I listened to Dr Liam Printer's new Motivated Classroom podcast this morning. It's a nice listen, as usual, and reminds us language teachers that thinking about language teaching can evolve over time. It would be weird if it didn't, don't you think? He asks the question "Is input enough" and essentially puts forward the idea that it may be in theory, but that communication/output is needed, as much as anything else, for motivation and engagement. I hope I got that right. So here are my own feelings about this question, with some references to standard research which you might find useful if you are learning about additional language acquisition. Nearly all language teachers would reply to the question "Is input enough? with "Of course not." We assume that to get better at speaking, you need to speak, and to get better at writing, you need to write. This is not an unreasonable response. After all, in general, we get better at what we practise. S...
Even when Google Translate was the main challenge, teachers have been concerned with designing homework tasks which make it harder for students to cheat. And I say ‘cheat’ unapologetically, since we know what we are talking about here: passing off work as your own when it isn’t. Because of Google, and now GenAI, teachers have resorted to setting vocab learning, or other tasks which don't require writing. You probably know what I think about vocab learning. If you don’t, look here. In a nutshell, not uselss but... ahem...sub-optimal. Traditionally, many teachers liked to prioritise listening and speaking in class, reserving most writing for homework tasks. Is it time to reverse this? Maybe, to some extent. I still think that in some schools, where teachers are able to hold the line, it is possible to be pretty sure students have done their own work. They just need to know that cheating is unacceptable and will result in unpleasant consequences: a telling-off, detention or rewrite. ...