Teaching English to both False and Real Beginners

Name:

School Affiliation:

People often decide to take up a new language because of different reasons. Some of these reasons include the requirement for persons to familiarize with the language spoken in the country they intend to visit or work. Non-English speakers who travel to English speaking countries must take up English classes to familiarize with the language. English teachers agree that there exist two categories of beginning students. These are classified as real beginners or false beginners. Real beginners are first time English learners while false beginners are those that know some English but they now wish to learn it systematically for better understanding (Sohn and Shin, 2007). This essay will seek to discuss how teachers can plan the lessons to the benefit of both true and false beginners.

Different Categories of Beginners

Teachers of English as Second Language (ESL) and English as Foreign Language (EFL) appreciate the fact that there are two main groups of beginners in the beginners’ class. The first comprises learners who are coming across English for the very first time. This encounter is often in their home countries. The second group is that of learners that have travelled to countries where English is the main language spoken. This categorization is important because it determines the approach that teachers will employ in teaching the real and false beginners. It is also important note that the first group of learners comprises those who have never attempted learning any foreign language (Podgornik, 2012).

The second category of beginners comprises false beginners. False beginners have studied some level of English at a point in their academic life. This means that these persons have a general knowledge of the English language and are now desirous of getting a better comprehension of the whole language. In other words, false beginners want to hone their linguistic skills to understand the English language better. Teachers to this category of learners can assume that these learners can participate in a simple English conversation (Nayar, 1997). The instruction given to this group of beginners needs to be different from that given to real beginners.

The Best Teaching Style for a Mixed Ability Class

A class with both true and false beginners is considered a mixed ability class. The ability of the teacher to handle this heterogeneous class will contribute to the performance of all students. The teacher must come up with activities that will keep the false starters challenged without overwhelming the real beginners. Both the EFL and ESL teachers need to employ instructional style that encourages students to participate in the learning process. The instructional style will ensure that the mixed ability class moves in the same pace and that the academic performance of all students is maximized (Sadeghi & Khonbi, 2013). The use of direct teaching should be avoided in a mixed ability class because this will only exacerbate the problems in the heterogeneous class. Following is a discussion of the various instruction styles that teachers can apply in a heterogeneous class for the profit of both the real and false beginners. The styles include heterogeneous and homogeneous groupings, communicative tasks, task differentiation, and language games and simple stories.

Instructional Styles

Homogeneous grouping

This style is advocated for as a potential solution to the challenges encountered in a mixed ability class setting. These groups have students of the same ability and as thus facilitate easy passage of instructional materials. Grouping learners into homogenous groups is advantageous as it ensures that real beginners are exposed to instruction that is at their level. False learners are also benefitted because the instruction given to them is intense enough to keep them challenged and encouraged to keep learning. In these groups, the false beginners are taught more complex stuff compared to what the real starters are taught. Proponents of homogenous grouping support this style saying that it is a great way of individualizing instruction reaching the students. Students achievement is registered as the teacher continuously revises the pace and complexity of the instruction reaching the students (Rogers, 1998).

Numerous researches have been conducted to check on the suitability of homogeneous grouping as a strategy to deal with the challenges of a mixed ability class (Rogers, 1998). The researches have yielded good results showing that this is a good way of ensuring that the instruction passed is ideal for both real and false beginners. However, some opposition has arisen to this strategy. Opponents to homogenous grouping argue that this type of grouping inflicts stigma to real starters making them feel inferior. Stigma in turn injures the learners’ esteem and rendering the instruction style counterproductive. Another fault leveled against homogeneous grouping rests in its ability to decrease the aspirations of real starters and decelerate their progress. A research conducted by Rogers (1998) revealed that real beginners in homogeneous groups are often exposed to reduced resources, lowered expectations and rote learning. The research also looked into the virtues and vices that learners acquire in the homogenous groupings. False starters are denied the chance of helping real starters to learn the basics in a group setting. This causes the learners in the high ability groups to form and propagate the vices of selfishness. Before applying homogeneous grouping to solve the challenges of a mixed ability class, the teacher should candidly look at both the merits and drawbacks highlighted above. The opponents of homogeneous grouping propose the formation of heterogeneous groups.

