Skip to main content

What did you do last weekend?

A language teacher staple for a Monday lesson is to ask students “What did you do last weekend?” It’s fine. Conversation is generated, you get to know the class better, there is target language input and output. Hopefully you would ask follow-up questions and show a genuine interest in the answers. Maybe you’ll get some new vocabulary out of it. All good. Let it go on as long as students are interested. You probably wouldn’t do it every week in that way because it would become too routine and predictable. 

So here are some low-prep variations you could use. I’m sure you have others!

To get the most students involved they would use notepaper or mini-whiteboards. For instance, every student would have to write down three things they did. (You could scaffold this with some verbs on the board.) You could then just ask around the class (hands up or not), or get the class into pairs and ask them to guess what their partner did.

Alternatively, with some classes you could put them in pairs and just say: “You each have to give a sentence about what you did last weekend. The first person who can’t say a sentence is the loser.” Allow them to make up absurd sentences to add a fun element, e.g. I ate my dog, I did my homework on the moon.

For very proficient classes, partners could time each other as they attempt to talk about their weekend for as long as possible without stopping. Once again you could give them the option of saying absurd things. The winner in each pair would be the student who talks the longer.

You use the topic differently. One way is to turn it into a listening task. In this case, you tell the class about your weekend as they take notes in L1 or L2, or you display a set of statements, some of which are true, some false. The class have to report back what you said or to identify the true ones from your account.

You might, instead, give your account as the class takes notes. Then make some statements, some of which are true, some false. The class identify which are which.

Another listening task would be to read a set of statements in the 2nd person, e.g. You played football. You went shopping. You went online. Students make a mark for every statement that applies to them. Then from memory they tell a partner what they did, using what they have just heard to help them.

Or how about ‘Find someone who...’. Students write on paper or on their whiteboard three things they did. They then circulate, seeking out students who did the same thing. Each time they find a matching statement, they cross it out and move on until all three statements have been matched. (Use more than three if necessary.)

Or you could use the ‘One lie’ listening task, whereby you give ten statements about what you did, one of which is false. The class identify the false one. You could ask students to translate each one to ensure they are all busy thinking. How obvious you make the lie depends on the class.

Another alternative is to get the class to ask you yes/no questions about your weekend. Every time they receive a positive answer, they get a point. (How about splitting the class in two and making it competitive?) They would ask questions like:

Did you watch TV?

Did you go to the pub?

Did you eat a pizza?

Did you go to a restaurant?

Did you go for a walk?

And so on. Note that the class gets to use yes/no question forms and to use the 2nd person (formal) of the verb, an opportunity which can be hard to generate day to day.

As a written fluency task you could simply give the class a five minute time limit to write as much as they can about what they did. Students could then read aloud what they wrote to a partner. You could add an element of urgency and competition by declaring the winner to be the person who wrote the most words. The priority would be fluency over accuracy here.

By the way, if you are working within an EPI/MARS EARS framework, as some readers may be doing, then all of these activities are really late in the sequence (S =Spontaneity). If you scaffold tasks heavily, they become more controlled and might be classified more as Automatisation or Routinisation (of past tense chunks).

If you have your own variations, feel free to leave them in the comments.








Comments

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,
4 comments
Read more

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).
Post a Comment
Read more

12 principles of second language teaching

This is a short, adapted extract from our book The Language Teacher Toolkit . "We could not possibly recommend a single overall method for second language teaching, but the growing body of research we now have points to certain provisional broad principles which might guide teachers. Canadian professors Patsy Lightbown and Nina Spada (2013), after reviewing a number of studies over the years to see whether it is better to just use meaning-based approaches or to include elements of explicit grammar teaching and practice, conclude: Classroom data from a number of studies offer support for the view that form-focused instruction and corrective feedback provided within the context of communicative and content-based programmes are more effective in promoting second language learning than programmes that are limited to a virtually exclusive emphasis on comprehension. As teachers Gianfranco and I would go along with that general view and would like to suggest our own set of g
2 comments
Read more