l~ai Oban~

Preventing Boredom in the Language Laboratory

Introduction

The traditional language laboratory exercise leans heavily on the mimicry-memorisation theory of language learning. The learner is expected to master a second or foreign language as a result of exposure to native-speaking models whose utterances he imitates several times and ends up by memo- rising. ~ustained practice is believed to lead to "over- learning", a phenomenon that ensures that the learner receives sufficient exposure to, and also retains, the language items he is learning.

Such exercises usually take either of two forms. The first involves the mere repetition of model utterances. The second involves grammar and vocabulary exercises in which the learner changes the forms of words and sounds slightly and answers questions asked by the master voice. In both cases the supervisor listens and corrects errors as they are ob- served. The learner is also able to judge his own perform- ance by comparing his utterances with the model.

Language laboratory work has however been criticised for being too dull and Stereotyped. It appears that the initial zeal of learning - connected with learning a new language and handling new equipment - is usually stifled by the un- ending repetitiveness of the exercises. It is therefore necessary to make laboratory language exercises more varied and consequently more interesting and rewarding to both the learner and the teacher. This paper describes an attempt by the writer to achieve this purpose.

A way of preventin 9 boredom

The writer spent the academic year 1969-70 with the Centre de Linguistique Appliqu~e of the University of Dakar, Senegal. One of his assignments was supervising language laboratory exercises of first year students of English at the University. The exercises were of the traditional type and seemed to generate a great deal of enthusiasm in the students. By the end of the third week, however, it was noticed that the size of the class had dwindled from thirty-six to twenty-one. Casual conversations with some of the students revealed that they were beginning to get bored with the repetition of model English sentences. The writer then decided to inter- sperse the normal exercises with something else.

42

i'rom the beginning of the fourth week the supervisor, imme- diately after students had settled down, would monitor one of them and start off a simple conversation like:

-What's your name, please?

(the student gives his or her name)

-Are you Senegalese?

(the student answers with a simple ~es or n~)

-For how long have you~been learning English?

(the student states the number of years, usually 5, 6, or 7)

-And you speak English so well~

(the student tries to say that her/his English is not as good as the supervisor thought)

At this point another student is monitored so that he too can hear the conversation already building up.

-Do all Senegalese students speak good English?

(the first student gives an opinion to which the second student adds something)

As the conversation builds up more and more students join in. The supervisor sets the pace, corrects errors of pronunciation, vocabulary, or grammar. The students get involved in the dis- cussion and a lively conversation lesson results.

Steps in developing the method

In trying out a similar exercise in the language laboratory (where English is taught as a foreign language) the teacher has to take the following precautions:

a. Adapt the level of conversation/discussion to that of the students. In the case described above the learners were university students who possessed the appropriateEnglish vocabulary but who lacked fluency. The tutor's main prob- lem was to help them to express themselves more fluently.

b. Introduce conversation/discussion at different periods of the "normal" laboratory exercise. It helps to reduce bore- dom if students cannot anticipate when the extra exercises will come in. It is also possible to have several short discussion/conversation sessions within a single language laboratory lesson.

c. It is also possible, at a later stage, to allow some of the better students to play the role of the teacher by initiating conversation~discussion and by directing it.

d. Teams also work successfully in this type of exercise. The class is divided into two teams, for example, and a controversial discussion topic given to them to discuss.

43

e. In all cases, it pays to grade one's daily conversation exercises carefully. One normally starts with simple yes-no questions and leads the student gradually to the point at which he starts expressing an opinion.

Conclusions

The injection of conversation~discussion sessions into English language laboratory exercises could help to achieve the major objective of teaching English as a foreign lan- guage - helping the learner to express himself in English. In most cases the learner is too shy to express himself in English in normal classroom situations. In the language laboratory he speaks into his microphone without necessa- rily lifting up his eyes to look into the teacher's (or any other interlocuter's) face. This usually increases the lev- el of self-confidence. The students with whom the writer worked were able to carry the habit of speaking English fluently and with confidence over into out-of-school situa- tions. Attendances at laboratory classes also improved.

It pays, however, for teachers wishing to try the method to adapt the suggestions put forward here to the needs and ability of particular groups of learners. It is also helpful to vary the exercises as much as possible in terms of timing, content, and method.

Institute of Education University of Ibadan Nigeria