THEORY into PRACTICE

Chagal Guidelines & Teaching Chinese Students: theory into practice

Introduction

It is commonplace to think of foreign language teaching as bringing a target culture to learners. This is culture as content. The aim is that students should acquire knowledge of a target culture. It is less usual to consider the culture learners bring to the foreign language classroom and its relationship to the target culture. It has a deep effect on classroom processes because it is a significant factor in how teachers and students perceive learning and how they evaluate each other’s roles and classroom performance. (Jin & Cortazzi :1998, p9)

The culture of the EFL classroom has changed significantly since the late 1990s since large numbers of Chinese students began arriving in English-speaking countries to undertake courses of study in English. This presentation at Chagal Set-Up, April 2005, was designed to:

• Outline the challenges arising from teaching predominantly Chinese classes
• To place those challenges into an intercultural communication framework in order to analyse and understand them
• To suggest a way forward, using ‘Bridging Strategies’ (Doyle, 2003) or ‘hybrid’ methodologies, which are immediately applicable to teaching in the EFL classroom. These ‘Bridging Strategies’ have the dual purpose of getting the students on board using a familiar framework in addition to showing respect for the culturally preferred learning and teaching styles within the Chinese students’ experience.

Background

Initially, when Chinese students began arriving, EFL teachers and schools believed that simply being sensitive to the learners’ needs would be enough to ensure successful classroom interactions. In the vast majority of English language schools this proved not to be the case with Chinese learners. In fact, feedback from EFL teachers from Australia, New Zealand, England, Canada and Ireland is almost identical regarding the challenges experienced in classrooms with Chinese students, (Jean Brick:1996; Jin & Cortazzi:1998, author’s research 2003).

Equally important is the feedback received from Chinese students (author’s research; Jin & Cortazzi, 1998) on how they perceive the learning process in English-speaking countries. The table below gives a sample of this feedback using direct quotations from students (translated from Chinese) and teachers.

Chinese students’ feedback on native EFL teachers & their classes

Native teachers don’t know the grammar. Chinese teachers are grammar experts.

 

Pair work is ‘fruitless’. I can only learn errors from peers. It is the teacher’s job to give the model (Jin & Cortazzi:1998) and author’s research.

Native teachers have no structure in their classes. They jump from one thing to another and use photocopies, books, games. It’s confusing.

Native teachers waste time reading newspapers in class and playing games. This is not serious.

Native teachers have no control in class. Students move around, interrupt and even challenge the teacher.

This table gives clear examples of how each ‘side’ evaluates the other’s role and performance. As the table content demonstrates, it is not very positive. However, by situating the above feedback into an intercultural communication framework, solutions soon become apparent to this mutual mismatch of expectations and a way forward can be mapped out. The diagrams below show the ‘Transmission’ model, which is standard in English language classes in China and the ‘Acquisition’ model (Jin & Cortazzi, 1998), which is standard in English EFL classes.

Figure 1 - A Chinese cultural model of learning English

Figure 2 - A Western cultural model of foreign language learning
Extracted from Jin and Cortazzi, 1998, pp102-103

Chinese students regard the book and the teacher to be the authoritative sources of learning (Jin & Cortazzi, 1998, Brick, 1996, Maley, 1987). Suddenly, in English-speaking countries, Chinese students are confronted with a model of teaching that they do not understand and a style of learning of which they have no, or little, experience.

Bearing in mind that average English class sizes range from between 40-60 students in China, it becomes immediately apparent that Communicative-style teaching methodologies are challenging to implement for Chinese teachers whereas teacher-centred classes are easier to ‘control’. Therefore, when native English teachers announce they are not using the book that week or leave their central position at the head of the class to circulate and monitor, the effect is bewilderment on behalf of the Chinese students.

Furthermore, this bewilderment sometimes turns to anger as students may feel that the teacher is not performing her/his duties well and, therefore, is wasting their time (and hard-earned family income). The question facing EFL teachers is how they can make their classes ‘work’ again and ‘win over’ students.

As with all journeys of intercultural exploration, this is a two-way process. EFL teachers need to look at their teaching styles and acknowledge that these are based in a particular cultural framework. To avoid ethnocentric attitudes, EFL teachers are advised not to ask how they can ‘get the Chinese to do this or that’ but rather how they can reveal the new cultural framework of the classroom and reassure students that ‘real’ learning is taking place.

Since undertaking my own research, I have tried to plan lessons starting off from the ‘Transmission’ model and gradually work towards the ‘Acquisition’ model. This is not because one is superior to the other; both have strengths and weaknesses. However, Chinese students are expected to operate within the Acquisition/Communicative model in English-speaking schools and universities and find themselves graded and marked within that system. Culturally, Chinese students look to a ‘good’ teacher to guide them towards successful models. Consequently, most students are open to suggestions on how they can attain their academic goals, provided the strategies are clearly linked to that particular goal.

In order to assist teachers to use ‘bridging strategies’ between the two methods, I have designed several lesson plans. Once teachers see the technique, they can replicate it in their own classes. Naturally, this approach is used in the initial period of adaptation (taking ‘Culture Shock’ stages ,Oberg, 1960, Brown, 1986; Burgoon, 1995, into consideration), to reassure and motivate students until they feel confident enough to cope with the new learning and teaching styles.

