I mentioned in that previous post that a popular way to clarify vocabulary was to match the words to the definitions. This activity typically works by having a set of vocabulary words at the top of the sheet, and the definitions further down the worksheet.
I used to do this a lot. But then I realized that by putting the vocabulary words at the top of the sheet, I was removing the need to look at the model text. And if you're doing a "language from a text" lesson, then you don't want to be taking the students out of the text. You want them to be seeing the vocabulary in the text. That is, after all, the whole point of a language from a text lesson.
Let me use the Impact textbooks as an example. I've been teaching out of the Impact series for the past several years (Impact 2, Impact 3, Impact 4). The Impact textbooks always begin the new unit with about 20 new vocabulary words which are embedded in a text. There is, however, no clarification activity, so the teacher has to design that themselves.
In the past, I used to design a worksheet where all the vocabulary was put at the top of the sheet, and the definitions below (for an example of this, see page 5 of this worksheet from Unit 1 of Impact 3).
Or, to make things more fun and kinesthetic, I would put the definitions on one set of cards, and the vocabulary words on another. As I described in this post here. But as fun and kinesthetic as this was, I eventually realized this also took the students out of the text. And I wanted them to use the text when they were trying to figure out the meaning of the word.
So eventually I started designing worksheets that didn't include the vocabulary at the top. This meant that the students had to search for the vocabulary in the text.
And, if I do a noticing activity, that involves matching vocabulary to blanks in the text, then I make sure to take that worksheet back from the students before I give them the list of definitions. Again, the reason is I don't want them looking at the bank of vocabulary words at the top of the sheet. I want them to go back to the sentences in the text, and use the context of those sentences.
One way to make this slightly more engaging is to use quizziz. So instead of putting the definitions on a boring white paper, I put the definitions into a quizziz quiz. Because quizziz lets the students work through the questions individually and at their own pace, it's essentially the same thing as if they were working off of a worksheet, it's just a bit more gamified.
As I learned from an experienced CELTA trainer(*), there are several different ways of clarifying the meaning of vocabulary:
You can use gestures, pictures, realia, board drawings, examples, mime, context, translation, clines, opposites or synonyms, or definitions. All of these are valid ways of conveying the meaning of vocabulary, but you need to select the best method for the appropriate vocabulary.
For example:
Pictures work very well for concrete nouns that represent physical objects in the real world (e.g. lion, firetruck, etc) and some action verbs (e.g. jump, kick). Pictures work less well for abstract nouns (e.g. justice)
Board Drawing is great for any words that can be quickly sketched, especially if you haven't prepared a picture beforehand (e.g. ladder, snail)
Realia is great for any vocabulary words that can be located in the classroom (e.g. pencil, elbow) or can be easily brought into the classroom (e.g fruits or vegetables)
Translation works very well for technical words which have a very specific meaning in both languages (e.g hemoglobin**). Translation works less well for words that have vague or nuanced meanings, or words that have multiple meanings.
Examples work well for any words that are hyponyms (e.g. if you want to define cutlery, you can give examples like spoon, fork, knife, etc.)
Mime is great for when the vocabulary is representing a physical action (e.g. limp, lean)
Gesture can be used with phrases like a tiny bit, or over and under.
Clines are good for anytime you have a vocabulary set of words that differ from each other in degree (see examples here)
Opposites are often useful, but of course this relies on the student knowing the opposite. (e.g. you can define miserly as the opposite of generous, but only if your students first know generous).
Synonyms as well rely on the students already knowing the synonym. (e.g. baggy as the opposite of loose). Although you should always be cautious about using synonyms, because it's very rare that two words would exist in the same language that are exactly the same. There's usually some sort of difference in nuance or register or something.
But of all the available methods for clarifying vocabulary, the one most favored by textbook publishers, by far, is match the words to the definitions.
The activity works like this: the students are presented with a set of vocabulary words at the top of the page. They have to match these words to the definitions further down the page (***).
Of course, the obvious question is: if students don't yet know the meaning of the word, how can they match it to the definition?
The answer seems to be that they make their best guess, and then in the all class feedback, the teacher tells them whether or not they got it right. (i.e. the old test-teach-test).
Besides, in any given vocabulary set, students probably know a few of the words already. And if you do it as group work, students can pool their knowledge, and teach each other the words.
Nowadays many textbooks encourage students to check a dictionary to help them complete the activity for any words that they don't know. (The textbook publishers know that the students are always carrying smart phones with them, and so can access online dictionaries or Google Translate at anytime.)
Personally, I have also used "match the word to the definition" activity a lot over the years. (If you search my archives, you'll find this activity pops up many times.) It is, after all, the most obvious activity to use when you want to clarify the meaning of the words in the vocabulary set. It's also the easiest to create.
But over the years, I've been noticing that my students don't really absorb the meaning of a lot of the vocabulary that I teach them. And I think this is partly because it's hard to fully absorb a written definition, especially when it's in your second language.
