The hazards bred by raising unrealistic L2 learning expectations
One central promotion concept predicts that a self-respecting commercial for English as a Second Language intensive series of courses should include at least one or all the following key terms: free of charge, 100% success, immediately, certificate, and the main verb would conjugate in the imperative case alongside a rigid deadline so that no time for reflection is allowed .
The approximate time span promised for the procedure of certificate acquisition sets as its maximum the time length of three to nine months of courses measuring up to four times weekly.
The decision to state the afore-mentioned messages in Greek (the prospective L2 audience's native language, that is) bears its distinct significance.
Can such unrealistic promises have a toll on the ESL teaching and learning?
Unrealistic educative expectations cannot generate beneficial outcomes for any of the involved parts of the procedure.
Starting with the potential harm for the teachers, teaching and remaining productive under rigorous and time-pressuring conditions, instructors run the danger of straining their potential in order to realize the finest of the possibilities of succeeding an unrealistically-set objective.
Practically, teachers get engaged in designing material and conducting lessons that are exam-focused and sometimes with no prior adequate L2 input.
Trying to meet a sky-raised bar might result in exhaustion, with menial or superficial educative and linguistic outcomes.
Exam training and language familiarization and development do not always converge in the ESL procedure.
A second teacher imperilment is the experience of student disappointment and frustration directed towards them.
Customarily, in language learning settings that rely on long-trusted marketing and promotion strategies, a class formed by L2 students designated to belong in the same level, following the lapse of the initially-set time span, is informed that, due to a variety of factors, they are strongly advised against participating in the forthcoming examination.
In effect, at this stage, L2 students or parents: either realize that the explicit promise of certificate acquisition was an attraction stratagem, or they have long forgotten about it, as now they are involved in the present stage.
Henceforth, ESL institutes that breed ungrounded promises yield nothing more compared to their peers. The teacher though, is the person who is to receive students’ embarrassment or frustration and is usually being left in her own devices to mitigate bitter reactions or negative feelings of their students.
Bitter feelings can and undermine students’ efforts, confidence and eventually even their performance. Being convinced that they are failing at some point-since they have not met the promised results-they might move on with debilitated enthusiasm and trimmed authentic interest.
It would have been different had they been cognizant that a more extensive time margin is provisioned.
The above is the optimistic scenario, as the uptake of unrealistic L2 learning expectations withholds a more bleak possibility:
majorly, adult L2 learners that were originally driven by the promise of immediate results-that is fast L2 development and command-might start to realize either that this is an unfeasible goal for them (not merely the certificate acquisition but the L2 development overall) or that they are not destined to fulfill the clamorously stated promise.
Leading to disappointment and withdrawal with a low possibility for any future efforts (if one takes under consideration that they have previous unmet efforts).
The core issue is not to decide whether some prospective L2 learners can attain extraordinary learning outcomes within a short time. Rather, the major consternation is to revisit the meaning and the value of the verb “it depends”.
Maybe, some of the far-fetched goals can be attained by some learners.
Yet, they are not the norm.
No learner should be burdened with remorse for not attaining the far-fetched.
Neither is it suggested that any L2 learner’s progress and examination entrance should be lagged.
Yet, students’ pace and needs are to be respected.
Everyone’s rate and familiarization progress is personal and, despite expected outcomes that derive from L2 acquisition theory and practice, they are differentiated.
L2 learners’ progress is divergent even across the same age group.
Therefore, it depends.
It is furthermore worth disclaiming that, prolonged or adequately-timed L2 courses does not entail, ipso facto, productive L2 development.
Education has mainly qualitative characteristics.
To a large scale, it depends.
The notion of “learning contract” is long-existent, but one cannot adjust it into unrealistic standards.
Regarding the failure of completing customers’ needs and promises, there lie specific legal and ethical provisions that are violated.
The action of not providing the services and/or that are explicitly promised is called deception.
Maybe it would be beneficial to revisit the L2 learning culture’s insistence on breaking time records.
Healthy educative systems are assessed by a set of factors.
One of those parameters is provision for unpredictability.
A time-pressed curriculum by default, compromises this need.
Teachers might also need to address underlying, unvoiced fear suggesting that, if they fail to satisfy unrealistic or unreasonable far-fetched expectations, then they might prove to be incompetent as teachers.
Every conscientious teacher might carry innermost hesitations and doubts.
One trustworthy strategy, on the part of the interested would be to devote some time on finding a professional teacher-either an institute or a freelance teacher, with whom they will communicate upon their needs, motivations and learning expectations and learning procedure within a setting of transparency.
Comments
Post a Comment