Communicating in a foreign language means constantly inventing

Stop worrying about form, focus on content

CLIQUEZ ICI POUR LIRE EN FRANCAIS

The series Words tripping off the tongue explores possible ways of stimulating oral expression in the foreign language classroom by proposing activities which respond to things students say about why speaking is such a challenge for them.

In Convincing a quiet class to communicate, published in January, I shared the case of a class of French secondary students in their senior year who seemed to be strangely quiet in English. A feedback discussion on the lack of oral participation revealed that, firstly, these students were afraid of making mistakes, and secondly, they felt themselves unable to match listener expectations when speaking.

It was the beginning of the school year and perhaps I wasn’t like their previous teachers. But we had to learn to work together. It was clearly time for a change of direction. That change is the subject of this article which reports a 3-session sequence on learning to satisfy listener expectations when speaking. The oral production activities proposed are all set in situations where content seems so important that fears about formal mistakes no longer dominate.

The objective at the end of the squence was for each member of this curiously quiet class to produce a structured and partly improvised oral adapted to the person they were speaking to. An oral they could be proud of and which would serve as a benchmark for the future.

The story of the inventor

Communication is not always a question of planning ahead to produce a precise effect. It also involves inventing solutions on the spur of the moment.

Thinking about how to set this sequence in motion, I remembered a story which I had used in class long ago. It must have been triggered by the idea of communication as constant invention, because it was a story about an inventor imagined by the Swiss author Peter Bichsel.¹

I have never read the original version of this story which I only know as a skeleton outline found in Morgan & Rinvolucri‘s Once Upon A Time, a collection of activities for the language classroom based on storytelling. ² Here is my version of that skeleton outline :

Inventor lived alone for 40 years – it gave him peace to invent – one day, realised he’d invented something and wanted to share – went to town – world had changed – lots of new things (electric cars, mobile phones, cash machines) – still wanted to share his invention but had forgotten how to communicate – finally found someone who accepted to listen – began talking but was soon interrupted by his listener : invention already existed, showed him – inventor went home sad but trip had inspired him, lots of ideas for inventions – with each invention, trip to town – each time discovered inventions already existed – came home, started again – because the most difficult thing in the world is to invent what already exists

Thinking about my curiously quiet class, I let the story come back to memory to see what was left. I reached for the written version of the skeleton which I had kept in a folder somewhere and decided to relearn it. I began saying it to myself, silently at first, then in a low voice. This oralisation technique, learnt from Morgan & Rinvolucri, helped to get the story in more detail, taking the narrative all the way to the end even though no-one else was listening.

Something seemed to click. Several features of the story matched the needs of that quiet class : the theme of invention which is such an essential ingredient of speaking, the search for an audience to hear what we have to say which seems to be a worry for so many, and finally learning to accept the challenge of making ourselves understood when speaking.

To tell it in class, I needed a preliminary activity to make sure people listened, and then lead from there into a final oral production task. Ultimately, that led to a plan for 3 sessions of 50 minutes, which is our standard lesson time. And here, gentle reader, is how it went.

Back in the classroom in invention mode

Session one.

On arrival, the students seemed ready to work. We were together again for the first time since our intense discussion the previous week – which you can read about here – and happy to feel something different was about to happen. Were they ready for some oral expression? They were.

The title Scientific innovation and responsibility was already up the board along with the question How do we share our innovations ? We were starting a new theme for which I needed their help I said. The class then formed groups of 3-4 to collaborate on a task with the following instructions :

On a small piece of paper, write down the name of an object, a machine or a technical process which your group finds particularly useful in everyday life. Work quietly so the other groups can’t hear what you choose.

This step went busily and relatively quickly. It was only necessary to encourage people to stay in English while discussing, to make sure all the groups were moving towards a choice of some sort, and to avoid two groups making the same choice – in which case, both groups would have had to think of another idea because confidentialty was vital for what followed. I collected up the papers from each group.

Groups stayed as they were. It was time to start work on the weighty subject of Scientific innovation and responsibility by looking at how we share our innovations with an oral activity on the theme of invention.

