CC BY
68
ЯЗЫКОЗНАНИЕ
УДК 378
ФОРМИРОВАНИЕ ПРОФЕССИОНАЛЬНОГО ДИСКУРСА НА ОСНОВЕ ПРИНЦИПОВ ИНТЕРАКТИВНОГО ОБУЧЕНИЯ ЯЗЫКУ, РАЗРАБОТАННЫХ ПРОФЕССОРОМ ГАРВАРДСКОГО УНИВЕРСИТЕТА ВИЛГОЙ М. РИВЕРС ДЛЯ НЕЯЗЫКОВЫХ СПЕЦИАЛЬНОСТЕЙ (опыт Томского государственного университета)
С.К. Гураль, П. Митчелл
Аннотация. В основу статьи положен многолетний опыт формирования профессионального дискурса при обучении студентов по программе «Переводчик в сфере профессиональной коммуникации». Наш опыт базируется на принципах интерактивного обучения языку, разработанных и опубликованных профессором Гарвардского университета Вилгой М. Риверс.
Ключевые слова: языковое образование, дополнительные квалификации, неязыковая специальность, мотивация.
Among the many tasks of Tomsk State University’s Faculty of Foreign Languages is the language education of students whose major is unrelated to a language discipline. Such students, in addition to their main studies, undertake additional studies at the Faculty - on an optional and fee-paying basis - and graduate with an additional qualification as an interpreter and translator in their major field. These students, being from a non-language background, require a special and streamlined approach to their language education, not least dictated by time constraints and the fact that their greatest loyalty is, as one might expect, to their major discipline.
In 1997 Wilga Rivers, a retired professor in the Department of Romance Languages and Literatures of Harvard University, devised ten «principles of interactive language teaching», a foundation upon which stand the methods of teaching, changing generation-by-generation, but based on a bedrock of timeless principles. It is these principles that the authors adopted in their teaching, with positive results. The principles are, therefore, neither new nor earth-shattering; they are, however, applicable throughout time and relevant to the context within which the authors work. They are not an exciting new trend in teaching, but rather the basic truths without which a teacher can fall victim to being meaninglessly swept away by constantly changing fashions in language teaching. The principles, as we shall see, apart from providing a general foun-
dation for language teachers, are particularly appropriate in the authors’ context of teaching language to «non-language» students.
The centre of Rivers’ thesis is the assertion that the focus should always be on the student rather than the teacher and this statement can be no better underlined than by the first of Rivers’ ten principles: The student is the language learner. In our work at the Faculty of Foreign Languages this point is emphasized by the never-ceasing focus on student learning, essential given the demanding syllabus, constraints upon the student’s time and the fact that students begin their education at the Faculty often without a basic grounding in language learning. Motivation plays a great role here. Rivers notes the «misconception among some teachers that it is their task to ‘motivate’ their students» and states that «motivation springs from within; it can be sparked, but not imposed from without» [1. C. 2]. We are perhaps fortunate in that our students make a conscious choice to study additionally for their diploma in translating; their motivation is high and seldom requires even a ‘spark’ to encourage them - needless to say we spark them regularly just in case.
Rivers’ second principle emphasizes that students’ needs and objectives shape language learning and teaching. This is no less the case for our students. Their perceived opportunities in terms of future career are foremost in their minds. Rivers mandates three compulsory questions [1. P. 3] that all language teachers should ask of themselves before taking language teaching decisions: Who are my students? What kind of course or learning materials do they need? What approach and which techniques are most appropriate in this situation? The range of students taught by the authors is exceptionally broad and includes the medical student with a desire to master English in order to undertake specialized post-qualification internships abroad, the law student who intends to work in an international legal practice and for whom fluency in English is essential, and the historian who understands the essentiality to his future research of being able to analyze primary sources in the original. Taking into account the fact that the students study in relatively large groups with students from a wide variety of majors, choosing appropriate course and learning materials is no simple task. It is inevitable that some comprises are made and common ground is found. A good starting point is to use what the students have in common. They are roughly of a similar age (20-25 years old), students of Tomsk State University or in a few cases other universities of Tomsk, and of course they are all studying English in order to further their careers or create job opportunities. This enables the teacher to develop a more or less unified approach to the group and, so it follows, to each individual student. The teacher is able to concentrate the learning process on the shared goals of the group as a whole and, in smaller individualized sessions, on each student’s personal interests. As recommended by Rivers, the course design is particularly diverse; unlike ‘traditional’ divisions of lessons into grammar, phonetics, oral practice, etc. a combined approach is followed, allowing for the student’s language skills to consolidate and develop naturally.
