ODB 5 Instructions (3 van den Hoven Focus Qs)

This is where Jason's ICC students should come to post their fifth homework assignment.

Moderator: Soon Mi

Which articles have been most helpful and interesting for you so far?

Culture Definition & Lenses
4
50%
Fluent Fool
3
38%
Why English? The Historical Context
0
No votes
The Cultural Basis of Teaching EIL
0
No votes
Whose English Should We Teach?
1
13%
 
Total votes: 8

User avatar
Jason M. Ham
Posts: 669
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 1:35 pm
Location: Yeokgok, Bucheon, South Korea

ODB 5 Instructions (3 van den Hoven Focus Qs)

Post by Jason M. Ham » Mon Apr 25, 2011 1:24 am

Read Whose English Should We Teach? (van den Hoven, 2005), and answer the three focus questions below in short organized responses.

1. According to van den Hoven, there are many valid responses to the question, “Whose English should we teach?” What are they? Do you agree?
2. According to van den Hoven, what is the problem with Standard English?
3. What is van den Hoven’s opinion about the kinds of input EFL teachers should offer in EFL classes in Korea? Do you agree? Why or why not?


Remember to reply to at least 2 classmates’ posts as well. The deadline is 4/29 by the start of class.

ICC steve
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:32 am

Whose English should I teach?

Post by ICC steve » Tue Apr 26, 2011 1:58 am

“Whose English should we teach?" is hard to answer. Perhaps your answers are "The English I speak", "Everyday English", "The English grammar I was taught and a touch of Konglish", "British English" "American English", or "Standard English". This is an interesting question. As an English teacher, we are so used to the English textbooks made by our government. We have considered them as "Standard English". If so, we need a clear explanation of "Standard English" from them.

According to van den Hoven, so far, the effort to quantify and qualify an international standard has been neglected. However, whatever criteria, an international standard of English needs to be both internationally accredited and serve as a tool enabling speaker all over the world to communicate meaningfully and intelligibly. If the key ingredients of Standard English are to communicate meaningfully and intelligibly, she argues that EFL teachers should input coming from a plurality of sources in classes in Korea: a blend of the variety of English that you speak, the standard embedded in text and sound bytes of the multiple varieties.

For me, I think I have input American English in classes consciously or unconsciously. I'm not sure, but we seem to teach American English in classrooms, which is Standard English just from our personal judgment. However, if we should teach Standard English whose criteria are to enable meaningful and intelligible communication around the world, and if our goal is to build communicative competence, we should expose our students to varieties of English in EFL classes.

ICCseonhee
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:08 am

Re: ODB 5 Instructions (3 van den Hoven Focus Qs)

Post by ICCseonhee » Wed Apr 27, 2011 1:50 pm

1.According to van den Hoven, there are many valid responses to the question, “Whose English should we teach?” What are they? Do you agree?
]The answers are `The English I speak', `Everyday English', `The English I was taught',`American English' and`British English English'. Finally `Standard English' is also s plausible choice. Each answer looks like appropriate arguement so It's difficult for me to agree with all or not at all.

2. According to van den Hoven, what is the problem with Standard English?
Though an international standard og english seems ideal,the reality,however,is that no one yet has convincingly shown what this standard English should look and sound like. Standard English needs to be quantified and qualified internationally and serve as a tool enabling speakers all over the world to communicate meaningfully and intelligibly.

3. What is van den Hoven’s opinion about the kinds of input EFL teachers should offer in EFL classes in Korea? Do you agree? Why or why not?
According to Van den Hoven, we- as a EFL teacher-should offer input coming from a plurality of sourses : 1)A blend of the variety of English that you speak, 2)the standard varieties embedded in text and 3)sound bites of the multiple varieties that can be accessed from guest speakers, movie DVDs from Non-Hollywood industries, and downloaded radio broadcasts. And I agree with her because i think teacher should expose students to a variety of English to prepare them for the reality of World English and New English.
Last edited by ICCseonhee on Fri Apr 29, 2011 5:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

ICCseonhee
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:08 am

Re: Whose English should I teach?

