CC BY
29
58
НАУЧНЫЕ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ И РАЗРАБОТКИ МОЛОДЫХ УЧЕНЫХ
Подводя итог прохождения производственной практики, можно сказать, что работа музыкального руководителя в не может обойтись сегодня без применения информационно-коммуникативных технологий и их использование дает возможность расширить творческие способности педагога и оказывает положительное влияние на развитие и обучение дошкольников. На методическом объединении для музыкальных руководителей было принято решение о включении таких форм работ с педагогами, которые направлены на повышение их квалификации, мастерства и повышения ИКТ-компетент-ности педагогов:
- мастер-классы;
- педагогические мастерские и наставничество;
- обучающие семинары по ИКТ-компетентности;
- тематические семинары.
Список литературы:
1. Кочегарова Л.В. Особенности ИКТ компетентности педагога в условиях информационно-образовательной среды [Текст] / Л.В. Кочегарова // Новые информационные технологии в образовании: Материалы междунар. научн.-практ. конф., Екатеринбург, 26-28 февраля 2008 г. / Рос. Гос. Проф.-пед. Ун-т. Екатеринбург. - 2008. - Ч. 2. - С. 225-227.
WAYS OF TEACHING ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE
© Kurbanova Sh.H.1
BETI, Uzbekistan, Bukhara city
This article is about the ways of teaching English as a second language that can be learned at classrooms on the bases of new pedagogical technologies with having taking into consideration the national aspect, i.e. influencing native language and typical mistakes and difficulties in learning English by foreign students.
Key words: language teaching methods, pedagogical trends, new pedagogical technologies, new proposals, evaluate, second language, communicative practice activities, form-focused, theoretical proposals.
Every few years, new foreign language teaching methods arrive on the scene. New textbooks appear far more frequently. They are usually proclaimed to be more effective than those that have gone before, and, in many cases, these methods or textbooks are promoted or even prescribed for immediate use. New me-
1 Старший преподаватель кафедры «Иностранные языки».
thods and textbooks may reflect current developments in linguistic/applied linguistic theory or recent pedagogical trends. Sometimes they are said to be based on recent developments in language acquisition theory and research. For example, one approach a set of correct sentences while another emphasizes the importance of encouraging 'natural' communication between learners. How is a teacher to evaluate the potential effectiveness of new methods? One important basis for evaluating is, of course, the teacher's own experience with previous successes or disappointments. In addition, teachers who are informed about some of the findings of recent research are better prepared to judge whether the new proposals for language teaching are likely to bring about positive changes in students' learning [1].
This article is about how English language can be learned at classrooms on the bases of new pedagogical technologies with having taking into consideration the national aspect, i.e. influencing native language and typical mistakes and difficulties in learning English by foreign students. We believe that information about findings and views in second language acquisition research can make you a better judge of claims made by textbook writers and proponents of various language teaching methods. Such information, combined with insights gained from your experience as a language teacher or learner, can help you evaluate proposed changes in classroom methodology [2]. Most people would agree that learning a second language in a natural acquisition context or 'on the street' is not the same as leaning in the classroom. Many believe that learning on the street is more effective. This belief may be based on the fact that most successful learners have had exposure to the language outside the classroom. What is special about natural language learning? Can we create the same environment in the classroom? Should we? Or are there essential contributions that only instructions - not of natural expose - can provide?
In this chapter, we will look at five proposals which theorists have made for how second languages should be taught. We will review research on second language learning which has been carried out in classroom settings. This will permit us to explore further the way in which second language research and theory contribute to our understanding of the advantages and limitations of different approaches to second language teaching.
There is a growing belief that learners in native language immersion programs need more opportunities to focus on form and receive corrective feedback. Birgit Harley [3] (1989) examined the effects of functional approach to grammar teaching on a particularly problematic area of grammar for English-speaking learners of native language - the contrastive use of two past tense forms for ' My mother often spoke about her childhood ', and roughly the specific or narrative past, for example, 'after class I had talked with the other students'.
Special teaching materials consisted of: 1) group work which created situations for the use of the conditional in natural communicative situations;
60
HAy^HLIE HCC^^OBAHHtf H PA3PABOTKH MOTOflBIX y^EHLIX
2) written and oral exercises to reinforce the use of the conditional in more formal, structured situations;
3) self-evaluation activities to encourage students to develop conscious awareness of their language use [4].
The contrasting results of the native language immersion program teaching experiments (focuses on grammar) may also be explained by potential differences in input. But in this case, it seems more likely that differences in the experimental teaching materials and technology may have contributed to the different results. Although both sets of materials had their goal to provide learners with the opportunity to use the linguistic forms in a variety of functionally-based communicative practice activities, the instructional materials for the 'past tense' study may not have been sufficiently form - focused or did not draw the learners' attention to their language use as frequently and as explicitly as the instructional materials for the 'conditional' study. While this is a possible explanation, other factors may be contributed to the different outcomes. For example it could be that the two linguistic structures under investigation respond to instruction in different ways or that even the relatively small differences in the age of the learners played a role [5].
It is difficult to draw firm conclusions about the strength of the theoretical proposals until further research is completed. But it is possible to speculate on the 'strongest contenders' on the basis of the classroom research findings so far.
There is increasing evidence that learners continue to have difficulty with basic structures of the language in programs which offer no form - focused instruction. This calls into question the 'Just listen' proposal, which in its strongest form not only claims no benefit from form - focused instruction and correction, but suggests that it can actually interfere with second language development. However, we don't find support for the argument that if second language learners are simply exposed to comprehensible input, language acquisition will take care of itself.
