Top Five Doctoral TESL/TESL Programs
Martyn J. Miller
A faculty member of mine is contemplating pursuing a doctoral degree in
TESL or TEFL (not Applied Linguistics, though). She would appreciate
hearing from any of you about what would be considered the top programs in
either the U. S. or in Canada for such a pursuit.
Please respond either to me or to the faculty member herself, Martine Allard.
We can both be reached via snail mail at the address below or any my e-mail
address.
Thanks in advance on her behalf.
Martyn
MARTYN J. MILLER
AMERICAN LANGUAGE PROGRAM
GEORGIA CENTER FOR CONTINUING EDUCATION
THE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA
ATHENS GA 30602-3603
TEL (706) 542-4095 BITNET JMILLER@UGA
FAX (706) 542-5990 INTERNET JMI...@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU
Tamara S. Al-Kasey
Fwd: Top Five Doctoral TESL/TESL
Sorry for the low tech slip-up
Tamara S. Al-Kasey
A few brief observations on the study abroad - naturalistic learning issue.
For several years I have been intersted in comparing the language
learning of fl students who go abroad as contrasted with those whose
learning is limited to the formal language classroom. There appears to
be some evidence, as first presented by Nina Spada ("Effects of informal
contact on classroom learner's proficiency" 1985, TESL Canada and
"The interaction between types of contact and types of instruction"
SSLA, 1986) and in a later pilot study of my own ("Language Learning in
a study abroad context: the effects of interactive and non-interactive
out-of-class contact" Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and
Linguistics, 1990, James Alatis, Ed.) that there is an interaction
between form-focused classroom instruction and out- of- class contact.
To dispel many of the popular myths we know of the magical advantages of
study abroad ("go abroad and become fluent") much more must be learned
about the linguistic impact of study abroad.
I am in the midst of evaluating data from a larger project which
compares the French of students who studied abroad with those who
remained on their home campus. The goal of this project is to be able
to descirbe, in some specific terms, the way in which the language of
those who have been abroad differs from the language of those who have
not. In several papers I have reviewed the scant literature on the
linguistic impact of study abroad program. With few exceptions (e.g.
DeKeyser and Ginsberg ) most of the studies (my own pilot study
included) merely indicate that test scores (OPI, CEEB and others) of
those who have been abroad are higher than those who have not. We have
leearned nothing in qualitative terms of what the linguistic differences
are in the language proficiency of these two groups of students. I am
collecting a series of recently completed studies on this topic in the
hope that they will appear soon in a volume on the linguistic impact of
study abroad. In the interim, I welcome (personal- not via SLART,
PLEASE) information from any of you who have completed or have in
process studies which relate to this general topic.
Barbara Freed
Department of Modern Languages
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
bf...@andrew.cmu.edu
Susan Gonzo
susan gonzo
Frank B. Brooks
programs:
> I'd love to see the answers to this question on the network!
>--->> Before anyone responds, I think it would be necessary to have
expressed or spelled out the criteria for making such a judgement call. The
discussion of the criteria would probably be the most interesting aspect of
this possible discussion, which of course would leave out any names of
programs.
As an example, would one of the criteria be number of Ph.D.s
awarded in the last, say, 10 years? The publication lists of the faculty?
The placements of the graduates? How does one determine something like
"the top five programs in TESL/TEFL"?
-----------------------
Frank B. "Pete" Brooks
The Florida State University
e-mail: fbr...@garnet.acns.fsu.edu
-----------------------
robb scott
#1) the one that is least aware of this competition
#2) the one that initiated the idea of this competition(should
be really frustrating to get second place)
#3) the one that teaches no courses in methodology
#4) the one that feels no sense of inferiority to applied
linguistics programs at the same institution
#5) the one whose ideas and innovations are developing
at such a rapid rate it is impossible for any of the
faculty or students to take time out to put any of it
down on paper
Glad to be of service.
Robb Scott/ rbscott@cutcv2/ teachers college columbia university
LYDIE MEUNIER-CINKO @ UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
==> Interdisciplinary Programs that overcome one-track condescending
attitudes of other departments...