For this, each group was to consider themselves the inventors of the object, machine or technical process which they had just named in writing and given to me. They would have 5 minutes to come up with a short presentation of their invention for the other inventors – without naming it this time, of course, but pointing out what it was for and how it would change our lives. They could add a little mystery to the invention so the other inventors would have to pay close attention to understand what it was. Again, secrecy was important during the preparation so as not to reveal their invention before the presentation.

This phase required careful observation. I stayed available as a language resource but tried to let the groups work on their own, most of them working around noting down ideas and sometimes producing a short text to read out. Some groups needed reassuring that they wouldn’t run out of time. The actual duration of the preparation time was flexible, but I had to make sure there would be enough time for the presentations ahead – while also leaving enough time after that for telling the story of the inventor. However, busy with their preparation, the groups were blissfully unaware of such trifles.

The 7 groups took turns to present their inventions. I acted as master of ceremonies. I was surprised to see the pleasure with which the class performed. Not only in the tension of the game of hide-and-reveal which they played with their presentations, but also in the way they listened to their classmates. It was the first palpable sign of the connection between individuals which is essential when speaking – whether you call it complicity or neural coupling.

Some presentations were so cryptic that they were unfathomable – particularly if they oralised a written text – and these inventors were requested to add more details spontaneously. This was hard to do for some, but everybody tried, and the thing worked. Progressively, a sort of tacit agreement emerged concerning what constituted sufficient information about each invention for the audience to feel they had a fair chance at least of visualising it, and at most of guessing what it was. They were learning to express and to satisfy audience expectations.

When an invention had been fairly presented but remained unnamed, I concluded by saying : Your invention really is new! Congratulations! In all other cases, the standard formula, gently delivered was : Thank you for your presentation but, we’re sorry to say, your invention already exists. This standard consolation would reappear in the next phase of the lesson.

To finish up this session, I announced : You’ve all just experienced what it’s like to be an inventor trying to share your innovations, but now I’d like to tell you a story about a real inventor. Here I told the story I had worked out using the skeleton mentioned at the beginning. In the version I told that day, I inserted the inventions chosen by the various groups in the class for their presentations, even managing to reuse certain turns of phrase that I had kept in memory.³ Everyone recognised the formula : Thank you for your presentation but, we’re sorry to say, your invention already exists when it appeared in the telling. But it was the final punchline which had the most impact on the audience : The most difficult thing in the world is to invent what already exists.

Sillence. We were all still absorbed by the world of the story of the inventor. After a short pause, I asked : If you could meet the character of the inventor from the story, what would you ask him? A couple of questions emerged fairly quickly : Why do you live alone? Everybody needs to eat, so where and how do you get food ? This gave us the homework task for next time : Find at least 5 more questions to ask the inventor and bring them to class.

This first session had been productive. Next time, we would pursue the story of this inventor who had forgotten how to communicate but who had so much to say to the world. After all, he was a mirror-image of certain students in the class who no longer dare to make their voices heard in English : these students had often spent so long observing their own classmates that they had lost the habit of joining in orally, with the result that they had become silent and almost invisible ; others had ideas they wanted to share but, surrounded by curiously quiet classmates, they simply could’t bring themselves to do it. The aim of the activities planned for the next two sessions was to incite all 24 students in the class to speak out and speak up.

Preparing an interview with the inventor

Session two.

To explore the experience of the story further, we were going to set up a role-play with one student as the inventor and the other as the interviewing reporter. The students’ homework task was going to provide a bank of questions to structure the oral interaction of that role-play. We had to check those questions first.

Working with a partner, everyone pooled their questions. Had they found questions to ask? Were they satisfied with them? Asking questions in a foreign language is a subtle exercise where meaning and form must match so that each question can be used with confidence. To guarantee the reliability of each question, we proceeded with a collective correction phase for which each student came to the board and wrote up at least one question from their list. In writing it up, they were invited to code that question A, B or C.

A = Definitely correct.

B = Looks correct but may not be, please confirm.

C = Looks incorrect, please help.

