Looking at the Finger and Reflecting
…. about didactics of French and Spanish, in teacher education and for best practices.
Myriam Coco
Nostalgy corner to HUIN102, class for which I made that blog.
I now mosttly exclusively teache Didactics of French and Spanish. So bye bye HUIN102! 🙂
Welcome, all of you, HUIN102 students and visitors! And welcome to me as well. I hope we can be all part of this starting process.
The topic of this first entry coincides with one of my perspectives throughout my studies. I am referring by “Looking at the finger” to this famous proverb that says:
“If a man points at the moon, an idiot will look at the finger”
Then I must be a fool, because the finger is what I look at first. Then, I might look at what it is pointing to.
- Who’s finger is it?
- Is it really pointing at the moon?
- Why is it pointing at the moon?
- Do I really see the moon at all when relying on that pointing finger?
- Do I see more or less of the moon, or anything else for that matter?
- Does the finger force my opinion and thinking?
- Does this finger leave me room for creativity?
- …
This semester, I propose to have a look at this technological finger and appreciate how interesting it actually is, along with its instructional power. Let us be curious about it: how it is used, its form, its purpose, its target, its objectives, our development.
Let’s challenge ourselves and be the idiots!
Normal
0
21
false
false
false
NO-BOK
X-NONE
X-NONE
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0mm 5.4pt 0mm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0mm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”;
mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;}
FELLES SPRÅKDIDAKTIKK:
Dysthe, Olga. 1997. “Skriving sett i lys av dialogisme: Teoretisk bakgrunn og konsekvenser for undervisning”. I Evensen, L.S. & Hoel, T.L. (red): Skriveteorier og skolepraksis Oslo: LNU/Cappelen. (33 sider).
Kramsch, Claire. 2006. ”Culture in language teaching”. I Hanne Leth Andersen, Karen Lund & Karen Risager: Culture in language learning. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press. (12 sider) *
Risager, Karen. 2006. ”Culture in Language: A transnational view“. I Hanne Leth Andersen, Karen Lund & Karen Risager: Culture in language learning. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press. (17 sider)
Rogne, Magne. 2008. ”Omgrepet tekst i skulen. Ei tverrfagleg tilnærming”. I Norsk Pedagogisk tidsskrift nr. 3/2008. (12 sider) *
Trebbi, Turid. 1996. “Hvordan kan elever ta ansvar for egen læring”. I NPT 5/1996. (9 sider) *
.
For studenter med to språkfag:
Aase, Laila. 2005. “Skolefagenes ulike formål – danning og nytte”. I Børhaug, K., A-B.Fenner og L. Aase (red.): Fagenes begrunnelser: Skolens fag og arbeidsmåter i danningsperspektiv. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. (13 sider)
Herzberg, Frøydis. 2001. ”Tusenbenets vakre dans. Forholdet mellom formkunnskap og sjangerbeherskelse”. I: Rhetorica Scandinavica, nr. 18/juni 2001. (12 sider) *
Vygotsky, Lev. 2001. Tenkning og tale. Kap. 6: s.135-156. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk. (21 sider) *
Wertch, James V. 1991. ”Beyond Vygotsky: Bahktin’s Contribution”. I Voices of the Mind. A Sociocultural Approach to Meditated Action. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. ( 21 sider) *
.
LÆREPLANER & ANDRE GRUNNLEGENDE TEKSTER
Læreplaner, til sammen 28 sider:
Fransk, Tysk, Gymnaset, i Undervisningsplanane for realskolen og gymnaset etter lov av 12. juni 1964. 5 sider.
Annet fremmedspråk: Fransk, russisk, spansk, tysk i Mønsterplan for grunnskolen 1974 6 sider
Det andre fremmedspråket i Mønsterplan for grunnskolen 1987. 7 sider
L-97 Tilvalgsspråk. 6 sider.
Læreplan i fremmedspråk, Kunnskapsløftet. 4 sider (http://www.utdanningsdirektoratet)
Den generelle delen av Kunnskapsløftet (http://www.utdanningsdirektoratet).
Council of Europe. 2001. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge University Press. (http://www.coe.int) (30 sider, studentene velger selv hvilke).
FRANSKDIDAKTIKK
Heimark, G.E. 2007 Fagdidaktikk og fremmedspråksdidaktikk. Et forsøk på å plassere 2. fremmedspråk i et fagdidaktisk perspektiv. Acta Didactica Norge. http://adno.no/index.php/adno/article/view/15/70, 14 sider.
Hokstad, L.M. 2002.: “IKT og læring – et didaktisk perspektiv”. I: Ludvigsen, Sten R. & Hoel, T. L. (red.): IKT og læring. Et utdanningssystem i endring. Gyldendal Akdademisk, Oslo. 208-225. 17 sider.