Lydie Meunier-Cinko
lci...@ccit.arizona.edu
Martyn J. Miller
My query was specifically for personal opinions. I know that it is very
difficult (and sometimes unnecessary) to state that one program is better
than another. One's natural reaction is to say that his/her program is
the best if his/her experience there was good. For example, though one
could easily argue that The University of Georgia is not one of the premier
institutions of higher education in this country, my experience at the
English department here was excellent. I, therefore, recommend that people
consider coming here is they're planning on pursuing a degree in medieval
English literature. But I am biased, and so are the majority of us.
Somehow, I think we are able congizant of that fact and take it into consi-
deration whenever we ask for the opinions of others. But I wouldn't go so
far as to say that that fact makes others' opinions irrelevant, does it?
Gail Guntermann
to getting from theory to practice?
Gail Guntermann 602/965-4645 (Office)
Dept. of Foreign Languages 602/965-6281 (Dept.)
Arizona State University 602/965-0135 (FAX)
Tempe, AZ 85287-0202
Frank B. Brooks
for a chapter in an edited book. The book is *Metaphor and Thought,*
which is edited by Andrew Ortony. The particular chapter whose
page numbers I need is written by Michael Reddy. Can/Will anybody out
there help me out? I thank you in advance.
kate
I'll be more than glad to give you the page numbers: 284-324.
That's Reddy on the Conduit Metaphor in Ortony, CUP 79.
Great stuff, eh, with all kinds of unacknowledged, unexplored
implications for the silly field of SLA!
kate garretson (KG...@CUNYVM.BITNET) Hunter College, NYC, USA, WORLD
Martyn J. Miller
I don't think courses in methodology would really count as pure theory courses.
Of course I believe that methodology is important in any teacher's training.
I personally think pure theory courses are also rather relevant to a teacher.
In fact, I believe also the person for whom I'm making this query is looking
for a program that emphasizes methodology courses; I can only imagine that she
already understands the benefits of such courses.
LYDIE MEUNIER-CINKO @ UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
A METHOD is prescriptive: teaching procedures are to be followed. An APPROACH
is defined in terms of goals: what do we want our students to accomplish at
the end of this semester? Techniques borrowed from various methods help to
adapt to the dynamism of a class, and to the personality profile of
both students and instructors. With this in mind, thinking in terms of
approaches allow more flexibility. Since todays' teaching is based on the
analysis of group dynamics, a methodology course taught at the University of
ARizona at the German Department by Mary Wildner-Basset uses Rebecca Oxford's
book LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES: WHAT EVERY TEACHER SHOULD KNOW. Students in
that course are trained to design more than one lesson plan according to at
least three different personality profiles. An article published by Doctor
Widner-Basset regarding that matter is in ISSUES IN TA SUPERVISION (Walz (Ed.)
(1993) available at Heinle & Heinle.
Lydie Meunier-Cinko
lci...@ccit.arizona.edu
Mike.S...@let.ruu.nl
Association...open to all) should know that their newsletter is about to
appear with details of SLA programmes worldwide. Those of you in the States
will find details of programmes given all over the country. But, inevitably,
there will be gaps so "you'all out there" are invited to send in short
descriptions of SLA courses that should be added to the data bank. These may
appear in an expanded version later. This goes for colleagues elsewhere.
Despite the noble efforts of the area coordinators, not all universities in
the world could be covered.
By the way, we are talking about SLA as a theoretical and experimental field
as opposed to teaching/applied courses where the main focus is on
applications to language teaching. Some SLA courses are given as part of a
package of courses including applied subjects and with an overall applied
aim. We are interested only the SLA components.
It turns out that SLA is given in many places now. This fact alone may be
useful to those trying to convince theit own administrators, colleagues to
include or boost SLA locally!
