Skip to main content

Choral repetition from pictures. Is it useless?

I had a little Twitter disagreement with a couple of colleagues today regarding the common use of PowerPoint pictures for choral repetition. The teachers in question described such practice as "mad" and "useless". I must be mad, therefore, and wasted my time waving flashcards or showing images on the board with my classes for many years.

Actually, however, I think I had some justifiable methodological reasons for presenting single word vocabulary with flashcards or PowerPoint minus spellings. Namely...

Research and common sense suggest that images are an aid to memory so I see good sense in presenting new words along with a simple, memorable visual aid. This could be in the form of a flashcard or with a picture displayed on the board with a slide show or on a simple Word doc. You can quickly move from simple repetition (using normal voice, whispering, singing and even shouting) to easy guessing games, picture hiding, gradual reveal and so on. These techniques alleviate any potential boredom. I think it goes without saying that knowledge of individual words is useful.

Secondly - and this applies in particular to French  with its relatively poor sound to spelling relationship - I preferred in the early stages for pupils to hear the word without seeing the spelling. My feeling was that the spelling might encourage poorer pronunciation despite my efforts to model accurately. Once pupils has imitated the sounds accurately I was then happy to show word spelling so they could see the correspondence between the phonology and orthography of the language. This is in line with the structured direct method approach (an "oral approach") which goes back to Harold E. Palmer and others in the 1920s and is explained here.

I was always keen on pupils reading aloud words, phrases and sentences from the board since I felt it was, in the long run, important for pupils' "bottom-up" reading skills to be able to hear the sounds in their heads and see how words are made up of smaller bits including syllables and morphemes.

As with all pedagogical practices it's clearly important not to overdo the same procedures, so if you spent very lesson on choral repetition from pictures it would indeed be boring, if not useless.

Single word repetition has its limitations, of course, and makes more sense with beginners. If done with skill pupils can find it motivating. Just think of the range of simple flashcard games you can play.

So, in sum, I would refute the claim that choral repetition of single words with pictures is mad, useless or ineffective. As part of a much wider diet of classroom activities it has its place.

Comments

  1. I would agree with you. In my own experience of learning the basics of Italian, I was desperate to be allowed to repeat the words out loud again and again to get the sounds right and to enable them to move from my short term memory to my long term memory. I guess when it is particularly useful is if you have motivated students who are actively trying to commit words and sounds to memory rather than students who just passively go through the motions of making the sound without any active attempt to learn it!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for commenting. The argument here is whether pictures enhance the process. I think they do. I cpuld have added in my post that they can be fun and motivational too.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Absolutely. Any kind of memory hook is useful I think, our brain works well with associations. You can do so much with flashcards too (as you say) and I do definitely believe there is still a place for them in the classroom.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I wouldn't be without them in the primary classroom.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Using pictures also renders English is unnecessary in this first stage of the learning process. Pictures can also be very useful culturally, such as when we are learning the names of places in town.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks for commenting. I agree. The question remains whether it is better to display the TL word with the picture at first presentation. I doubt if it' a big deal, really, but on balance I would rather students heard the word alone. Let them focus juts on sound initially.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is skill acquisition theory?

For this post, I am drawing on a section from the excellent book by Rod Ellis and Natsuko Shintani called Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research (Routledge, 2014). Skill acquisition is one of several competing theories of how we learn new languages. It’s a theory based on the idea that skilled behaviour in any area can become routinised and even automatic under certain conditions through repeated pairing of stimuli and responses. When put like that, it looks a bit like the behaviourist view of stimulus-response learning which went out of fashion from the late 1950s. Skill acquisition draws on John Anderson’s ACT theory, which he called a cognitivist stimulus-response theory. ACT stands for Adaptive Control of Thought.  ACT theory distinguishes declarative knowledge (knowledge of facts and concepts, such as the fact that adjectives agree) from procedural knowledge (knowing how to do things in certain situations, such as understand and speak a language).

What is the natural order hypothesis?

The natural order hypothesis states that all learners acquire the grammatical structures of a language in roughly the same order. This applies to both first and second language acquisition. This order is not dependent on the ease with which a particular language feature can be taught; in English, some features, such as third-person "-s" ("he runs") are easy to teach in a classroom setting, but are not typically fully acquired until the later stages of language acquisition. The hypothesis was based on morpheme studies by Heidi Dulay and Marina Burt, which found that certain morphemes were predictably learned before others during the course of second language acquisition. The hypothesis was picked up by Stephen Krashen who incorporated it in his very well known input model of second language learning. Furthermore, according to the natural order hypothesis, the order of acquisition remains the same regardless of the teacher's explicit instruction; in other words,

The 2026 GCSE subject content is published!

Two DfE documents were published today. The first was the response to the consultation about the proposed new GCSE (originally due in October 2021) and the second is the subject content document which, ultimately, is of most interest to MFL teachers in England. Here is the link  to the document.  We are talking about an exam to be done from 2026 (current Y7s). There is always a tendency for sceptical teachers to think that consultations are a bit of a sham and that the DfE will just go ahead and do what they want when it comes to exam reform. In this case, the responses to the original proposals were mixed, and most certainly hostile as far as exam boards and professional associations representing the MFL community, universities, head teachers and awarding bodies are concerned. What has emerged does reveal some significant changes which take account of a number of criticisms levelled at the proposals. As I read it, the most important changes relate to vocabulary and the issue of topics