Skip to main content

Dans ma trousse

This post is a defence of the humble pencil case as a classroom language teaching aid.

Some MFL teachers argue that teaching children about what is in their pencil case is plain dull and that there are better ways for children to acquire the vocabulary of classroom objects. In general, they would argue that we need to find classroom activities for beginners and learners in general which are inherently stimulating. the argument runs: they are studying volcanoes in geography, burning magnesium ribbon in chemistry, learning about how the body works in biology, then they come along to the languages lesson to point at the window and say "this is the window".

I get the argument and if you want to see it amusingly parodied, watch Eddie Izzard's well know and very funny video.

Oh.......... alright, if your device lets you watch it, here it is:


So how can I defend using a pencil case in the classroom. First, the obvious stuff. There are a range of simple language areas for which the pencil case and its contents provide a useful tool. Here are some:

  • Teaching the vocabulary of classroom objects, which children need to understand simple, target language instructions such as "prenez un stylo", "soulignez avec votre règle" etc. beyond simple demonstration and repetition there are guessing games of various types to play.
  • Teaching the principle of gender. Note that it is best to teach items of one gender first, then the other. You can then ask pupils what they noticed - inductive learning.
  • Teaching colours. This is easilty done with beginners who keep an array of coloured pencils. Also, pupils have pencil cases of different colours.
  • Teaching prepositions: "Le stylo est sur la table ou sur la tête du professeur?" etc etc.
  • Teaching object pronouns: "Je prends le crayon et je le donne à David".
  • Teaching indirect pronouns: "Je lui donne un crayon ou une gomme?"
  • Teaching negatives: "Je n'ai pas de crayon rouge".
  • Teaching verbs. "Je touche la gomme; il touche la gomme; tu touches la gommes? vous touchez la gomme?"
  • Teaching possession: "Le taille-crayon est à moi ou à toi?"
  • Helping to develop early fluency through accumulation memory games: "Dans ma trousse j'ai... et... et..." 
  • Teaching imperatives: "Donne-moi ton bic".
  • Teaching il y a and plurals.
Now, I can hear you saying, but there are other more interesting ways of teaching all of these things, so why not use more stimulating resources and texts which have more intrinsic interest to young people? I would reply that where this is possible, absolutely, why not? But you then get serious issues of grading of language - texts and pictures which require too much unknown vocabulary and grammar for example. I have seen interesting sites which are superficially attractive, but when you think about how you would use them, you soon find that ungraded vocabulary can create blockages, slow the pace and hinder the teaching sequence. (An example is this bedrooms around the world site which is important and interesting, but not necessarily the easiest to use.)

In addition, and this might raise the eyebrow of comprehensible input fans, by using very familiar classroom items you are focusing the students' attention on grammatical form rather than meaning. This may be what you want to do. The acquired syntax can later be recycled and ultimately internalised in other more interesting contexts.

Is it boring to use the pencil case as a teaching aid? Not necessarily. It's all about how you do it and the enthusiasm you bring to the tasks. Guessing games are always popular. A humorous delivery helps as does  getting pupils up to play teacher. In addition, holding up real touchable objects may, I stress may, be more immediately motivational than using pictures in a powerpoint or on a flashcard.

I suppose my fundamental point is this: a teaching activity is a means to an end. We engage in artificial classroom activities because we know that, if they are well done, they can lead to long term acquisition. Clarity is vital and the humble pencil case can play a very useful role.

Comments

  1. I struggle with the need for fundamentals, but I think teaching them in isolation--or near isolation--is a mistake. I love learning for its own sake, but I don't think it's appropriate for the majority of young people. Purpose beyond the classroom is a powerful motivator and justification for learning of any type. My students this year, for example, packed backpacks of school supplies to send to an impoverished school in Colombia to learn "pencil case vocabulary." There is si much that can be done with a needs list from a charity abroad, especially if they will talk with students too.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I understand what you are saying. That project sounds superb. i suppose I would say in reply that the main aim for me as a French specialist would be the language rather than another cause. If that projects taught the words in the most effective way, then fine. Thank you very much for your comment.

    ReplyDelete

Post a comment

Popular posts from this blog

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,

What is "Input Processing"?

Input Processing (IP) was proposed by Bill VanPatten, Professor of Spanish and Second Language Acquisition from Michigan State University. Bill may be known to some of you from his podcast show Tea with BVP. He is one of those rare university academics who makes a specific effort to engage with practising teachers. IP was first proposed in a 1993 article (published with T. Cadierno in the Modern Language Journal) entitled "Input processing and second language acquisition: A role for instruction." My summary of it is based on an article "Input Processing and Processing Instruction: Definitions and Issues" (2013) by Hossein Hashemnezhad. IP is a little complicated to explain, but I'll do my best to summarise the key points before suggesting how it relates to other ways of looking at classroom language teaching. Is this actually any use to teachers? I apologise in advance for over-simplifying or misunderstanding. To paraphrase Dr Leonard McCoy from Star Trek &q

Delayed dictation

Image: pixabay.com What is “delayed dictation”? Instead of getting students to transcribe immediately what you say, or what a partner says, you can enforce a 10 second delay so that students have to keep running over in their heads what they have heard. Some teachers have even used the delay time to try to distract students with music. It’s an added challenge for students but has significant value, I think. It reminds me of a phenomenon in music called audiation. I use it frequently as a singer and I bet you do too. Audiation is thought to be the foundation of musicianship. It takes place when we hear and comprehend music for which the sound is no longer or may never have been present. You can audiate when listening to music, performing from notation, playing “by ear,” improvising, composing, or notating music. When we have a song going round in our mind we are audiating. When we are deliberately learning a song we are audiating. In our language teaching case, though, the

Using sentence builder frames for GCSE speaking and writing preparation

Some teachers have cottoned on to the fact that sentence builders (aka substitution tables) are a very useful tool for helping students prepare for their GCSE speaking and writing tests. My own hunch is that would help for students of all levels of proficiency, but may be particularly helpful for those likely to get lower grades, say between 3-6. Much depends, of course, on how complex you make the table. To remind you, here is a typical sentence builder, as found on the frenchteacher site. The topic is talking about where you live. A word of warning - formatting blogs in Blogger is a nightmare when you start with Word documents, so apologies for any issues. It might have taken me another 30 minutes just to sort out the html code underlying the original document. Dans ma ville (in my town) Dans ma région (In my area) il y a (there is/are) des banques (banks) des cafés (cafes) des

Pros and cons of pair and group work

Most teachers have made frequent use of pair and group work for many years, notably since the rise of communicative language teaching in the 1980s. Even before then it would have been common for pupils to work in pairs on simple role-play and dialogue tasks. So pair and group work is standard practice, if not universally supported by language teachers. It’s always worth evaluating, however, whether a practice works - whether, in this case, it helps students develop their proficiency. Pros Rod Ellis (2005) summarises the advantages of pair/group work (based on Jacobs, 1998) “1. The quantity of learner speech can increase. In teacher-fronted classrooms, the teacher typically speaks 80% of the time; in groupwork more students talk for more of the time. 2. The variety of speech acts can increase. In teacher-fronted classrooms, students are cast in a responsive role, but in groupwork they can perform a wide range of roles, including those involved in the negotiation of meaning. 3. There can