The third principle posed by Rivers focuses on the importance of ‘normal’ uses of language, with an emphasis on oral and written communication of meanings. One cannot learn a language naturally without a great deal of experience of using the language in normal life and everyday situations. It is one thing for a historian from Russia to sit in Washington DC in the Library of Congress and analyze treatises on the United States Constitution in the original, but quite another if, having arrived in the city, he is unable to find his hotel, ask directions to the library and then explain to the custodian which documents he would like to inspect. Our courses, therefore, provide not merely an academic approach to language learning, but require the student to engage practically in acquiring the ability to use language naturally and thus express himself comprehensibly and comprehend others in the target language.
The fourth principle governs classroom relations, which are dependant on mutual liking and respect on the part of the teacher and students. Rivers discusses at length:
«Teaching and learning languages are distinctly different from other subject disciplines. Speaking and writing what one really thinks and feels means revealing one’s inner self: one’s feelings, prejudices, values, and aspirations. In a new language, learners can do this only in a roughly approximate, unnuanced way... so that they can easily give a false impression of who they are, or who they would like people to think they are. This experience can be very inhibiting and ego-threatening, if not traumatic» [1. P. 5].
In the authors’ experience, this is especially the case when students come from a non-language background and are often highly able specialists in their own discipline. While learning a language they therefore find themselves at a lower ability level than they are accustomed, as a result of which they are extremely self-conscious and regularly avoid expressing themselves in extensive detail, preferring to limit their speech and writing to that which they have already perfected in sure certainty that they will not make mistakes. This undoubtedly has an inhibiting effect on their progress and ultimate realization of their language potential.
The authors are experienced educators and recognize that creating a non-threatening, yet challenging, atmosphere is one of the most important responsibilities for a teacher. This is achieved by reminding the students that they are all in the same position and students generally appreciate that it is far better for them to make a mistake in class and be corrected, than to make that mistake later on in life and either not to be understood or to feel embarrassed. It is worthy of note that students worry more about making mistakes in front of their whole peer group than in a more personal teacher-student situation or when working in twos and threes. This is made use of by increasing contact time on a one-to-one basis while the remaining students are engaged in small group work.
Rivers’ fifth principle reminds us that central to language learning are language knowledge and language control. Language knowledge is gained ‘tra-
ditionally’ whereby our students gain a mental representation of how the language works and how they can use the language creatively building on their basic knowledge of the language structure. Language control - defined by Rivers as «the ability to understand messages and their full implications in the context, social and cultural, interpreting tone of voice, stress, intonation and kine-sics, as well as actual words and structures» - is achieved through continual use of materials based on the normal everyday uses of language and examples of typical situations [1. P. 8]. For example, to the native speaker of English, the phrase ‘pass me the milk’ sounds rude. Even ‘pass me the milk, please’ sounds slightly impolite. The use of the subjunctive ‘could you please pass me the milk’ is obviously - to the native speaker - the most appropriate, but to a nonnative speaker - and especially to Russian speakers, the authors’ students -sounds rather peculiar and artificial. This is equally true for our Russian historian asking the Library of Congress archivist for an essential document. Special attention is therefore paid to language control.
The sixth principle continues to discuss language control, noting that its development proceeds through creativity and is nurtured by interactive, participatory activities. There is much scope for creativity and participatory activities in the work we do. This generally involves discussions, presentations and small group work based on hypothetical situations. Such work stimulates the students to think beyond the boundaries of their practiced and well-rehearsed knowledge, progressing qualitatively in both language and communication skills.
Rivers’ seventh principle opens us to the use of every possible medium and modality to aid learning. Over the last several years, under the leadership of Prof. Gural, the Faculty of Foreign Languages has invested heavily in new educational technology, all of which is used to great effect. Furthermore, students are encouraged to watch films, TV programs, listen to songs and radio programs, and read books, newspapers and information online, all of which contributes significantly to their development as competent language learners.