Post by ICCseonhee » Wed Apr 27, 2011 1:56 pm

ICC steve wrote:“Whose English should we teach?" is hard to answer. Perhaps your answers are "The English I speak", "Everyday English", "The English grammar I was taught and a touch of Konglish", "British English" "American English", or "Standard English". This is an interesting question. As an English teacher, we are so used to the English textbooks made by our government. We have considered them as "Standard English". If so, we need a clear explanation of "Standard English" from them.

According to van den Hoven, so far, the effort to quantify and qualify an international standard has been neglected. However, whatever criteria, an international standard of English needs to be both internationally accredited and serve as a tool enabling speaker all over the world to communicate meaningfully and intelligibly. If the key ingredients of Standard English are to communicate meaningfully and intelligibly, she argues that EFL teachers should input coming from a plurality of sources in classes in Korea: a blend of the variety of English that you speak, the standard embedded in text and sound bytes of the multiple varieties.

For me, I think I have input American English in classes consciously or unconsciously. I'm not sure, but we seem to teach American English in classrooms, which is Standard English just from our personal judgment. However, if we should teach Standard English whose criteria are to enable meaningful and intelligible communication around the world, and if our goal is to build communicative competence, we should expose our students to varieties of English in EFL classes.
I agree with you. In our country, American English is conducted in the classroom so many students consider American English as a Standard English.But whatever it is, the important thing is meaningful and intelligible communication around the world.so we should try to let them know that.

ICC eunjeong
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 4:46 am

Re: ODB 5 Instructions (3 van den Hoven Focus Qs)

Post by ICC eunjeong » Thu Apr 28, 2011 6:07 pm

1. According to van den Hoven, there are many valid responses to the question, “Whose English should we teach?” What are they? Do you agree?There are viable answers, “The English I speak”, “Everyday English”, or “The English grammar I was taught and a touch of Konglish”, “American English”, “British English”, and also “Standard English”. It is difficult for me to answer because I’ve never thought whose English I should learn and teach. I just taught the English I learned. But it must be interesting topic that I think about various Englishes once.
2. According to van den Hoven, what is the problem with Standard English?Though an international standard of English seems ideal, the reality, however, is that no one yet has convincingly shown what this standard should look and sound like. An international standard needs to be both internationally accredited, and serve as a tool enabling speakers all over the world to communicate meaningfully and intelligibly. Thus far the definition of such an international standard has been elusive.
3. What is van den Hoven’s opinion about the kinds of input EFL teachers should offer in EFL classes in Korea? Do you agree? Why or why not?According to van den Hoven, we should offer input coming from a plurality of sources: 1) A blend of the variety of English that you speak,
2) The standard varieties embedded in text, 3) Sound bytes of multiple varieties that can be accessed from guest speakers, movie DVDs from non-Hollywood industries, and downloaded radio broadcasts.
I agree with her. We’ve already learned there are a lot of countries which use English as an official or co-official language in the world. Therefore, if teacher only teach Standard English, students can’t understand different pronunciation, accent, various Englishes for the real world.

ICC Jisu
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:30 am

Re: ODB 5 Instructions (3 van den Hoven Focus Qs)

Post by ICC Jisu » Fri Apr 29, 2011 12:02 am

1. There are many viable answers: The English I speak, Everyday English, The English Grammar I was taught and a touch of Konglish, American English, British English, Standard English. I agree with all of them because each of them is definitely ENGLISH.

2. Though an international standard of English seems ideal, however, the reality is that no one yet has convincingly shown what this standard should look and sound like. The effort to quantify and qualify an international standard of English has been neglected. An international standard needs to be both internationally accredited, and serve as a tool enabling speakers all over the world to communicate meaningfully and intelligibly. Thus far the definition of such an international standard has been elusive.

3. According to her, we should offer input coming from a plurality of sources: 1) A blend of the variety of English that you speak, 2) the standard varieties embedded in text, and 3) sound bytes of the multiple varieties that can be accessed from guest speakers, movie DVDs from non-Hollywood industries, and downloaded radio broadcasts. In Korea, most students have been struggling to master American English. When I provide them with different sources of English, they would feel overwhelmed by new accent and pronunciation. And they usually make fun of Southeast Asian English. I think EFL teachers should offer a variety of World Englishes and try to have a lesson free from prejudice.

