Week 1: First class with CiC and the Immediate Method
Welcome to the first issue of the CiC e-zine.
Conversations in Class is a conversation textbook written especially for Japanese university students, but it can also be used in any group of low intermediate to intermediate-level Japanese learners. It is based on the Immediate Method - a class management system developed to streamline and improve conversation classes in Japan.
We will post regular items here about using the textbook, the extension activities, and tips on running a class.
This first post is a possible lesson plan for the first class of an IM conversation course.
We welcome all comments, questions and suggestions.
Stephen, what do you do in the first class of the term?
Stephen : For me, the first class of term has two main objectives. The first is to introduce students with the method that the class will be using each week, so that they know exactly what they need to do. The second it to start on some focussed speaking practice, and familiarise the students with how a class will run. Since this style of class is quite different to their other lectures, it’s important to set the tone early.
How do you go about this?
Well, every teacher has their own way, and even amongst IM teachers there are many different teaching styles. This is simply the lesson plan that I have found works best for me after a few years teaching with this method.
Introducing the class system (PDF) Starting oral practice (PDF) Pronunciation, silence (PDF) Testing (PDF) Whole text for easy printing (PDF)
posted by ALMA at
9:48 AM
2 Comments:
Useful and interesting. I look forward to reading more. I've just started using CiC this semester.
Written tests and the IM
David Bergh teaches at Kaiyo Academy junior high school, using CiC with third grade students. This is an excerpt from an e-mail exchange we had this week.
David:
In spite of our efforts at school we have failed to get agreement to let us run a course without written style midterm and final exams. I realise it is not part of the IM curriculum, but do you have any information on mid-term/final testing for IM? For example sample tests or test construction guidelines others have found successful. Perhaps some testing materials you are thinking of evaluating? Just a reminder, we are using "Immediate Conversations 1" with first year JHS students and "CiC" with third year JHS students.
Bruno:
Some IM teachers do have written tests, and I for one started doing some on a regular basis last year, in one of my classes.
They have several advantages:
1- Good for the institution (JHS and some universities);
2- Clear incentive for students to memorize the content of lessons more accurately (wider range of vocabulary, correct spelling, etc.). I actually started giving regular very short written tests to a class last year when I realized that their spelling was disastrous, even though they were doing OK in conversation;
3- They help to have more varied marks. Thanks to the class dynamic induced by regular conversation classes, students usually do well and in most cases try seriously to prepare for their conversations, and so they tend to get good marks, between 7.5 and 9 out of 10. This is fine and normal, but the motivating force of this dynamic tends to wear off if everybody tends to get the same mark, or a given students tends to get repeatedly the same mark. Written exams will re-introduce a wider range.
However, written tests are like other interesting activities that we sometimes can't tackle in class, simply because we don't have enough time. We are very aware of the need to manage time as efficiently as possible, in line with the stated main goal of the class, conversation. In the same way as for other aspects of class management, written tests will then have to be managed according to the class context (institutional demands, number of classes per week, size of classes, style and level of students, etc.) and teacher's preferences.
The different possibilities I can imagine are:
1- final tests and midterm tests.
OK if their content reflects what was studied in class and they are not too easy nor too hard...
They are helpful for the above goals (1) and (3).
2- regular in-class written tests.
They are helpful for goals (2) and (3).
They should be very fast to correct. Some teachers ask students to self-correct, or correct their classmates' test sheets, but I am not sure that would fit JHS students (?).
IM teachers I know use one of the two following formats for regular
in-class written tests:
(a) Photocopied tests sheets that are designed for quick correction.
Stephen Richmond is making such tests for "Conversations in Class" and can send them by e-mail to interested teachers. For "Immediate Conversations 1", the homework sheets can be used to this effect.
(b) Another quick and efficient way is simply to dictate a few sentences in Japanese to students and ask them to write their English equivalent on a piece of paper. For IC1, such sentences can be found on the Teacher's Sheets. To correct, simply draw a circle around the areas that contain a mistake, then count the number of circles in a given sentence.
- No circle or one: 1 point.
- Two circles (depending on the seriousness of the mistakes): 0.5 point.
- Too many circles: 0 point.
Don't write the correct answer. Just add up the points and distribute back to the class (this in itself takes time, I usually just put them on a table and ask students to come and get them when there is a good moment for that). They will have to show you that they have corrected their mistakes in order to get you to write that mark on their Progress Sheet (again, this simple operation in itself takes time and may not be applicable to JHS classes: please adapt and mix these ideas and let us know if you found a combination that works well).
In summary, it is not against IM principles to do written tests. They just have to be balanced against the main target of the class, which is conversation practice. We have found that the IM as a class management technique works well because it is a consistent whole designed around one clear pedagogical objective. Conversation tests are what guaranties that students will practice conversation, and should therefore be given the highest priority.
I am very aware that the junior high school context is a tough one because classes are so short, 45 to 50 min. average. Teachers need to be creative and manage time efficiently. It sure helps when there is a team-teaching system in place, or when classes are split in two. That said, I have seen a JHS class with 44 rather unruly students in which the IM was used. It didn't produce miracles, as that teaching context was basically bad in itself, but it seemed to me that given the circumstances the IM system was the only one that had any chance of producing any results. The same can be said of university classes of 60-70 students, as I used to have at Osaka University a few years ago.
Best,
Bruno
Post a Comment
<< Home