Mike Sharwood Smith
Herbert Seliger
Do we mean theoretical syntax? Theories of SLA? Theories of teaching and
learning? Do those of you who are adherents of no methodology position
prevent people from re-inventing the wheel? Can we learn anything from
the past or should we keep on repeating it? What do we know
about the effects of talking about methods and techniques (and distinguishing
between them) and actual classroom teaching? What do we know about the
carry-over of talking about SLA and what teachers do in classrooms?
If anyone can teach through intuition, why bother with a doctorate in
in TESL? Just a few questions to get the juices flowing. I have
many more but I have to run. My only concern is that we often coast along
on the basis of tradition and belief and not on the basis of any real
findings. Herb Seliger
Herbert Seliger
I find your statement "since TODAY'S teaching is based on an analysis of
group dynamics..."[caps mine] interesting. Does everyone out there share
this view? Certainly group dynamics is an important element of classroom
teaching but how is language teaching different and what other
focusses might methods training have?
LYDIE MEUNIER-CINKO @ UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
Herbert asked: "How is language teaching different and what other
focusses might methods training have?"
Well, I would first advise anyone of you interested in the question to read
Doctor Wilner-Basset article.
Just a few quick thoughts, however... (sorry for staying public.. although I
know who is the author of the unsigned message, the author did not leave any
e-address... so I assumed he wanted the discussion to remain public... am I
right?... Since American netwroks function a bit differently than French
networks... I may become a bit overwhelming in the French way again... sorry
if I do... Sorry if my style is direct in the French way, too...)
The first thing that we ought to minimize is the fact that teachers are still
too often preachers. Knowledge does not only come from the teacher-preacher,
students construct knowledge, too. STuents are still too often the outcome of
an education essentailly based on highly structured tasks: activities are
still too often designed to get specific types of information allowing very
little flexibility. The instructional approach based on the pleasure of
discovering and constructin knowledge during the learning process has not
developed much face validity, yet. Education, according to some researchers is
the result of either extrinsic or intrinsic motivation. When intrinsically
motivated, students tend to excel at cetain tasks because the are fun or
interesting. Extrinsic motivation, on the other hand, only takes place when
rewards such as grades, or even threats are used as incentives. Resaech
suggests that classrooms are imbalanced learning environments because there is
still too much extrinsic motivation. Doctor Schulz (1991) states in one of her
latest articles: "To increase learner motivation, there should be an increased
emphasis on content- i.e., on worthwhile, thought- and emotion provoking
information and interaction"... Instead teachers still raise questions they
know the answers of... Traditionally, courses in methodology were based on a
positivist philosophy whereby scientific methods are applied in a linear way:
there is a transfer of knowledge from the scientist (teacher) to the novice
learner. Knowledge is acquired through a system of extrinsic rewards. TODAY
8-) language teaching takes place in a constructionist approach: knowledge is
constructed by students with the help of the teachers and by means of various
types of interaction. According to the contructivists, knowledge has no
absolute validity, and learning is the result of an underlying cognitive and
affective development which, according to Piaget undergoes various phases: 1)
assimilation, 2) disequilibrium, 3) assimilation. LIkewise, Vygotsky states
that human beings do not only learn by means of their independant ability, they
also learn with an ability acquired through social interaction, a learning
process referred to as the "zone of proximal development". Traditionally, we
were speaking first in term of language learning, then in term of language
acquisition, TODAY we think in term of language development based on a
constructive, positive, as well as rich psycho- and sociolinguistic dynamics.
STudents have a lot of information the teacher does not have: they can bring
their own experiences to class and be part of genuine interactions. Genuine
interactions are TODAY's goals of language teaching whether elements needed for
interaction have been acquired analytically or wholistically. If students need
some grammar-translation, let's give it to them... if others need the presence
of a context, sure... VAriety of techniques within the classroom are of course
better done when students are devided in groups... personalized instruction can
be provided from group to group... in case of a teacher-centered appraoch, a
veriety of techniques across presentations are also necessary to sustain the
students' attention... Whatever the technique, our goal is to be able to
communicate genuinely and to allot 10 minutes at the end of every session for
ACTUAL commnunication and conversations.
