[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
Oleo de José Tola
From: Ken Klein
Date: 5/2/99
Time: 1:21:52 AM
Remote Name: 207.172.202.225
Well, Luis' unbridled enthusiasm has inspired me to write at this late hour. Overall, I enjoyed this course because of people in it. In general, I'm not much one for theory - I prefer more of a 'trial and error' process of teaching. Of course, teaching which is based on sound theories of language and language learning will optimize the learning potential . . . blah blah blah. Intellectually, I am aware of this; emotionally, I just want to teach without all this fuss about Theory A vs. Theory B. Basically, I like to cut the to the chase - give me the conclsion and let me get to work. With this in mind, I really did not care for the SLA theorists who wrote 20-plus page papers on theories that could have been summed-up in 100 words or less (okay, I admit I'm exaggerating, but I think you get my point)! I couldn't help but think about Krashen's statement that input must be comprehensible in order for it to become intake. At times, I felt that we were trying to cover too much material and I was simply not absorbing it. I would have preferred less extensive reading and a greater emphasis on a summarizsation of the main points of each article. The other theory that has come to my mind is that one ought to teach at L + 1 (was this also Krashen?). Ocassionally, I felt like Dr. Sotillo assumed we (the class) had a higher level of knowledge about SLA than we did. I found it difficult to follow some of the tangent discussions (am I making up a term here?) about theorists we had not even discussed yet (e.g. numerous references to Vygotsky early in the term). I would have preferred a more structured approach to the many theories of SLA. Perhaps, the first few classes could have been more of an overview of the main schools of thought (sort of an expansion of what Dr. Sotillo touched upon during the last class). Did anybody else feel this way or I am the only one who was lost at times? Fess up (slang for 'confess') if you did. Okay, I realize I'm sounding pretty negative right now. It's my tendency to first state what I didn't like about something, then emphasize what I did like. This way, we leave off on a positive note! : ) I really enjoyed the use of the computer/Internet as a tool for learning. I would have liked to have learned more about different web sites related to the subject. I also liked the student presentations. I learned the most about the topic that I had to present on. I also enjoyed other student's presentations and learned a lot from them. Everyone really did a great job. Working with Angel was also helpful. His knowledge of his L1 was very useful in providing examples of different types of transference. As far as the written paper - I think this was a good idea. I would have liked more time as I felt rushed to complete the project by the deadline. Again, working with Angel was beneficial. He's a very smart guy and I got to "pick his brains" (slang for "get free info from him". Are these translations necessary for ESL students or are they insulting?)! Finally, I think that Dr. Sotillo is very self-motivated and enthusiastic about this field. I enjoyed hearing her opinions about different theorists (e.g. "'So and so' is a real jerk . . ." ). Dr. Sotillo was also very supportive of her students and provided encouragement. She also makes a genuine effort at informing students about different opportunities in the field. Well, I'm tiring of writing. I don't know if my plans for Norway will work out or not, so I may see y'all on campus some point in the future. Best of luck to everyone. It's been a pleasure. Peace - Ken.