. It could even have the effect of de-motivating students. We seem to have forgotten this.
Comprehensible input is essential. The teacher is usually the best and sometimes the only person who can
provide comprehensible input. It is not comprehensible input alone by any means that is the 'motor' for second
language acquisition. Comprehensible input is the fuel, not the engine of language acquisition. But this still means it is
essential - and not just, I believe, in the early stages. Comprehensible input, dare I remind you, is not simply 'input'. It is
language that is broadly comprehensible to the learner.

Ellis's 'eight conditions favourable to language acquisition


Ellis (1985) has suggested that eight conditions are central or especially favourable for language acquisition. I would like
to look at each of them and then discuss their implications.'

1. A high quantity of input directed at the learner


2. The learner's perceived need to communicate in the L2.
3. Independent control of the propositional content by the learner (e.g. control over the topic choice
4. Adherence to the 'here and now' principle, at least initially.
5. The performance of a range of speech acts by both native speaker/teacher and the learner (i.e. the learner needs
the opportunity to listen to and to produce language used to perform different language functions).
6. Exposure to a high quantity of directives.
7. Exposure to a high quantity of 'extending utterances (e.g. requests for clarification and confirmation, paraphrases
and expansions).
8. Opportunities for uninhibited 'practice' (which may provide opportunities to experiment with using 'new forms')

Questions of degree and interpretation


There are, in my mind at least, a number of questions about these eight elements.

- Are we to assume that is it enough simply to direct a high quantity of input at the learner? If learners don't understand,
they switch off. Input, as Pitt Corder pointed out, is not the same as 'Intake'.
- What exactly is a 'perceived need,' ‘by whom is it supposed to be perceived? In ordinary life, people give evidence of
their desire to listen to 'perceived needs to communicate' not only by listening but also by asking questions, offering
advice, consolation or support, and so on. In other words, people indicate interest in other people's talk by talking
themselves.
- How can students have 'independent control over the prepositional content of the input 'if, for instance, they are in
groups of twelve or even more? How do teachers decide how much, or what kind of input to provide? Is this to be done
by some formal means - asking each student and asking them to vote or select certain topics or types of input? How
much time is likely to be consumed by this process? How do students know what they want until they experience it?
- If, as Ellis suggests, ' the learner needs the opportunity to listen to and to produce language used to perform different
language functions' and if most or many in the class don't know enough English to perform different language functions,
where is this language to come from if not from the teacher/ Or let us say that some in the class know enough English to
perform certain functions reasonably well, and others do not, but that even those who can perform them are likely to
make a number of mistakes, who is to decide on the acceptable level of accuracy? If you say, 'the students, of course',
should you not also ask 'what if their own English is defective? What if, in other words, they are not really able to judge
what is an acceptable mistake and what is not?' Why should they pay for a teacher to teach them at all if the teacher,
because of her or his addiction to the principle of 'learner autonomy' refuses to offer any guidance, refuses even to
speak to the class because this would 'diminish the quantity and quality of student taking-time'?
- Who is to provide the 'requests for clarification and expansion'? Is it not the teacher's job to do a good deal if not all the
time? And if the answer is 'Yes', how do teachers do these things and at the same time engage the interest and attention
of the whole class?
-What exactly is meant by 'opportunities for uninhibited practice'? Yes, I know that teachers can be an inhibition if they
correct all the time? But does this mean that teachers should in the classroom ignore mistakes that they know could lead
to misunderstanding or no understanding at all if they were to occur outside the classroom in the 'real world'?

When, then, is teacher-talk helpful?


First of all, teacher-talk is useful when the following conditions are met. These conditions all relate to verbal factors:

1. It is broken into sense groups


2. It is simplified but not unnatural
3. It is more redundant than 'ordinary speech' and words and structures are naturally repeated or 're-cycled' at
regular intervals
4. It is broken into 'short paragraph' segments to encourage or invite students to interrupt, comment and ask
questions.
5. When new vocabulary or structure is taught, typical examples are given
6. The teacher gets regular feedback through questions - especially 'open questions' or 'two-step questions' (closed
question + follow-up as below
7. Teacher uses other devices to get feedback such as
-physical response (Touch your left ear)
- using 'parallels to get examples from the class
(I don't like overcooked vegetables. And I never eat rare meat. Tell the person next to you about a kind of food
you don't like or never eat.)
8. Variety of elicitation & explanation techniques are used, including
-use of context
-enactment
-illustration
9. There is also a variety of correction techniques, including both covert and overt types
10. It is between 95% and 85% comprehensible

However, I believe there are also certain conditions in regard to the para-verbal features of teacher-talk.
 When the teacher talks, she or he maintains eye contact with as many members of the class as possible.
 The teacher uses eye-contact and body movement to give emphasis and invite participation (prolonged gaze at
different students between some sentences to invite comment, gestures to help explain language, etc.)

The question of 'authenticity'


How 'authentic' does teacher-talk have to be? Have we not been told that the only way to prepare students for
authentic language is to expose them from the very start to 'authentic language’?
There is a kind of unwritten rule in all 'normal' discourse that the speaker or speakers make concessions to the people
they are speaking to or with. They try, as far as possible, to use language they think the others will understand. They
also use various rhetorical devices to focus on information they assume the others may not be aware of. It is not just a
question of information but also of language. In other words, authentic language varies considerably in style and
content so that the people for whom it is intended will understand it.
The implication of this is that any definition of 'authentic' must depend to a considerable extent on the question
'authentic for whom?'. We can and should try to use naturalistic English as far as possible. But this naturalistic English
is bound to be influenced by the obvious fact that we are not using it with possessors of the full native-speaker code.

Classrooms and the uses and limitations of formal teaching.


Classrooms suffer from some very obvious limitations. They do not and cannot offer the same natural profusion of daily
occurrences that life in the streets outside offer. This is both a limitation and a strength. Because of their apparent
sensory monotony, they make it possible to focus on only one or several things at a time. They are, at best 'sheltered
environments' and offer opportunities not only for 'uninhibited' but also for sheltered practice.

You might also like