Even with more than one student writing up questions at any one time⁴, this phase took a few minutes. But it gave crucial time for exchanges : some people asked for help, others turned to those around them, all focused on correctness. Once the board was full, we worked through, question by question : I said each one out loud for the class to verify. Author anonymity was the rule, all questions now being in the public domain, as we would see shortly. Together we confirmed the correctness of the As, we confirmed or corrected the Bs, and finally corrected the Cs. With 24 certified questions to ask the inventor, it was time for the instructions for the next phase :

Work on your own. You are going to play the role of a reporter who has been sent to interview the inventor. Choose and write down 15 questions you would like to ask. Select questions from the board or use questions of your own if you’re sure they’re correct. List them in logical order for the interview. Leave space in between to note down the answers. ⁵

Session two ended with everyone choosing and organising their lists of questions for the interview ahead. Judging by things I heard during this phase, most students clearly believed that their teacher would play the inventor who would answer all their reporter-questions. Little did they suspect that they would be the ones sit in the inventor’s chair in what would be an improvised dialogue of their invention. For the moment, they saw themselves as reporters, which was fine because they were already looking towards the oral interaction to come.

Where reporters and inventors meet

Session three.

For the third session, everyone came with lists of questions ready. This was the big day for speaking and I outlined the plan. They would be working in pairs to carry out two interviews : in one a reporter would interview an inventor and make notes of the answers given ; after that, roles would be reversed and the person who had reviously played the inventor would take out the list of prepared questions and interview their partner who would answer as the inventor. They would record these interviews on their phones.⁶

As a warm-up, we would run through saying some of their questions, because we knew they were correct but they needed to be clearly spoken and easy to understand. That meant not speaking too quickly, making a special effort to articulate, and accentuating key-words so that the listener would grasp the questions on first hearing. This warm-up was an open exercise which took about 5 minutes. When students wanted to test a question they raised their hand, said the question out loud, which I then I repeated : either by correcting the way it was said for the student to repeat in imitation – generally clarifying accentuation and segmentation of the words – or by simply repeating what the student had said to confirm that it sounded fine. A brief moment for oralisation in pairs was enough to end this brief warm-up which had also allowed for anticipation of the questions to come.

Two important instructions preceded the interview phase concerning the reporters. Their role was to keep the conversation flowing by moving communicatively from one question to the next, not simply working mechanically through their lists. They would also be in charge of the telephone placed on the table during the interview on which they were to record it, making sure they announced who was speaking and in which role, as these audio files would have to be passed on to me, their teacher, so I could listen to all their interviews in detail.

Pairs worked simultaneously, sitting face to face. Each pair worked at their own speed and the aim was for each student to play reporter and inventor at least once. The intensity of this phase was quite something to see. Who was leading the way? Was it the reporter or the inventor? Or were they taking turns to lead and to follow? The reporters certainly had to manage the recording, structuring their questions and keeping a note of the answers, but the inventors had to creating the content and build their character through the answers they gave.

I approached groups as they finished to gather first impressions – there are things which are more likely to be shared in a three-way exchange between partners and their teacher than in a whole class discussion. Some highly motivated students actually had time to change partners and do a second interview.

To close the session, the whole class joined up for a quick oral feedback discussion using a series of trigger questions I had already put up on the board :

How was your oral ? Unanimously, the class had enjoyed the experience. Having a framework but being left free to be themselves was stimulating. The step-by-step approach in preparing and carrying out the interview helped them feel confident.

Which role did you prefer ? The majority saw reasons to like both roles, and alternating between the two was a good idea. Playing the inventor gave them a chance to change identity and use their imaginations. The reporter’s role was less straightforward than anticipated : they had to adapt their questions to an often rather strange inventor, while also taking notes and monitoring the recording so they had to be well-organised.⁷

Did anything surprise you ? The freedom of the task surprised some, having the feeling that they were in charge of what they were doing. Several said of the inventor that, prior to the role-play, they would never have seen themselves speaking in English for so long without being fully prepared or simply saying a pre-memorised text. One student was reminded of a drama impro workshop and hadn’t thought such an experience possible in an English class. Another commented : I discovered that my partner is a very creative person!