Lightbown, P.M. & Spada, N. 2006 How languages are learned. Kap. 2 og 7. 35 sider ***
Little, D. 1991. Definitions, issues and problems. Learner Autonomy 1. Dublin: Authentik. 62 sider. ***
Tornberg, U. 2000. ”Om kunnskapssyn og metode”. I Språkdidaktikk. Oslo: Forlaget Fag og Kultur. 15 sider. ***
Trebbi, T. 2005. Det andre fremmedspråket: fra elitefag til et fag for alle? I Børhaug, K. et al (eds.) Fagenes begrunnelse. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. 12 sider.
*Kompendium Fellesspråkdidaktikk
**Studia
***Biblioteket
@ på nettet
.
ANBEFALTE DOKUMENTER PÅ NETTET:
Den europeiske språkpermenhttp://www.fremmedspraksenteret.no/index.php?ID=13348.
Stortingsmelding nr 23 Språk bygger broer http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/kd/dok/regpubl/stmeld/2007-2008/stmeld-nr-23-2007-2008-.html?id=512449
Strategiplanen Språk åpner dører! http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/kd/dok/rapporter_planer/planer/2005/Sprak-apner-dorer.html?id=496903
Et foreløpig utvalg websider (suppleres av studentene selv i løpet av semesteret)
Basiel, a. (2000). web-based learning Environments: The transitional Autonomy Model (TAM)
www.cogs.susx.ac.uk/lab/hct/hctw2000/papers/skip.pdf
Bersee, T. and Perkins, P. (1999). On-line language learning – the internet and teaching language.
www.pedc.se/tentec/didactics/Internet_Online_language.doc
Huhta, M. (1997). The Dynamics of Language Training – into an Investment in Communication. Research Report 1. Helsinki: National Board of Education www.edu.fi
ICT in FLT in Europe (2003). Report. www.icc-europe.com/ICT_in_FLT_Final_report_Jan2003/ICT_in_FLT_in_Europe.pdf
ICT4LT. (continuously updated). Information and communications Technology for Language teachers.
www.ict4lt.org/en/index.htm.
DIALANG (n.d.). DIALANG-Project and System.
www.dialang.org/english/index.html.
www.languages.dk/eurocall/eurocall99/recordings/symposium_on_language_assessment.htm
.
Pensumråd
I. Fagets egenart, legitimering g utvikling
Bourdieu, P. (1982). Ce que parler veut dire. Paris: Fayard.
Puren, C. (1988) Histoire des méthodologies de l’enseignement des langues. Paris : Nathan.
Riley, P. (2003). Le “linguisme” – multi-poly-pluri? Points de repère terminologiques et sociolinguistiques. i: Le français dans le monde, Recherches et applications. Vers une competence plurilingue. Juillet 2003 Paris: CLE International, 9 sider.
Risager, Karen (2003) Det nationale dilemma i sprog- og kulturpædagogikken. En studie i forholdet mellom språk og kultur. København: Akademisk forlag.
Trebbi, T. & M-J. Gremmo (2003). L’enjeu des “deuxièmes langues étrangères”: reflexions à partir du cas de la Norvège. i: Le français dans le monde, Recherches et applications. Vers une competence plurilingue. Juillet 2003 Paris: CLE International, 11 sider.
Utaker, A. 2004. Babel et la diversite des langues. Forum Vol. 2 No.2. Paris: Presses de la Sorbonne Nouvelle KSCI
.Wagner, J. (1995). Moderne fremmedsprogsundervisning og den faglige tradisjon. Sprogforum 2/95 8 sider
II. Teorier om tekst og språklæring
Albrechtsen, D. (2000). Sproglig bevissthet og fokus på form. Sprogforum januar 2000.
Byram, M., G. Zarate & G. Neuner (1997). Sociocultural competence in language learning and teaching. Strasbourgh: Council of Europe Publishing, 30 sider (E)
Friedrichsen, A. (1993) “Poetisk kommunikasjon”, i Tværsproglige blade. Danmarks Pædagogiske Bibliotek, 15 sider (E)
Newby, D. (1998). “Theory and practice in communicative grammar” in R. de Beaugrande, M. Grosman & B. Seidlhofer (eds.) Language Policy and Language Education in Emerging Nations, Series: Advances in Discourse Processes Vol. LXIII, s 151-164. Stamford, Conneticut: Ablex Publishing Corporation. 11 sider
Redder, A. & J. Rehbein (1999). Grammatik und mentale Prozesse. Tübingen: Stauffenberg.
Wells, G. 1994. Text, Talk and Inquiery: Schooling as semiotic apprenticeship. In Bird, N. (ed.) Language and Learning. Hong Kong: Institute of Language Education, Education Department. 26 sider
.
III. Planlegging og tilrettelegging for læring
Cormon, F. (1992) L’Enseignement des langues. Théorie et pratiques. Lyon: Chronique sociale, Collection “Synthèse”.