Heterogeneous grouping

Students of different ability levels form this grouping. It is also known as cooperative learning because students cooperate in the learning process. The opponents of the ability grouping favor this strategy as it promotes the learning process. Researchers believe that all students deserve to be exposed to challenging curricula. The teacher’s goal in these groups is to find a way of engaging all students to ensure that real starters are not overwhelmed and the false starters are kept interested. One merit of using this kind of rests in the fact that low ability students are not left feeling inferior and the high ability students are also provided a chance to develop virtues such as selflessness by helping low ability students catch up. Teacher expectation is also normalized for the whole class and the teacher can only design and administer a standard form of learning instruction (Norris, 1970).

Some research also reveals that peer learning contributes to language development. Brown, Odom & Conroy, (2001) argue that social sharing among learners in the group promotes the learning process encouraging the low ability learners to strive to reach the targets set by their high ability counterparts. This type of learning helps real beginners to learn from the false beginners. Students in heterogeneous groups help each other overcome cognitive barriers. The benefits of cooperative learning are more evident where the work assigned to the group takes the form of written work. This is important because it allows low ability students to rely on the high ability students as a source of positive critique that will help them achieve best results in the assignments. Heterogeneous grouping is further advocated for because of its design in which it allows every member to participate in the activities of the group at the level of one’s ability.

Open ended tasks

This type of instructional teaching is rooted for because of its ability of achieving maximum involvement from all kinds of beginners. However, this style of learning allows the teacher little time to prepare. This style is also known as communicative based learning and it allows the beginners at the various levels to work on similar tasks, but at their own speeds. This will ensure that the real beginners are afforded sufficient time to work on the assignments while the false beginners are allowed the convenience of clearing their assignments fast and submitting (Pica, Limcoln, Paninos & Linnell, 1996). This style of instructional teaching ensures that neither the real beginners get overwhelmed nor the false beginners bored by the instructions given. Communicative based learning looks at a mixed ability class as a single whole rather than a class with different groups. The use of open-ended tasks as an instructional style is also associated with communicative methodology as it offers both the real and false learners the opportunity to use the target structure as part of their language system.

Language games and Stories

Despite the fact that real and false beginners exhibit differences in prior knowledge of the English language, they all show a similar liking for pleasure. Games and stories help both EFL and ESL learners to memorize certain linguistic cues. The games and stories used are designed in such a way that they will help in furtherance of the learning process. Games have been found to be powerful as language learning tools. Competitions offer platform for both the false and real beginners to the learnt linguistic knowledge. The stories used for instructional purposes are also simple to understand and are captivating to both the false and real learners. These stories help beginners to learn the various aspects of English as a language. The use of games introduces fun to the learning process and breaks the monotony of classroom learning.

In conclusion, one or more of the instructional styles discussed above can be used to address the challenges presented by a mixed ability class. Regardless of the instruction style adopted, the teacher must ensure that both the real and false beginners benefit from the instruction. The use of ability grouping might prove necessary in some instances while some occasion might favor the use of open-ended tasks or language games and short stories.

References

Betsy Rymes, B., & Pash, D.,(2001). Questioning Identity: The Case of One Second-Language Learner. Anthropology & Education Quarterly. 32(3). 276-300. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3195989

Brown, W. H., Odom, S. L., & Conroy, M. A. (2001). An intervention hierarchy for promoting young children’s peer interactions in natural environments. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 21(3), 162. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/233615236?accountid=458

Nayar, P. B., (1997). ESL/EFL Dichotomy Today: Language Politics or Pragmatics? TESOL Quarterly, 31(1). 9-37. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3587973

Norris, E. W (1970). Teaching Second Language Reading at the Advanced Level: Goals, Techniques, and Procedures TESOL Quarterly, 4(1). 17-35. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3585776

Pica,T., Lincoln-Porter,F., Paninos, D., & Linnell, J,. (1996) Language Learners’ Interaction: How Does It Address the Input, Output, and Feedback Needs of L2 Learners?. TESOL Quarterly 30(1), 59-84. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3587607

Podgornik, S. M. (2012). Automatic detection of language levels in L2 english learners. (Order No. 1508769, University of Washington). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, , 105. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1011476719?accountid=458. (1011476719).

Rogers, K. B. (1998). Using current research to make “good” decisions about grouping. National Association of Secondary School Principals.NASSP Bulletin, 82(595), 38-46. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/216028863?accountid=458

Sadeghi, K., & Khonbi, Z. A. (2013). Learners’ starting age of learning EFL and use of language learning strategies. English Language Teaching, 6(1), 28-34. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1288358503?accountid=458

Sohn, S., & Shin, S. (2007). True beginners, false beginners, and fake beginners: Placement strategies for korean heritage speakers. Foreign Language Annals, 40(3), 407-418. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/216019874?accountid=458