ICCdayoung
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: ODB 5 Instructions (3 van den Hoven Focus Qs)

Post by ICCdayoung » Fri Apr 29, 2011 1:01 am

1. According to van den Hoven, there are many valid responses to the question, “Whose English should we teach?” What are they? Do you agree?
Peter TRudgill have provided a definition of Standard English. Writer said that what you do in the classroom with the needs of students outside of the class. I agree this opinion. I think center-learning is important in classroom, too.
2. According to van den Hoven, what is the problem with Standard English?
Swan said that pratical english usage, we learn that new entries on varieties and styles of English merit attention. In response to our question, there are not one but two standards which have worldwide appeal British and American English.

3. What is van den Hoven’s opinion about the kinds of input EFL teachers should offer in EFL classes in Korea? Do you agree? Why or why not?
A blend of the variety of English that you speak, the standard varieties embedded in text, and sound bytes of the multiple varieties that can be accessed from guest speakers, movie DVDs from non-Hollywood industries, and downloades radio broadcasts.
I disagree this method. On my opinion, it is efficient that LSRW(listening, speaking, reading, wrting.) together.

ICC_MyungYeon
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:06 am

Re: ODB 5 Instructions (3 van den Hoven Focus Qs)

Post by ICC_MyungYeon » Fri Apr 29, 2011 1:03 am

1.According to van den Hoven, there are many valid responses to the question, “Whose English should we teach?” What are they? Do you agree?
According to van den Hoven, Ther are answers such as `The English I speak', `Everyday English', `The English grammar I was taught',`American English' and`British English English' etc. Plus`Standard English' is also s plausible choice.
I think those English could be a variety of English, So I agree sith van den Hoven's opinion.

2. According to van den Hoven, what is the problem with Standard English?
Though an international standard og english seems ideal,the reality,however,is that no one yet has convincingly shown what this standard English should look and sound like. An international standard needs to be both internationally accredited, and serve as a tool enabling speakers all over the world to communicate meaningfully and intelligibly. Thus far the definition of such an international standard has been elusive.

3. What is van den Hoven’s opinion about the kinds of input EFL teachers should offer in EFL classes in Korea? Do you agree? Why or why not?
According to Van den Hoven, As a EFL teacher should offer input coming from a plurality of sourses such as : 1)A blend of the variety of English that you speak, 2)the standard varieties embedded in text and 3)sound bites of the multiple varieties that can be accessed from guest speakers, movie DVDs from Non-Hollywood industries, and downloaded radio broadcasts. In my opinion, I totally agree with that .Because there are a variety of English as I mentioned above.
So those offering helps people communicate easier and efficient :D

ICC steve
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:32 am

Re: ODB 5 Instructions (3 van den Hoven Focus Qs)

Post by ICC steve » Fri Apr 29, 2011 3:04 am

ICC Jisu wrote:1. There are many viable answers: The English I speak, Everyday English, The English Grammar I was taught and a touch of Konglish, American English, British English, Standard English. I agree with all of them because each of them is definitely ENGLISH.

2. Though an international standard of English seems ideal, however, the reality is that no one yet has convincingly shown what this standard should look and sound like. The effort to quantify and qualify an international standard of English has been neglected. An international standard needs to be both internationally accredited, and serve as a tool enabling speakers all over the world to communicate meaningfully and intelligibly. Thus far the definition of such an international standard has been elusive.

3. According to her, we should offer input coming from a plurality of sources: 1) A blend of the variety of English that you speak, 2) the standard varieties embedded in text, and 3) sound bytes of the multiple varieties that can be accessed from guest speakers, movie DVDs from non-Hollywood industries, and downloaded radio broadcasts. In Korea, most students have been struggling to master American English. When I provide them with different sources of English, they would feel overwhelmed by new accent and pronunciation. And they usually make fun of Southeast Asian English. I think EFL teachers should offer a variety of World Englishes and try to have a lesson free from prejudice.

We are on the same boat. As a non-native English teacher, I think that handling all varieties of English in classes is beyond my abilty. We should make clear what Standard English is and provide it to our students first and then give them a chance to experience other varieties. It's my personal opinion.

