Immersion is apparently the way but that's just Cambridge's opinion...

Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk

Kammekor wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:19 am

Barang chgout wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 7:40 am

AndyKK wrote:

mauser765 wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:36 pm Indeed, prescriptive out, functional/communicative in.

People don't learn English by studying grammar. It's completely unnatural.

And to help your students better, put yourself in their position.

To put yourself in their position you need to speak Khmer, because they don't understand English.

I didn't understand English when my parents taught me. ..

Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk

At that age the brain has a very different structure and is very open to acquiring new languages. Try the same at the age of 15 or higher and you'll face a very different situation, needing a different approach.

That's true. But there are several methods for learning a little bit like you would if you just picked a language up rather than studying it formally. So many tourist touts etc have learnt that way. Their English sounds natural as well.
One of those methods prepares you to take the Cambridge exams PET after 6 months of one hour per day, and the FCE after one year. Compared to traditional TEFL teaching of around two plus years of three hours a day. And that's from an absolute beginner to intermediate.

Barang chgout wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:58 am Immersion is apparently the way but that's just Cambridge's opinion...

Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk

I think youll find it was the Canadians that invented the immersive method and implemented it across their curriculum many years ago with extremely high success rates. But that's teachng half the subjects in the children's native language and half in the target language.

AlonzoPartriz wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:32 pm

Barang chgout wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:58 am Immersion is apparently the way but that's just Cambridge's opinion...

Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk

I think youll find it was the Canadians that invented the immersive method...

I think you found Wikipedia...

Barang chgout wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 7:38 am

AndyKK wrote:

Barang chgout wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 12:26 pm

AndyKK wrote:Just one simple question to all English teachers here. Do you speak fluent Khmer?

Cambridge says that speaking the indigenous language is no use when trying to teach ENGLISH.

And please tell me how many English teachers in Cambodia have master degrees from Cambridge and Oxford?

100s of CELTAs here...they even gave me one....

Wait... what? You're suggesting that 4-week "how to teach English" courses are Masters Degrees?

StroppyChops wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:47 pm

AlonzoPartriz wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:32 pm

Barang chgout wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:58 am Immersion is apparently the way but that's just Cambridge's opinion...

Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk

I think youll find it was the Canadians that invented the immersive method...

I think you found Wikipedia...

No mate, it was in my TEFL preparatory course. Yes, I needed to prepare... Lol. Actually, the course was the most boring I've ever been on, except for that bit about the Canadian system.
The TEFL itself was much more interesting.

AlonzoPartriz wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:35 pm

StroppyChops wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:47 pm

AlonzoPartriz wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:32 pm

Barang chgout wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:58 am Immersion is apparently the way but that's just Cambridge's opinion...

Sent from my SM-G570Y using Tapatalk

I think youll find it was the Canadians that invented the immersive method...

I think you found Wikipedia...

No mate, it was in my TEFL preparatory course. Yes, I needed to prepare... Lol. Actually, the course was the most boring I've ever been on, except for that bit about the Canadian system.
The TEFL itself was much more interesting.

I sat through a few similar subjects in my early studies, so you have my sympathy.

No links of evidence to offer, but I think you'll find many of the toff schools taught Latin using the immersion method, before the Canadians cracked onto it, and Wikipedia does actually refer to immersion being used some thousands of years ago.

simon43 wrote: ↑Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:52 pm

And please tell me how many English teachers in Cambodia have master degrees from Cambridge and Oxford?

Whew! I reckon there are maybe no more than 10 teachers in the country with a Master's degree from Cambridge. Maybe about the same number of post-graduates from Oxford.

But how many of them have Master's degrees from Cambridge AND Oxford?? You're lucky if it's more than one...

Ok. Or not and. Sorry for that I only have a degree from the north of England.

The age-old debate over whether it's better to study language with someone who also speaks the learner's native language is unlikely to be concluded here. From almost 15 years of experience, I would suggest that at the earliest stages of language learning, it might be more efficient to study with a bilingual teacher. Of course, this largely depends on the method adopted and the linguistic goals of the student.

I would say that since most people learning Khmer in Cambodia do that from a Cambodian, very dated approaches are used (as they are in the public schools here). I would hazard a guess that lessons would be along the lines of introducing individual sounds through their corresponding consonant/vowel in the writing system (since Khmer, like Spanish is a phonetic language) and then over time building these into a set which can then be represented by simple words and building up from there. This is essentially a form of rote-learning and is probably best achieved with a bilingual teacher.

On the other hand, in more modern language learning settings, with English being very much at the forefront, task-based, communicative language teaching is more likely to be the norm. Here communication would be the central focus and this would (hopefully) be achieved through performing tasks in the language which lead to the ability to communicate in terms of the learner’s immediate needs. Here, it would be important that mistakes are noted/corrected and that authentic, relevant materials are applied. More than likely a native speaker of the language would find it easier to have the flexibility to select relevant materials, correct in real time and have the ability to scaffold communication appropriately (pitching the communication just above the current level of the learner).

The question then, of whether you’d be able to learn Khmer from someone who doesn’t speak any English, is probably a moot point. It’s unlikely (but not impossible) to be achieved when being subjected to dated, rote-learning techniques. It is likely to be achieved when adopting modern language learning techniques with communication in the target language front and centre of the course.