I'm gonna stop my European rambling around right here... I have to go back to
my dissertation. ... sorry for the typos... Let's hope this will pave the way
to an interesting exchange which already showed to be promising based on what I
already read... And remember... It's only by accident that I may happen to be
right!!... (French joke!)
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Lydie Meunier-Cinko
lci...@ccit.arizona.edu
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
8-)
robb scott
programs distinguished from MA TESL/TEFL programs? Second,
is one difference between language classes and others the
way in which the process of learning relates to the purpose/goal/
object of the learning? Thank you for any help anyone can
give me on these.
Frank B. Brooks
Metaphor. What were you going to write with regard to that chapter?
---------------------------
Herbert Seliger
however, I am not sure that I have read anything that is actually new
and that hasn't been the accepted practice in most ESL classrooms
that I observe on almost a daily basis. However, genuine interaction needs
a knowledge base on which to begin. Level 1 (real beginners) have nowhere
to go and teachers need some guidance about how to set up situations
that will lead to real and beneficial communication. Unfortunately, when
the learner is left to his own devices he develops fossilizations and
peer dialects. Intrinsic motivation is fine but a lot of people
where you come from have learned English and other languages through
being extrinsically motivated. The issues are never as clear as
educational theorists and their predisposition for inventing new
jargon would have us believe. The role of instruction and what
effective language instruction consists of must still be investigated.
Mike Long has done a good job in reviewing some of these issues in
L. Beebe (also known as doctor Beebe) Issues in Second Language Acqusition.
Herb Seliger\
susan Foster-Cohen, Northern Arizona U
Hi Mike! Just saw your note on SLART about the survey of SLA programs.
I hope NAU is included. If not, I'll send you some stuff.
I also just got a copy of Bialystock's new volume on bilingualism.
Thanks for the citation in your paper!
Best, Susan Foster-Cohen.
Gail Guntermann
received the volume and have heard her speak on this. Greet her for me
if you see her, Gail
LYDIE MEUNIER-CINKO @ UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
extrinsic motivations that I am here in the US, a country where people are
looking for answers and not fossalizing in old theories. The problem is that
a lot of those trained in France have been teaching in French programs in the
US. And indeed, without pedagogical training lots of harm can be done. Those
who pretend to know it all are fossalized instructors. And we have a lot of
those in FL departments. Our NEW approach, although not all that new, is to be
able to grow with our students, to learn from them as much as they can learn
from us. I grant you this: it's not a new concept.. but it has staid in the
theoretical drawers for a long time... it's time it comes into practice...
--Lydie!...
Mike.S...@let.ruu.nl
back with more response later!
Mike
Mike.S...@let.ruu.nl
going to press. More details welcome. How are things!!!???? Mike
Herbert Seliger
Here at Queens all of the instructors in French are trained in literature
and do their shcolarly resarch in literature. They have absolutely no
training as LANGUAGE teachers and the results are terrible. but they
also don't care to get the training because the system rewards them for
research and not for teaching lower level proficiency courses. It is
a real problem here. As a matter of fact, foreign language teaching at
the high school level is much better because those teachers must have
methods training and concentrate on language proficiency teaching.
Herb Seliger
LYDIE MEUNIER-CINKO @ UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
instructors undermining language programs are a national catastrophy!!...
--Lydie!...
Martyn J. Miller
As a holder of a Ph.D. in Medieval English literature, a student of the
history of the English language, a student of English grammar and the
history of the grammar, and a holder of a teaching certificate in TEFL,
I find your statement that "Literature-trained instructors undermining
language programs are a national catastrophy (sic.)" to be a little difficult
to swallow. Though one does need a thorough grounding in the theory and
practice of teaching a language before s/he is put in a language classroom,
I certainly do not agree that simply being trained in literature makes one
incapable of teaching language.
SLART-L is not a list for flaming, and I think that it would be best if we
didn't get into the argument about who is a better teacher than another.
I personally think discussing what does qualify one to be a language teacher
is a more valid discussion than what does not qualify.