Language

Native vs Classroom

Learning a second language is challenging for everyone, though some more than others. Something that I have always wondered in learning a second language is the difference between being taught by someone whose mother tongue is the language, and someone who learned the language in a classroom like the students. In learning Spanish, I have been taught by people in both categories, and they both have pros and cons.

Being taught by a native speaker can be very hard in an immersion setting for students at any level. This is because the native speaker has an accent that, depending on how thick it is, can make understanding more difficult. Another factor is the fact that native speakers tend to be, understandably, faster speakers than the teachers who learned the language in classroom. This is due to their comfort in the language, and even though they would think they were speaking slowly and clearly, in reality, it is much faster.

A native speaker can also have difficulty in explaining some of the basic concepts in the language, such as verb conjugation for example. The teacher would simply know the conjugations and be able to rattle them off without difficulty in remembering them. This can be frustrating for students who are still tying to grasp those same conjugations because they aren’t naturally knowing the rules and tricks.

The benefit of having a native speaker as a teacher is that students are exposed to “real life experience” in using the language. Outside of the classroom, speakers will have accents and speak fast, and this gives the student a chance to practice hearing and understanding the language that way. As well, these teachers would be able to show the students a more colloquial version of the language to go along with the classroom version, such as slang or abbreviations.

Having a teacher who learned the language the same way the students do has a lot of benefits as well. They would teach the students based on their own experience in learning the language. They would know to speak slowly and clearly, aware of the time it would take to process the language at first. They would remember which words they struggled with, and perhaps know to emphasize them, or explain their significance more in-depth. In the the example of verb conjugation, the teacher would be able to provide acronyms or rhymes that the student could memorize in able to be able to learn the endings of the verbs.

What it “boils down to” is that a native speakers gives the student a real life version of how the language would be used, whereas a teacher who learned the language is able to give the students more guidance on confusing rules or concepts. Personally, I believe the best option is a combination of the two. Students need the reassuring, clear guidance of a teacher who learned the language like they did, but they also need the exposure to accents and speed that the native speaker gives them in the classroom.

What do you think? Is one better than the other? Are there pros and cons that I haven’t pointed out that are important? Go ahead and chime in!

Welcome and Bienvenido on Chalkboard
Image credit: http://www.cachevalleydaily.com (Google)
Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Native vs Classroom”

  1. You have covered the basis of both sides and I agree with them. I am having that same difficulty. My teacher is from Cuba and her accent is so thick that when she switches between Spanish and English I don’t even realize she was speaking English until after I processed what she says several sentences later. It’s indeed frustrating and discourages me from learning the language. But I’m not a quitter so I’m still trying. As you said a mixture would be best. I think a native speaker should be introduced to students when they are more comfortable with the language as oppose to the beginners/new learners.

    Like

    1. You make a great point about a native speaker being introduced to advanced students. I think that’s a great idea, and definitely would have been something I could have benefited from when starting out. Good for you for not quitting, it’ll make sense soon! Thanks for sharing!

      Like

  2. Oddly enough, the proponents of immersion learning argue that a student should be “washed over” with the language and therefore abandon, momentarily, their “native” language infavour of the second language. This works fine for those that have superior language learning skills. They are the minority. This immersion approach restricts the greatest number of persons interested in a second or third language because of the valid argument stated above that the “learning speed” is “too fast”. This is especially true when the learner is “immersed” in their own native language. Other factors effecting learning are the competency of the instructor and the age of the learner.

    Like

    1. I agree with you that there isn’t enough time to pick up skills. I’m one of the members of the “minority” you speak of, I pick up languages pretty quickly, but there are elements that I struggle with within the language, and there isn’t enough time to untangle the problems before we have to move on to the next element. It can be frustrating. Thanks for sharing!

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s