Yi Hu
I have lived in Montreal for more than one year. In February of this year, I chose to learn French at the language centre in Montreal. Since I have studied some French before I came here, I could deeply experience the differences in language teaching between these two countries.
In China, teachers were more likely to teach us some grammars, like conjugations and some words that were related to the texts. However, teachers in Montreal are different. They prefer to teach us some useful knowledge that we can apply in our daily life. For example, we have already learned the vocabularies about clothes and food. They also teach us some grammars but that is not the main point. Students can improve their French skills more easily here. I think the reasons that cause these differences are the different social cultures and surrounding environments. I will explain these in more details in the following paragraph.
VS
French Syllabus in China (right)
China’s current social context of education is test-oriented. Teachers excessively pursue students’ academic performance but ignore the practical application of language, and simply indoctrinate teaching with Chinese thinking mode based on exam-oriented education, which will lead to ‘Chinglish’. Meanwhile, China is a monolingual country, meaning learners are in a group where all their classmates are proficient in the same L1 and share the same cultural identities (Thomas, 2022). Outside of the classroom, they usually speak Chinese, so there is no foreign language environment for students to practice.
On the contrary, teachers in Montreal pay more attention to the practice and the cultivation of students’ autonomous learning abilities. Students are usually asked to try to do one task in class, and then study and answer questions by themselves, to become their own knowledge. Teachers do not pay much attention to the test scores, but to the cultivation of students’ individual abilities. Meanwhile, students have a real language environment in Montreal. They can have many opportunities to try to put what they have learned into practice. In this article https://www.ednewsdaily.com/five-major-differences-between-the-chinese-and-american-education-system/, the author also gave us some other educational differences between Eastern and Western countries which are influenced by government policy and cultural norms.
I do think that one of the ways to show good performances in French or language learning is to get a ‘good’ grade, but it is not enough. I still remember what Professor Mela Sarkar said in class at that time, ‘many students with good grades cannot successfully order a cup of coffee in the coffee shop’. Therefore, our ability to communicate smoothly and comfortably with others is also a sign of good language learning; these two need to be integrated.
Last but not the least, I want to say that there is no best language teaching model, only the most suitable. After all, our social environment is different. However, do you think it is necessary to integrate these two different educational models together?
Reference:
Thomas, E. (2022). Issues and ideas for a monolingual context. International House. https://ihworld.com/ih-journal/issues/issue-48/issues-and-ideas-for-a-monolingual-context/
Hi Yi Hu, I think it is necessary to integrate these two different educational models together for they both have pros and cons. Under traditional instruction model, students may get high grades in tests but lack the ability to communicate with others; while under communicative teaching methods, students may speak the language fluently but may not pay attention to grammar usage. Therefore, it is really necessary for us teachers to combine these two models together and better develop students learning abilities. (Jundong Ma /Sep30)
Hi Yi,
You ask, “do you think it is necessary to integrate these two different educational models together?”
I think it’s an excellent question! On the one hand, you have a traditional grammar-based approach, on the other hand, a communicative model. Can these be integrated? I think so. More than that, I believe it has to be done. When someone just learns everyday conversational language with very little grammar, she can become quite fluent, but her grammar will always stay super basic and often incorrect. Is it a problem? Here, the francisation integration programs do not consider it to be a problem. They prep immigrants for essential “street” knowledge helping them to get the kinds of jobs Quebecers have no interest for (labour-intensive menial tasks). It is common knowledge that to get a white-collar job here one needs to cover much more than 8 levels of French available via MIFI programs. Advanced writing courses are not free, but one would need to do those in order to really learn written French on the level needed for better jobs, which Quebecers want for themselves. I hope you get the picture… So, yes. To really master a language one needs both, grammar and communicative approaches combined.
Hi Yi,
You ask, “do you think it is necessary to integrate these two different educational models together?”
I think it’s an excellent question! On the one hand, you have a traditional grammar-based approach, on the other hand, a communicative model. Can these be integrated? I think so. More than that, I believe it has to be done. When someone just learns everyday conversational language with very little grammar, she can become quite fluent, but her grammar will always stay super basic and often incorrect. Is it a problem? Here, the francisation integration programs do not consider it to be a problem. They prep immigrants for essential “street” knowledge helping them to get the kinds of jobs Quebecers have no interest for (labour-intensive menial tasks). It is common knowledge that to get a white-collar job here one needs to cover much more than 8 levels of French available via MIFI programs. Advanced writing courses are not free, but one would need to do those in order to really learn written French on the level needed for better jobs, which Quebecers want for themselves. I hope you get the picture… So, yes. To really master a language one needs both, grammar and communicative approaches combined.
Sam Lyn
Hello Yi Hu,
Your discussion post spoke to me as a Chinese-born Canadian. Growing up, I went to Chinese School every Saturday to learn Mandarin. This lasted over 5 years. I found it very challenging as there were many words to learn and not enough time to practise. Furthermore, we weren’t given any time to communicate in class and I didn’t know many people I can talk in Mandarin with. I found your example of teachers in Montreal very interesting. I also wish my instructor provided many occasions for us to use our knowledge. That said, I wonder if I would’ve learned Mandarin easier if the approach that was used was more task-based.
Best,
Catherine