More of this …? Contrasting reactions here. One student immediately said : Yes, definitely. Another developed a different response : I didn’t find this easy at all. Quite the contrary. But I need to speak good English for my studies, and I have to be able to do things like this.

I closed the session by reminding the class of how all this had started : Not long ago, someone in this class said : “I think we don’t speak much in class because we’re afraid of making mistakes.” Someone else said : “When I speak in public I get the impression that people expect somthing from me that I can’t possibly give them.” From what I have seen here, today you have proved, as the reporter, that you can perform something you have prepared and, as the inventor, create original answers on the spot. Communication is a mix of both, but there is always a degree of invention. Well done, everybody! Now it’s up to each one of you to find your way as an inventor in English. And, personally, I can’t wait to hear about your next invention!

This intense session ended with the request to make sure that everyone send the audio files of their interviews to me before the day is over, while they were still warm.

The sequence and its consequences

After this lively introduction, for the following class we picked up our chapter on Scientific innovation and responsibility from the foreign languages syllabus as planned. But these three sessions had set changes in motion for what had previously been a curiously quiet class.

The students were much more willing to interact orally in class, but also to get down to work on their own or in groups. What they produced was more ambitious, more complete and more inventive than before. It was the start of a new working relationship based on cooperation and collaboration.

For my part, having seen them coming to grips with oral expression and listening to their recordings, I felt that I knew the students better as individuals with all their qualities and their challenges. There was a calm, concentrated side to the class character which made them good listeners, which meant I relaxed a little and began to enjoy working with them more at their own speed and in their own time.

Finally, the choice of the story of the inventor, a story close to my heart, had allowed me to affirm my teaching personality. The ghosts of their previous teachers were better behaved from then on, and I felt that I was their English teacher now and together we had found our Subjective Classroom.

Signing off this series on speaking

This is the last of 6 articles based on learning how to enjoy speaking. Everything here grew from things students said in real-life experiences encountered during my time as a secondary school teacher of English as a foreign language in France.

The series Words tripping off the tongue doesn’t pretend to be exhaustive. Each article explores aspects of oral expression as they came to light in class, often unexpectedly. Giving importance to these unplanned incidents has helped me learn to think differently, to adapt and sometimes to completely change my classroom approach in order to make myself a more useful teacher for the students I am working with. Sharing these experiences here in written form has not always been easy, but doing it has become a challenge I have thoroughly enjoyed.

Beyond the various ideas for understanding how it feels to be a speaker in a foreign language, and how to make that a good experience for learners, this series has used a process which I believe is a key to teacher development and teacher autonomy : a teacher who is able to pick up on a learner comment and use it to identify a new direction to explore in class has a creative professional tool for a lifetime of constantly inventing.

The full series of 6 articles is available in French and in English.

Notes

1. For more about this story and Peter Bichsel‘s work in general, please see this article entitled The Usefulness of Reality. ↩︎
2. I throroughly recommend Once Upon A Time, Using stories in the language classroom, John Morgan & Mario Rinvolucri, Cambridge, 1983. ↩︎
3. With pratice, this is not as difficult as people think. I discovered it by accident during a telling of the story when I unwittingly recycled elements still in my working memory from the students inventions presented a few minutes earlier. People liked it, taking it as some sort of compliment. Now I do it deliberately. ↩︎
4. Several board markers of different colours were at students’ disposal here. ↩︎
5. This organisation of questions in interview order is crucial from a pragmatic point of view : when leading an interview, we start out with a series of approach questions to put the interviewee at ease, saving deeper, more demanding questions for later. If students find putting questions in order difficult, suggest listing the questions first and only numbering them once the list seems complete. ↩︎
6. This was before restrictions on access to phones were introduced in French schools. But even with the new rules, pedagogical use of phones remains negotiable. ↩︎
7. There is an optional written follow-up to the interviews. Using their reporter-notes, everyone writes up a portrait of the inventor they met. These articles can be posted in the classroom or even shared on the school webiste. My focus being on oral expression, and not wanting to get into writing or extend the number of sessions spent on the inventor story here, I chose not to do that this time. ↩︎