The eighth principle reminds us that testing should be used only as an aid to learning, and not as an end in itself. In our context, as an organization not only educating students but also examining them and awarding a qualification, we cannot avoid preparation of students for state-mandated examinations. We do, however, use internal testing at appropriate intervals in order to ascertain what our students have learned and what assistance they require in order to overcome their weak areas. The students are neither over-tested nor undertested. They understand - as one would expect from mature and intelligent individuals - the need to meaningfully acquire knowledge and the importance of using and demonstrating that knowledge both in everyday work and life situations and in an examination situation. They are well aware that future employers will look at the latter when deciding whether to hire and the former when deciding whether to fire.
Principle nine emphasizes that language learning is penetrating another culture; students learn to operate harmoniously within it or in contact with it. Language does not exist in a vacuum, independent of the culture which it bears. Language, as the bearer of culture, is the peculiar creation of that culture. We cannot therefore fully understand the language if we do not have a sense of understanding the culture. Our students are taught that, in order to use English validly as does an educated native speaker, cultural penetration is unavoidable. Communication with native speakers plays an important role for our students, but a distinct lack of English native speakers - at the time of writing, one of the authors is the only English native speaker in the employ of the Faculty - means that use of culture-appropriate material must often substitute. In such cases, as noted by Rivers, «the teacher, being more experienced, acts as a guide to interpretation. since students will tend to interpret this raw material from the point of view of their own culture» [1. C. 13].
The tenth and final principle reiterates that the real world exists outside of the classroom and so learning takes place not only in the classroom. By not limiting themselves to learning during classes, our students made maximum use of their ‘real world’ opportunities. As discussed previously, communication with native speakers in a natural environment plus the use of different media greatly improve a student’s language knowledge and enable him to make fuller use of his potential. The authors’ students have ample opportunities for communicating with foreign peers, albeit at a distance, in their own academic spheres and beyond. For example, our historian may collaborate internationally both with the analysis and interpretation of various materials and, fundamentally, with accessing such materials. A historian based at Tomsk State University would find it much more convenient - at least in terms of time, finance, etc. - to ask an American colleague to access material in the United States than to travel there himself. Considering the technology available, our hypothetical American colleague could access the material, scan and sent it to our Russian historian in a matter of hours, leaving the analysis solely to the receiver. In such a case, even academic independence -as related to the actual analysis - is not compromised. The availability online of various materials is of obvious benefit to a student of discipline. A journalism student - of which we have had several - would be ignorant to learn English only in the classroom and not read articles from newspaper websites or watch English-language news programs. We strongly encourage all our students to make the best use of such opportunities to improve their knowledge and abilities subject-specifically and generally.
Rivers concludes that «by clarifying our attitudes and convictions in our own minds, we are strengthened to ‘select judiciously’. We are in charge and we cede this role to no other. This way lies true professionalism with liberation from external pressures and empowerment to develop and improve our work in the way we judge to be best for our students» [1. P. 15]. By using Rivers’ principles as a foundation-philosophy for language teaching at the Faculty of For-
eign Languages, Tomsk State University, the authors have ‘liberated’ themselves from the various and conflicting fashions in language teaching, while providing a language education which meets, most significantly, the needs and objectives of students whose main aim is not to learn a language for its own sake, but to apply it in the most practical sense to their own academic discipline. It is the authors’ considered opinion, therefore, that Rivers’ ten principles of interactive language learning are most conducive to formulating a professional discourse in relation to students with non-language majors.
Literature
1. Rivers W.M. Principles of interactive language teaching. Harvard University, 1997.
FORMATION OF A PROFESSIONAL DISCOURSE USING THE PRINCIPLES OF INTERACTIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING BY HARVARD PROFESSOR WILGA M RIVERS (Tomsk State University’s experience in the context of teaching students with nonlanguage majors)
Gural S.K., Mitchell P.
Summary. The experience of forming a professional discourse while teaching students according to the program «The interpreter in the sphere of professional communication» is described. Our experience is based on the principles of interactive language teaching devised by Harvard professor Wilga M. Rivers.
Key words: language education, additional qualification, non-language background, motivation.
