Teacher Talking Time
At one time teacher talking time (TTT) was seen as being inevitably counterproductive and something to be limited as much as possible. Why? There are five main arguments against it :
A large amount of TTT necessarily limits the amount of STT (student talking time). For example, in a 60 minute class, if the teacher is talking for a total of 45 minutes, that leaves only fifteen minutes left for the students. If there are ten in the class, they’ll get only 90 seconds each to speak. Many activities, however, do not need to be teacher led – pair work (PW) or group work (PW) can be used instead. A practice activity might be set up in T/class mode, demonstrated in open pairs (students doing the activity in front of the class), and done in closed pairs (all the students working at the same time).
A large amount of TTT inevitably means long stretches of time in T/class mode. This is uninvolving for students and is likely to lead to a drop in concentration and in pace. The lesson becomes boring and students “switch off”. To prevent this, activities and interaction patterns (T/class,PW,GW, IW) need to be be varied. How much class time can usefully be spent in T/class mode will depend on factors such as the students, the time of day, and what is being taught, but a useful rule of thumb guide is to set an absolute maximum of 30% of any one lesson, and no more than 10 minutes at a stretch.
TTT often means that the teacher is “telling” the students things that they could be working out for themselves - for instance grammar explanations and corrections. Apart from the fact that concentration may well wander half way through the explanation, monologue gives the teacher no real clue as to whether the students have understood. This can be avoided by using elicitation rather than explanation – the teacher asks pointer questions rather than simply telling, allowing the students to formulate the rules for themselves. If students are presented with clear examples and guiding questions, they often do not need to be “told”. Discovering grammar in this way is liable to mean deeper understanding and ultimately more successful learning. Organising the activity as pair work rather than T/class work also means that all the students have the chance to work on the new language, and not just the quicker ones who get the answer immediately and “tell” the others.
The work done by researchers such as Coulthard and Brazil on discourse analysis made it clear that T/S discourse is always distorted by the role imbalance of teacher and student – the teacher is expected to take the lead in initiating the topic, allocating turns, evaluating comments etc, while the student merely responds. A typical piece of classroom discourse might go something like :
T : Right. (indication of change of topic) Can you turn to page 99 and look at the picture (instructs) What sport is that? (initiates discourse topic) Paola? (allocates speaking turn)
S : Tennis (responds)
T : Yes, tennis. Good. (evaluates)
If students are constantly kept in T/class mode or if the teacher participates in PW or GW, there is a very high probability that the discourse will follow this sort of pattern. But this, as researchers such as Crystal and Davy, and Brown and Yule have shown is very different from the structure of normal conversation, where participants have equal rights and need to be able to carry out all the different moves in the discourse. PW and GW without teacher intervention is therefore essential for developing the speaking skill.
If the teacher is constantly dominant and controlling, student autonomy is minimised. Students take no responsibility for their own learning but learn what the teacher decides and when. Several methodologies of the last twenty five years or so (for example, CLL and Dogme, which I will discuss in more detail in future articles) have questioned whether this sort of “imposed syllabus” can produce results and have attempted to turn the situation on its head, giving learners full responsibility for the language produced and analysed in the classroom.
Is TTT always counterproductive however? In the second part of this article we’ll look at when it can be useful, and ways it can be used productively in the class.
Notes
1. For a more detailed analysis of classroom discourse, with references for the work of the researchers I have mentioned and many others, see this article by Moritoshi.
=====================================
وهذا موضوع آخــر
But what should the balance be between teacher talk time and student talk time?
It's best to consider talk time in the following percentages.
Students should speak for 70% of the lesson. Teachers should speak for 30% of the time. Of course, some lessons may require longer explanations on the part of the teacher. Or other lessons may only require a minimal amount of explanation, and 90% or more may be devoted to conversational activities. But this 70/30 figure works well as a goal in most classroom situations. Consider the following positive and negative examples as well:
Positive:
1. The teacher praises students.
2. The teacher provides feedback, correction, and possible guidance.
3. The teacher presents information or gives instructions.
4. The teacher sets up and/or demonstrates activities.
Negative:
1. The teacher offers personal anecdotes that don't connect to the lesson.
2. The teacher speaks too quickly (or slowly) for the level of students.
3. The teacher offers too much correction.
4. The teacher explains the target language for too much.
5. The teacher excessively uses slang and fillers.
How does the 70/30 figure get affected by specific activities?
Listening activities, examples from the teacher, demonstrating an activity... all can affect talk time. Let's look at some of the following examples to better highlight good use of talk time.
Effective:
1. The teacher reads a paragraph as part of a listening activity. The teacher speaks most of this time, as he reads the monologue several times and asks comprehension questions. However, his talk time can be deemed effective because the students get to practice their listening and comprehension skills. To increase the effectiveness, though, the listening activity could segue into another activity. Maybe the students could pick out idioms and try to use them in subsequent conversations. Maybe the students could imagine subsequent events from the monologue, or rewrite it as a dialogue. Maybe the students could summarize the monologue in their own words.
2. The teacher provides examples before eliciting a few more sentences from the class on a particularly difficult grammar point. Although his talk time is quite high here, the class can better use the form and function of the language. In other words, they know the structure of the target language, how to use it, and why to use it. This translates into better and more accurate usage both later in the lesson and out in the real world.
3. The teacher explains an activity's directions step by step, then demonstrates the activity with a student. Last, he checks confirmation with a few questions, such as "What will you do first?" and "How about after that?" Again, the talk time is high, but students can immediately begin the activity without confusion.
=========================================
How about student talk time?
A lot has been said so far regarding the teacher's talk time.
For students, the most effective use of their time occurs when they are actively using the target language. This can come in the form of drills early in the lesson or as part of a meaningful conversational activity later. Be careful of the following negatives, though.
Ineffective:
1. Students drill the target language throughout much of the lesson, and don't have the chance to use the new grammar or vocabulary with previously studied material. Drills are great to set the pattern of the target language, but students won't know how to use the language outside of these narrowly defined parameters. If students are still practicing with drills towards the end of the class, then the teacher may have introduced too much in the lesson. Retention will drop, and talk time will be rendered ineffective.
2. Students don't practice the target language enough in drills, and so make numerous mistakes with the grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and so on. If this continues during the whole class, then students may not understand how to correctly use the target language. They will continue to make the same mistakes outside of the class. Although the students may have spoken a lot during the lesson, they used the target language incorrectly. Again, this translates into ineffective talk time.
3. The teacher talks or calls on students one at a time. Although the talk time for the class may be roughly 70%, individual talk time is quite low. In a class of ten during a one-hour session, answering questions one by one translates to six minutes of talk time for each student. This isn't enough of an opportunity to speak and practice the material! A better course of action would be to pair up the students, have them practice in drills and free(r) activities throughout the lesson. Two students speaking in pairs for one hour would mean roughly thirty minutes each of talk time, which is a huge difference!
وبالتوفيق
معدين نلخصو ونكتب رائينا فية ساعدوني بليز الله يرضى عليكم
ضوابط المشاركة
المفضلات