ICC steve
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 9:32 am

Re: ODB 5 Instructions (3 van den Hoven Focus Qs)

Post by ICC steve » Fri Apr 29, 2011 3:28 am

ICCseonhee wrote:1.According to van den Hoven, there are many valid responses to the question, “Whose English should we teach?” What are they? Do you agree?
]The answers are `The English I speak', `Everyday English', `The English I was taught',`American English' and`British English English'. Finally `Standard English' is also s plausible choice. Each answer looks like appropriate arguement so It's difficult for me to agree with all or not at all.

2. According to van den Hoven, what is the problem with Standard English?
Though an international standard og english seems ideal,the reality,however,is that no one yet has convincingly shown what this standard English should look and sound like. Standard English needs to be quantified and qualified internationally and serve as a tool enabling speakers all over the world to communicate meaningfully and intelligibly.

3. What is van den Hoven’s opinion about the kinds of input EFL teachers should offer in EFL classes in Korea? Do you agree? Why or why not?
According to Van den Hoven, we- as a EFL teacher-should offer input coming from a plurality of sourses : 1)A blend of the variety of English that you speak, 2)the standard varieties embedded in text and 3)sound bites of the multiple varieties that can be accessed from guest speakers, movie DVDs from Non-Hollywood industries, and downloaded radio broadcasts. And I agree with him because i think teacher should expose students to a variety of English to
prepare them for the reality of World English and New English.

I agree with you. She said that teachers should input the standard varieties embedded in text. There is no clear explanation of the term 'standard varieties". My concern is that if we provide lots of varieties of English to students who are still low level, what will happen to them? To be honest, I have never thought over it. That's not only my homework but also our government's one.

ICCwonhee
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:27 am

Re: ODB 5 Instructions (3 van den Hoven Focus Qs)

Post by ICCwonhee » Fri Apr 29, 2011 4:26 am

1. According to van den Hoven, there are many valid responses to the question, “Whose English should we teach?” What are they? Do you agree?
Whose English should we teach? is kind of fresh but hard question to answer. Viable answers that The English I speak, Everyday English, The English Grammar I was taught and a touch of Konglish, American or British English, Standard English must be ENGLISH. so I agree with all of them. and I have believed that I have learned ENGLISH is standard but, now I can't be sure with that. What is Standard English clearly?

2. According to van den Hoven, what is the problem with Standard English?
Though an international standard og english seems ideal, the reality, however, is that no one yet has convincingly shown what this standard English should look and sound like. Standard English needs to be quantified and qualified internationally and serve as a tool enabling speakers all over the world to communicate meaningfully and intelligibly. Thus far the definition of such an internal standard has been elusive. and British and American English, both of them could be standard but the tremendous range of geographical and linguistic variations(incomprehensible) of spoken English is undeniable.

3. What is van den Hoven’s opinion about the kinds of input EFL teachers should offer in EFL classes in Korea? Do you agree? Why or why not?
EFL teachers should offer input coming from a plurality of sources. 1) A blend of the variety of English that you speak. 2) The standard varieties embedded in text. 3) Sound bites of the multiple varieties that can be accessed from guest speakers, movie DVDs from Non-Hollywood industries, and downloaded radio broadcasts. I agree with that students should be exposed to variety of English because a lot of English is out of class.

ICCwonhee
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:27 am

Re: ODB 5 Instructions (3 van den Hoven Focus Qs)

Post by ICCwonhee » Fri Apr 29, 2011 4:52 am

ICC Jisu wrote:1. There are many viable answers: The English I speak, Everyday English, The English Grammar I was taught and a touch of Konglish, American English, British English, Standard English. I agree with all of them because each of them is definitely ENGLISH.

2. Though an international standard of English seems ideal, however, the reality is that no one yet has convincingly shown what this standard should look and sound like. The effort to quantify and qualify an international standard of English has been neglected. An international standard needs to be both internationally accredited, and serve as a tool enabling speakers all over the world to communicate meaningfully and intelligibly. Thus far the definition of such an international standard has been elusive.

