Can you please clarify Getting It?
I have been looking more closely at 'getting it' (Gi) activities and trying to more clearly classify the scaffolding according to their benefits to students. Based on my observations in classrooms and conversations with teachers in Hokkaido, it appears that most teachers use a lot of repetition and translation and some pair work. What is the purpose of each and what is the intended value? So far I understand the following from the teachers’ point of view:
| Gi Level 1- repetition | Purpose: to gain comfort, pronunciation practice, memory aid |
Gi Level 2 – translation |
Purpose: to insure comprehension; to insure accuracy |
Gi Level 3 – pair work – practice the model or pattern |
Purpose: to gain comfort talking to someone else, pronunciation practice, memory aid |
Gi Level 4 – pair work/group work – substitution drill – teacher directed (eg fruit basket; teacher gives students some ‘commands’ and students do them) |
Purpose: to assess if learners understand the new vocabulary, expressions or grammar points, gain comfort, memory aid |
Gi Level 5 – pair work/group work – substitution drill – student-lead (eg fruit basket with students calling the words; point to (do you remember this game?) |
Purpose: to assess if learners understand AND CAN SPEAK WITH MEANING the new vocabulary, think about what they are saying, gain comfort, memory ai |
Three problems seem evident to me.
First, teachers use mainly levels 1 and 2. They understand the other levels from workshops I do, but in my observations few seem to do the higher levels. I say this because I can tell if students are used to them when I see a class using them, or if this is a new activity for them.
Second, teachers tend to use the same words to describe very different things. Eg. pair work can mean many different activities. I think that there is a need for more granularity or precision.
Third, there is little mid level thinking (according to Bloom’s taxonomy) involved in levels 1-3, which are the most common ones used in Hokkaido.
In discussion with HOKKAIDO (DOKEN) supervisors last year I learned that pattern practice or substitution drills were discarded when the communicative approach was brought in some time ago. Apparently MEXT is now revising grammar expectations so they will again be back in style. Pattern practice does focus on accuracy and is not ‘real’ communication in the same way, but it has many other benefits, including seeing patterns, learning patterns, being able to manipulate language etc. and so I am highly recommending it in Gi Levels 4-5. In my mind every historical approach to teaching a SL has had some really good merits. Dismissing everything from a previous approach is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater!!