One example of a lesson plan:

DICTATION

Give students a short dictation, i.e.: one paragraph or two. At the end of the dictation write the script on the board or distribute copies of it to Ss. Ask Ss to correct originals and revise the errors for homework. Follow this with chorus work – read each sentence out loud and ask students to repeat it (for pronunciation & intonation work). Follow this by asking students to call out any words they do not understand. If they seem reluctant (face issues, Chang & Holt, 1994; Goffman, 1967, Ho, 1976), pick out a few words which you feel may be challenging. Write each on the board and show students how to look them up in a monolingual dictionary (bring in a class set). Ask a student to come to the blackboard and write the definition on the board (you are encouraging them to cross the ‘active/passive’ line in ‘western’ terms).
Two days later (flag students that this is happening) give the same dictation and check the number of errors. The students will see that errors are greatly reduced (having used their traditional memorizing skills to learn the piece by heart). This encourages and motivates the students.

A further exercise to round off is to select the same words that initially gave problems and ask students to explain them. Give them a model sentence using each word. Ask students to write one further sentence of their own using the word (if confidence is still low, allow them to use the monolingual dictionary).

Chinese students enjoy dictation and feel it is good for their listening as well as their writing.

ANALYSIS OF LESSON

The positive elements introduced in this lesson from the ‘western’ perspective are that students are ‘active’, moving around the class at times (to blackboard) thereby becoming accustomed to this requirement. The teacher encourages taking initiative (in western terms) by asking Ss to try to answer questions and make suggestions. Using monolingual dictionaries gradually builds confidence in the Ss to move away from electronic dictionaries, which always translate back to Chinese.

The elements of preferred cultural learning style for Chinese students are that the dictation gives the correct model/answers. Ss have time to memorize it before having to repeat it. Ss are listening to the teacher (teacher-centred in Chinese terms, activity-centred in western terms). Chorus work is used which is a familiar learning technique and finally, students are taught a new skill, which increases their vocabulary, and focuses on the target language - using a monolingual dictionary.

It is important to keep in mind that no culture is static. EFL teachers are gradually learning more about China and Chinese students and the same process is taking place within Chinese student communities regarding classroom procedures abroad. However, the danger is that some of these exchanges of information (teacher to teacher and student to student) remain anecdotal, serving to reinforce negative stereotypes instead of forging solutions. It is for this reason that informing the debate with a framework from intercultural communication theory is so essential. In this way, the teacher is allowed to step back and view arising challenges with understanding instead of judgement.

In conclusion, this research fits the Chagal guidelines as it takes the views and learning styles of a non-traditional/international student group into consideration and attempts to employ an inclusive methodology to allow the group to participate in the learning process. The English version of the Chagal guidelines are now available in book form (please contact margarete.kernegger@vwu.at). Chagal guidelines may be used as a reference guide by language schools and universities to ensure best practice for Chagal-type student groups.

Bibliography

Brick, J, (1996) China: A handbook in Intercultural Communication. NSW Australia: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research, Macquarie University, Sydney NSW

Brown (1986) Learning a Second Culture in Culture Bound: Bridging the Cultural Gap in Language Teaching. (ed) Joyce Merrill-Valdes CUP: UK

Brown, & Levinson (1987), Politeness: Some universals in Language Usage.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Burgoon, J.K. (1995), Cross-cultural and intercultural applications of expectancy violations theory in R. Wiseman (ed), Intercultural Communication Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Byram & Fleming (1998), Introduction p.9 In Learning in Intercultural Perspective: Approaches through drama and ethnography CUP:U.K Cambridge

Byram, M (1989), Cultural Studies in Foreign Language Education Multilingual Matters Ltd: UK, Clevedon, USA Philadelphia

Chang & Holt (1994), A Chinese Perspective on Face as Interelational Concern, in The Challenge of Facework: Cross-cultural and Interpersonal Issues,(Ed) Stella Ting-Toomey. State University of New York: Albany

Doyle, D (2003) MA thesis ‘Understanding Chinese Students & Agents in the TEFL Context: applying intercultural communication theory to enhance classroom & business encounters. Dublin City University, Dublin 9 , Ireland. (unpublished)

Jin & Cortazzi (1998), The culture the learner brings: a bridge or a barrier? In Language Learning in Intercultural Perspective: Approaches through drama and ethnography CUP: U.K Cambridge. (Eds) Byram & Fleming

Goffman, E (1967), Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face interaction. Garden City, New York: Doubleday

Ho, D (1976), On the Concept of Face. American Journal of Sociology. 81, 867-884

Hofstede, G (1991), Cultures and Organizations: Intercultural Cooperation and its Importance for Survival, Software of the Mind. Harper Collins Business, London: Hammersmith (ed 1994)

Kim Y & Rubens B. (1988) Intercultural Tranformation: A Systems Theory in Y. Kim & W. Gudykunst (Eds) Theories in Intercultural Communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Maley, A (1986) ‘Xanudu’- “A miracle of rare device”: the teaching of English in China in Culture Bound: Bridging the Cultural Gap in Language Teaching. (Ed) Joyce Merrill-Valdes CUP: UK

Oberg, K (1960), “Culture Shock: adjustment to new cultural environments”, Practical Anthropology 7, 177-82

© Dee Doyle, 2005

Contact: Dee DOYLE
DCU Language Services
dee.doyle@dcu.ie

return to top of page