Gohard-Radenkovic, A. (1995). L’écrit, strategies et pratiques. Paris: CLE International. (Savoir-faire)
Holec, H. 1993. Apprendre à apprendre les langues. I Bogaert, E., Van der velde, M. & Vermeire, A. (eds.) Taal en bedrijf. ABLA papers no 15-1993.
Koyama, M. & Skier, E. (eds.). Learner and Teacher Autonomy in Japan, Vol 2: More Autonomy You Ask! Tokyo: JALT LD. ISBN 4-931424-29-5 C 3482 P 2500
Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and Culture in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Little, D., L. Dam and J. Timmer (1998) Focus on learning rather than teaching: Why and how? Papers from the IATEFL conference on learner independence, Krakov, CLCS, Dublin: Trinity College
Little, D., J. Ridley & E. Ushioda (eds.) (2003) Learner Autonomy in the Foreign Language Classroom. Dublin: Authentik. ISBN 1 871730 708
Ludvigsen S. & T. Løkensgard Hoel (red) (2002) Et utdanningssystem i endring. IKT og læring. Gyldendal Akademisk ISBN82-05-30409-2
Palfreyman, D. & R. Smith (2003) Learner Autonomy Across Cultures. New York: Palgrave.
Péry-Woodley, M-P. (1993). Les écrits dans l’apprentissage. Clés pour analyser les productions des apprenants. Paris: Hachette
Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Warschauer, M. (1998). Electronic Literacies. Language, culture and power in online education. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Widdowson, H. G. (1990) Aspects of Language Teaching. Oxford University Press.
På tysk
Bischof, M. et al. (1999). Landeskunde und Literaturdidaktik. Berlin: Langenscheidt
Kästner, U. (1997). Freies Schreiben in der Fremdsprache – prozesse und ihre Didaktik. Untersuchung zur Textproduktion im fremdsprachlichen Deutschunterricht auf dem Hintergrund neuro-psychologischer Theorien. Bochum: AKS-Verlag Bochum (Fremdsprachen in Lehre und Forschung)
Mummert I. (1984) Schüler mögen Dichtung – auch in der Fremdsprache. Peter Lang, Frankfurt am Main
.
IV. Veiledning og vurdering
(2003) Karakterer – mer enn karakterer. Debatt om elevvurdering i grunnopplæringen, Læringssenteret, Oslo.
Byram, M. (2000). Evaluering af interkulturel kompetanse. Sprogforum Oktober 2000, 3 sider
(2001) “Common reference levels” in Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Council of Europe. Cambridge University Press. s 21-42, 22 sider.
Grabe, W. & R.B. Kaplan (1996) Kapittel 13 i Theory & Practice of Writing. Longman, 45 sider.
Harris, Vee (2001) Helping Learners Learn: Exploring Strategy Instruction in Language Classrooms across Europe. Strasbourg: European Centre for Modern Languages / Conseil de l’Europe. — Part 1. How to Teach Learning Strategies; the Secondary School Context. (40 sider). http://tinyurl.com/6yvku5c .
Holec, H. 1990. Apprendre à l’apprenant à s’évaluer: Quelques pistes à suivre. I Etudes de linguistique appliquée, Octobre-Décembre 1990. Paris: Didier erudition.
Igland. 2001. Mens teksten blir til: Lærarkommentarar og felles bearbeidingsprosjekt. I Dysthe, O. (red) Dialog, samspel og læring. Oslo: Gyldendal. 27 sider.
Little, D. (2003). Le plurilinguisme dans le Portefeuille des langues européennes. i Le français dans le monde, Recherches et applications. Vers une compétence plurilingue. Juillet 2003 Paris: CLE International, 10 sider
Rea-Dickins, P. & K.P. Germaine, Kevin P. (eds) (1998). Meaning Evaluation and Innovation in Language Teaching: Building Bridges. Essex: Addison Wesley Longman Limited.
IKT og Læring: Erfaringsbloggen for lærere og studenter 
Does the moon really care whether I give it the finger or not?
Well, she does hide once a month, and no one really knows what she is doing then…
They say “new moon”, I’d say “passive/aggressive moon”, ranting all she can on her other side…
And the rest of us might just as well care… :p 🙂
The finger gives the direction. Looking first at the finger dosen’t make one a fool. I think stopping at the finger and not following its direction is what makes one a fool. Its like the river in the saying that, if you follow the river, you will get to the sea. The finger is a lead to the moon that has to be followed.
And I insist that looking at the finger does not make us fools and is, indeed, an activity whorth practicing. Why a finger, why not a telescope? What are the differences between the tools we use to meet our goals? Are there consequences to whether or not we see the moon, how we see it, how we comprehend it, how the tool may change us, etc… ?