3. According to her, we should offer input coming from a plurality of sources: 1) A blend of the variety of English that you speak, 2) the standard varieties embedded in text, and 3) sound bytes of the multiple varieties that can be accessed from guest speakers, movie DVDs from non-Hollywood industries, and downloaded radio broadcasts. In Korea, most students have been struggling to master American English. When I provide them with different sources of English, they would feel overwhelmed by new accent and pronunciation. And they usually make fun of Southeast Asian English. I think EFL teachers should offer a variety of World Englishes and try to have a lesson free from prejudice.
Yes, you are right, but who can be EFL teacher.? Frankly, to be EFL teacher is almost impossibel for teachers who study and live in korea.

ICCwonhee
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:27 am

Re: Whose English should I teach?

Post by ICCwonhee » Fri Apr 29, 2011 5:09 am

ICC steve wrote:“Whose English should we teach?" is hard to answer. Perhaps your answers are "The English I speak", "Everyday English", "The English grammar I was taught and a touch of Konglish", "British English" "American English", or "Standard English". This is an interesting question. As an English teacher, we are so used to the English textbooks made by our government. We have considered them as "Standard English". If so, we need a clear explanation of "Standard English" from them.

According to van den Hoven, so far, the effort to quantify and qualify an international standard has been neglected. However, whatever criteria, an international standard of English needs to be both internationally accredited and serve as a tool enabling speaker all over the world to communicate meaningfully and intelligibly. If the key ingredients of Standard English are to communicate meaningfully and intelligibly, she argues that EFL teachers should input coming from a plurality of sources in classes in Korea: a blend of the variety of English that you speak, the standard embedded in text and sound bytes of the multiple varieties.

For me, I think I have input American English in classes consciously or unconsciously. I'm not sure, but we seem to teach American English in classrooms, which is Standard English just from our personal judgment. However, if we should teach Standard English whose criteria are to enable meaningful and intelligible communication around the world, and if our goal is to build communicative competence, we should expose our students to varieties of English in EFL classes.
Yes i agree with you. but do you think teachers and students in korea can handle variety of English. i believe if we master any of English, that works as a standard English.

User avatar
Jason M. Ham
Posts: 669
Joined: Tue Jun 22, 2004 1:35 pm
Location: Yeokgok, Bucheon, South Korea

Re: ODB 5 Instructions (3 van den Hoven Focus Qs)

Post by Jason M. Ham » Fri Apr 29, 2011 5:34 am

Great thread here guys...

ICCseonhee
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 10:08 am

Re: ODB 5 Instructions (3 van den Hoven Focus Qs)

Post by ICCseonhee » Fri Apr 29, 2011 5:45 am

ICC_MyungYeon wrote:1.According to van den Hoven, there are many valid responses to the question, “Whose English should we teach?” What are they? Do you agree?
According to van den Hoven, Ther are answers such as `The English I speak', `Everyday English', `The English grammar I was taught',`American English' and`British English English' etc. Plus`Standard English' is also s plausible choice.
I think those English could be a variety of English, So I agree sith van den Hoven's opinion.

2. According to van den Hoven, what is the problem with Standard English?
Though an international standard og english seems ideal,the reality,however,is that no one yet has convincingly shown what this standard English should look and sound like. An international standard needs to be both internationally accredited, and serve as a tool enabling speakers all over the world to communicate meaningfully and intelligibly. Thus far the definition of such an international standard has been elusive.

3. What is van den Hoven’s opinion about the kinds of input EFL teachers should offer in EFL classes in Korea? Do you agree? Why or why not?
According to Van den Hoven, As a EFL teacher should offer input coming from a plurality of sourses such as : 1)A blend of the variety of English that you speak, 2)the standard varieties embedded in text and 3)sound bites of the multiple varieties that can be accessed from guest speakers, movie DVDs from Non-Hollywood industries, and downloaded radio broadcasts. In my opinion, I totally agree with that .Because there are a variety of English as I mentioned above.
So those offering helps people communicate easier and efficient :D

we are totally agree with her now, but the reality is different from her ideal arguements. In Korea, almost learners consider British abd American English as a standard English. Even if they learn English in `Outer circle'-like phillipine- they try to actualize British English or American English. It's quite ironic.Variety of English is accepted but people still insist to pursue the main English. How can we treat that?

Post Reply