There are similar problems with the 'Say what you mean and mean what you say' proposal [6]. As noted earlier in this chapter, there is evidence that opportunities for learners to engage in conversational interactions in group and paired activities can lead to increased fluency and the ability to manage conversations more effectively in a second language. However, the research also shows that learners in programs based on the 'Say what you mean and mean what you say' proposal continue to have difficulty with accuracy as well.
Because these programs emphasize meaning and attempt to simulate 'natural' communication in conversational interaction, the students' focus is naturally on what they say, not how to say it. This can result in a situation where learners provide each other with input which is often incorrect and incomplete. Furthermore, even when attempts are made to draw the learners' attention to form and accuracy in such contexts, these attempted corrections may be interpreted by the learners as continuations of the conversation. Thus, programs based on the 'Just listen' and 'Say what you mean and mean what you say' proposals are incomplete in that
learners' gains in fluency and conversational skills may not be matched by their development of accuracy. It is important to emphasize that the evidence to support a role for form-focused instruction and corrective feedback does not provide support for the 'Get it right from the beginning' proposal. Research has demonstrated that learners do benefit considerably from instruction which is meaning-based. The results of the native language immersion and intensive ESL program research are strong indicators that many learners develop higher levels of fluency through exclusively or primarily meaning-based instruction than through rigidly grammar-based instruction. The problem remains, however, that certain aspects of the linguistic knowledge and performance of second language learners are not fully developed in such programs. Unfortunately, research investigating the 'Teach what is teachable' proposal is not yet at a point where it is possible to say to teachers: 'Here is a list of linguistic features which you can teach at any time and here is another list which shows the order in which another set of features will be acquired. You should teach them in this order.' The number of features which researchers have investigated with experimental studies within this framework is simply far too small. Similarly, second language researchers working from the 'Get it right in the end' proposal cannot yet provide a list of those forms which must be taught. Nonetheless, because these proposals do not argue for exclusively form-based or meaning-based instruction, but rather acknowledge a role for form-focused instruction and correction within a communicative program, the Teach what is teachable1 and 'Get it right in the end' proposals appear to be the most promising at the moment in terms of guiding decisions about second language teaching. Decisions about when and how to provide form focus must take into account differences in learner characteristics, of course. Quite different approaches would be appropriate for, say, a trained linguist learning a fourth or fifth language, a young child beginning his or her schooling in a second language environment, an immigrant who cannot read and write his or her own language, and an adolescent learning a foreign language at school. It could be argued that many teachers are quite aware of the need to balance form-focus and meaning-focus, and that recommendations based on research may simply mean that our research has confirmed current classroom practice. Although this may be true to some extent, it is hardly the case that all teachers approach their task with a clear sense of how best to accomplish their goal. It is not always easy to step back from familiar practices and say, 'I wonder if this is really the most effective way to go about this?' Furthermore, many teachers are reluctant to try out classroom practices which go against the prevailing trends among their colleagues or in their educational contexts, and there is no doubt that many teachers still work in environments where there is an emphasis on accuracy which virtually excludes spontaneous language use in the classroom. At the same time, there is evidence that the introduction of communicative language teaching methods has sometimes resulted in a complete rejection of attention to form and error correction in second language teaching.
62
НАУЧНЫЕ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ И РАЗРАБОТКИ МОЛОДЫХ УЧЕНЫХ
Teachers and researchers do not face a choice between form-based and meaning-based instruction. Rather, our challenge is to determine which features of language will respond best to form-focused instruction, and which will be acquired without explicit focus if learners have adequate exposure to the language. In addition, we need to develop a better understanding of how form-based instruction can be most effectively incorporated into a communicative framework. Continued classroom-centered research in second language teaching and learning should provide us with insights into these and other important issues in second language learning in the classroom.
List of literature:
1. Day E and S. Shapson.1991.'integrating formal and functional approaches to language teaching in native language immersion: An experimental approach'. Language Learning 41: 25-58.
2. World Book Encyclopedia Vol. 3, p. 48. Chicago, 1993.
3. Harley, B. 1989.'Functional grammar in native language immersion: A classroom experiment. p. 331.
4. Savignon, S.1972. Communicative Competence: An Experiment in Foreign-language Teaching. Philadelphia, Pa: Center for Curriculum Development.
5. http://www.univercityofottawa.ca/teachenglish/-various publications.
6. Montgomery C. and M. Eisensstein. 1985. Relality revisited: An experimental communicative course in ESL'TESOL Quarterly. 19: 317-34.
ФОРМИРОВАНИЕ УНИВЕРСАЛЬНЫХ УЧЕБНЫХ ДЕЙСТВИЙ МЛАДШИХ ШКОЛЬНИКОВ В ПРОЦЕССЕ РЕАЛИЗАЦИИ ПРОГРАММЫ РАЗВИТИЯ ТВОРЧЕСКОЙ САМОСТОЯТЕЛЬНОСТИ В УСЛОВИЯХ ДОПОЛНИТЕЛЬНОГО ОБРАЗОВАНИЯ
© Миронова Ю.П.1
Московский педагогический государственный университет, г. Москва
В статье раскрыта взаимосвязь развития творческой самостоятельности в условиях дополнительного образования и формирования системы универсальных учебных действий младших школьников. Обозначена структура творческой деятельности детей, охарактеризованы личностные, метапредметные и предметные результаты освоения до-
1 Специалист по учебно-методической работе отдела содействия занятости студентов и трудоустройству выпускников Управления профессиональной ориентации и содействия трудоустройству МПГУ.
