Amy’s education blog

If I had to sum up my Inquiry project in one phrase it would be; TPRS works so well because teaches second languages in the same manner as one acquires their first. There are no grammar lessons, no verb charts, and no verb tenses taught. It is plain and simple; Teaching Proficiency through Reading and Storytelling; just as children do with English (or whatever their L1 may be). TPRS doesn’t claim to make student fluent in speaking in their first two years, because children are not able to speak in their first two years. It takes time for them to be able to reproduce the input that they have been receiving and the same holds true for high school students. The output comes in their 3rd and 4th year, as with any child in any area of the globe.

I’ve decided that the reason that there are no findings on the negatives of TPRS is that those who have tried it and did not like it most likely found it too tiring. I find it hard to believe that someone would publicly advertise that they were not willing to put in the effort, and therefore there is nothing out there about TPRS’s downsides. Initially I came into this project with the idea that I was going to somehow disprove TPRS and find all sorts of flaws, because I thought that I didn’t like it, but after researching it more, I found that I just haven’t given it enough time. I thought that it was a bad thing that the students at my placement high school could not produce output, but now I realize that it is because they were only in the 1st and 2nd level. The output will come with time. If TPRS is done right (because as with anything, if it is done wrong, then it is a disaster), I believe it to be a highly effective method of teaching foreign language, but under no circumstance should it be the only option for teachers. Variety is the spice of life, and using anything exclusively can cause students to miss out on other aspects of the language.

I haven’t had any luck finding anything about the negatives of TPRS. It looks like everything out there is in favor of this method and I think that this goes to say something. There must not be very many teachers that have had problems with the method, which I find quite amazing, but also maybe very misleading. I did find this one quote that I think sums up why there are no negatives on TPRS: “I think it is more comfortable for instructors who are not native speakers of the target language. They are off the hook. When they speak in the target language, they are anxious that their pronunciation may not be perfect. So, to escape any criticism, the safe approach is to ask the students to take out pencil and paper and start translating. I don’t think it is more complicated than that.” (http://www.eslincanada.com/tpr.html) Although I am sure that there are people that just don’t think it works, I’m sure the majority of people that try TPRS and don’t continue with it simply find it too tiring. I know that my host teacher has complained about the workload before but she believes that it is worth is for the value of the education that her students are receiving. I also know for a fact that a student in our class told me that his/her host teacher tried TPRS and quit simply because it was too much work.

I think that the quote is extremely true. I think people who quit because it is too tiring choose not to brag about it because it simply makes them look lazy, which is probably the main reason that there are no negative reports on the method. Also, the method is so new that there just may not be enough research on it to produce such information. However, I do not want to rule out that some people just do not see the benefits of the method. I can see that if a class is used to grammar instruction and then they are forced to switch to story telling, they, especially the boys, may find it childish and patronizing. I feel that for TPRS to be done right, it must be started from the level one class and it must include a small amount of grammar instruction as a compliment to the storytelling/TPR part. Also, the teacher needs to set down the rule that just because the content is more fun, does not make it any less serious.

For the last week or so I have been trying very hard to find something on the web about the downsides or cons of TPRS, but all I’m finding are quotes like these …

“It’s based on repetition, or “comprehensible input”; if you hear something enough times you know it, you use it correctly, and may even pronounce it correctly! This makes perfect sense to me. Isn’t that what language teachers do already? Isn’t that how we learned our native languages? By hearing a word or phrase used around us numerous times, then feeling confident enough to use it ourselves? With TPRS the repetition is accomplished by stories, interspersed with questions as the same content is rephrased from various angles, and the class adds parts to the story where appropriate. There is also reading that goes with the stories, and homework assignments that may include telling the story to someone at home.” ~ http://listserv.buffalo.edu/cgibin/wa?A2=ind0411&L=flteach&T=0&P=94835

So basically, I am at a loss. I have found nothing to discredit TPRS except what I am seeing in my own placement, which is that the students are amazing at reading, writing, and even understanding, but they cannot reproduce the language at all. For Spanish 1 I understand this, but for Spanish 3 I am having a tough time understanding why the students cannot speak correctly, or at least pronounce correctly. When they are given a sentence in Spanish and asked to translate it into English, it is a no-brainer for them. The same goes for when they are asked to construct a sentence in Spanish in writing. They even understand everything that the teacher asks them. The difficulty seems to be in the area of answering her back or trying to form a question in the target language. So, my question now is, how did the speaker of the above quote get it to work so well? “If you hear something enough times you know it, you use it correctly, and may even pronounce it correctly!” He/She must have done something different than my host teacher is doing, and from the sounds of it, what my other classmates’ teachers are doing.

What I think is happening is that TPRS encourages the teachers to not overcorrect the mistakes that their students make, but I think some teachers take that a little too far. Some mistakes need to be corrected and I don’t think it is bad to do so. In fact, didn’t our parents correct us as children learning out L1? If TPRS is supposed to be the closest thing to L1 acquisition, then errors correcting and feedback are a necessity. I know that in Spanish 1 you want to get kids excited about the language, so by correcting every little mistake they will become easily discouraged, but by the second or third year, students will get set in their ways and it may be harder for them to change their speech patterns. I guess I just have so much to learn and I have to realize that it’s ok to not know everything. TPRS may work in some classes and it may not in others. I’ll just have go through the process of trial and error until I find the right fit for not only myself, but most importantly for my students.

Since switching my topic, my progress has been very good. There are tons of resources out there for TPRS and luckily for me, not just electronic ones. My host teacher uses TPRS and she has soo many neat things that I am able to use. She has probably close to all of the Blaine Ray books (the founder of TPRS) and all sorts of instructional resources that teach teachers how to teach TPRS. His website, which I like very much, is http://www.blaineraytprs.com/ and it has a lot of good insight as well as tools that one can order.

What I like the most about his website is that he divides everything up by language, so that way I can focus more in detail on Spanish, as opposed to a general overview of foreign language instruction. I think the non-Spanish students in our class would like it as well because they can have things tailored to their language, instead of always having to listen to ideas about Spanish!

As far as my research about the actual TPRS topic goes, my biggest question at this point is “Is TPRS the most beneficial when practiced by itself, or can it be more beneficial with a bit of grammar instruction thrown into the mix?” Basically, most of the websites that I am finding are for 100% TPRS, but I’m sure this is just because these websites are trying to sell products or ideas. I would really like to find a website, or any other resource for that matter that deals with the cons of TPRS as well. I was talking with a fellow classmate that says her host teacher tried TPRS and stopped after a couple years. I would really like to meet with her and see what her reasoning for this was and how she feels her new method is an improvment.

Another resource that I have is a blog site where my group members (Amanda G, Ashely C, Doren) and I can collaborate and share ideas with each other. The site is http://flmethodsgroup.uniblogs.org/ and I think it will be very helpful as the project progresses.