Steve Kaufmann,

I am not sure what assumptions of mine you are challenging. However,  
I agree with some of what you have said below.

On Jul 20, 2008, at 12:07 AM, Steve Kaufmann wrote:


> David Rosen and others,

>

> I will challenge some of your assumptions.

>

> I offer language learning online to people all over the world.  I  

> do not consider it important to encourage our learners to vote, nor  

> to understand their political rights. I do not  think it would be  

> different in an ESL class in the US. If a learner is interested in  

> politics, by all means make political texts available or encourage  

> the learner to find such texts and learn from them. In my  

> experience, political content is not of great interest, whereas  

> ordinary authentic conversations between people, with transcript,  

> are very popular. So are radio programs. Some people like  

> literature and some like self-help articles. So the answer to your  

> various rhetorical questions about what I might be opposed to is  

> the following. Language learners should be encouraged to learn the  

> language from subjects that interest them.


If I were teaching English as a Foreign Language or English as a  
Second or Other Language (ESOL) to students in other countries, I  
might not place as much importance on voter education or  
understanding political rights as I would if I were teaching adult  
literacy education (including ESOL) in the U.S. I agree with you that  
the language (and literacy and numeracy) contexts that are motivating  
to their learners are the ones that teachers should focus on.  
However, I don't see that that contradicts anything I have written in  
this discussion.


> The classroom is not a very effective place to learn languages.  

> This is true in our school system, and it is true for immigrants.  

> What immigrants do outside the classroom is more important to their  

> language learning. In Canada studies have shown that immigrants who  

> settle outside the major centres, and therefore do not have access  

> to as much ESL instruction, learn English faster. The key is the  

> motivation of the immigrant and his or her willingness, need or  

> opportunity, to engage with the mainstream culture. That was true  

> of me as a foreigner living  in various countries as well.


Here, too, I agree that using a new language outside of class  
generally helps learners acquire the language faster. However, from  
my experience, the combination of structured and non-structured  
learning works best for most adult language learners. The structured  
learning could take place in a variety of ways: in face-to-face  
classes, online classes,  independent study online, and in other  
ways. In the U.S., a three-year national demonstration project that I  
am part of, the Learner Web, offers adults in some regions of the  
country an opportunity to learn many things, including English,  
independently (and in other ways) with online and telephone-based  
support.  Also, I am an advisor on a U.S. workplace education project  
in which restaurant workers learn (work-contextualized) English using  
a computer in the restaurant, for three hours of classes a week. They  
also are required to practice their English with co-workers and  
customers. Nevertheless, I believe the face-to-face classroom can be  
an effective place to learn English, ideally supplemented with using  
English outside of class.


> Here in Vancouver, there are long waiting lists for the most well  

> established immigrant ESL programs. Immigrants who go to these  

> schools mostly only use English in the artificial environment of  

> their class. The rest of their life is in their native language.  

> That is really not an effective way to learn languages.

> Maybe it is time for people to reassess assumptions about the  

> usefulness of these programs. I know from my own learning  

> experience, watching people around me, and our online program, that  

> regardless of the nature of the learning program, only a motivated  

> and independent learner will actually succeed in transforming him  

> or herself into a comfortable speaker of another language.


I agree that classroom instruction alone is not the most effective  
way to learn a new language. However, ESOL teachers I have worked  
with in the U.S. would not disagree. I wonder if the phenomenon of  
ESOL teachers assuming that the way to teach English is through class  
alone comes from your experience at your program or school, or other  
programs or schools in Vancouver. Is this typical in Canada? Is it  
typical in the U.S.? I don't know, but at least, from my experience  
it is not typical. That would be a good question to explore on the  
National Institute for Literacy English language discussion list and/ 
or the Technology discussion list.


> If we are talking about citizens' awareness of where tax-money is  

> spent, it is not obvious to me that the average tax-payer feels  

> that it is his obligation to pay for immigrant language learning,  

> especially given the poor results.


Most people in the U.S. want immigrants to learn English. The  
question of whether or not they want to pay for more adult English  
classes out of their federal tax dollars is now tied up with a number  
of other immigrant issues. The U.S. Congress so far has not been able  
to pass a new immigration bill because the country has been so  
divided on some of these issues. However, even in states like Arizona  
where legislation now forbids providing government English language  
services to undocumented immigrants, the state law provides that  
public funding can be used to teach English for legal immigrants.

I would not agree that government-funded ESOL classes in the U.S.  
have poor results. There is some evidence that they that have good  
results, although of course this varies from state to state and  
program to program, but a recent analysis of U.S. adult education  
programs that are funded by the U.S. Department of Education (PART  
Analysis, conducted by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget))  
showed that adult education -- including ESOL -- was one of only four  
federally-funded programs that are effective.


> I think we should put the emphasis on teaching ESL learners how to  

> learn on their own, their own responsibility for their own  

> learning, plus a lot of encouragement, rather than putting them in  

> classrooms in the hope that they will achieve a breakthrough there.


Steve, can you shed some light on this? Is there any research from  
Canada -- or elsewhere -- that shows that adult ESL learners,  
learning on their own with a lot of encouragement, produces better  
results than attending face-to-face (or online) classes? I am not  
aware of any. If there is, I think that would be useful for people on  
the Professional Development list to be aware of.

David J. Rosen
djrosen at comcast.net