So recently I've been making an effort to get away from "match the words to the definitions" and return to the old CELTA method of presenting the words in context (****), and then, using that same context, using concept checking questions to check the meaning of the words.
...although actually, come to think of it, that previous post was mostly about using concept checking questions for grammar, not vocabulary. For an example of vocabulary, see this video by Jo Gakonga.
I may still have students match the words to the definitions as a follow-up activity, but now I try to make sure that I always check the words in their original context first (*****).
* Actually this whole post is heavily influenced by two CELTA tutors that I once worked with. Many of the examples I use are also taken directly from them.
*** At one time, I would have imagined that "match the words to the definitions" was such an obvious and standard activity that it would be ridiculous to take the time to explain it. But now I'm not so sure. I remember going to a presentation once at CamTESOL in which an Irish guy (who was teaching at a University in Japan) did a presentation on how to teach vocabulary, and he presented matching the words to the definitions as if it was some new activity that he had thought of himself.
At times like these, I remind myself that a lot of the people teaching at universities in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, etc, have Masters degrees in applied linguistics, but no practical teaching qualifications--no CELTA, no Delta. So they know all about the theory of second language acquisition, but they don't know how to run activities in the classroom. (Having done a Master's Degree in applied linguistics myself, I know exactly what you learn on those courses, and what you don't learn.) I can imagine this Irish guy in the classroom at his university, trying to figure out how to best teach vocabulary, and stumbling upon the idea of having the words on one side of the pager, and the definitions on the other side of the paper, and thinking that he had just thought of something new.
In other words, I've learned over the years not to take it for granted that everyone knows about a certain technique or activity. People in this profession have all different backgrounds and training. Maybe there are still people out there who don't know about "match the word to the definition".
***** Of course, this assumes that you have the vocabulary in a context to begin with. If you don't have a context (i.e. if the textbook you are using just gives you a wordlist to teach, and doesn't put the words into any sort of context), then you'll have to first create some sort of model text to embed the vocabulary in. AI can be helpful with this.
***** Although, a small note of caution, if you clarify the meaning by using concept checking questions, and then you subsequently have students match the vocabulary to the definitions, you are technically clarifying the meaning twice. Which, as I wrote before, an experienced CELTA tutor once told me is a mistake.
But personally I don't think it's the end of the world if you clarify the meaning twice. Maybe clarifying it twice helps the meaning to sink in more? I don't know. But just be careful about this if you are ever doing a formally observed lesson.
The article contains this depressing line at the end:
El Nino is forecast to end this year, however, Quyet believes that the intensity of heat in the south is unlikely to decrease in the dry season in the coming years. Current climate fluctuations are becoming increasingly unusual. They easily break old rules, which means forecasting is also more difficult.
"There is only one sure trend, which is that the temperature will keep increasing, both globally and in Vietnam," Quyet said.
Granted I don't spend a lot of time outside--just going to and from work, and going out at lunchbreak. But during the times that I do go outside, it's not like I'm burning up or anything.
If this is the what the future holds, I guess I can survive it.
And although I have been spending the majority of my time inside air-conditioned buildings the last few days, as longs as there's no apocalypse, and electric air-conditioners continue to work fine in the future, I should be okay. (If society ever breaks down, and we lose our source of electricity, then I'll be in trouble. But that's probably unlikely. Right?)
*****************************************
Yesterday my wife told me that we need to spend 11 Million VND ($430 USD) to buy her parents an air conditioner.
They have spent their whole lives living out in the provinces in Vietnam and never needed an air conditioner before. But now it's so hot that they can't stand it anymore. (My wife says that during the afternoon, the whole extended family goes to her brother-in-law's house. He has one room which has an air-conditioner, and they all sit in that room.)
I was reluctant to spend the extra money. (Every month I keep thinking that this will be the month when we finally save some money, and every month we have new expenses come up.) But I agreed, they needed an air-conditioner. You don't want to be in this heat without an air-conditioner. "Yes, buy it for them," I said. "They're going to need it."
...I am, of course, fully aware of the air conditioning paradox. So hopefully the change to renewable energy happens soon, so we don't have to worry about our air-conditioners running on fossil-fuels.
But in the mean time, what can you do? You have to keep cool somehow.
It's very simple. The students are given a worksheet containing each of the target vocabulary words in an example sentence. Based on the grammar of the sentence, the students then have to decide what part of speech the target vocabulary is (i.e. noun, adjective, adverb, verb, etc).
My students often struggle with this, at least at first, so I talk through the first couple ones with them as examples before I let them do the rest on their own. Then I make sure to allow time for pair-checking, and finally, I am prepared to do extra clarification and explanation during the feedback and checking stage.
It's somewhat of a guided discovery in the sense that the students are supposed to work out the parts of speech of the vocabulary words themselves, but in practice I also find there is also often a lot of teacher-centered clarification in the feedback.
It's scary, but the climate crisis is no longer something off in the distant future. It's here now.
Fortunately, it hasn't finished me yet. I've been hot, but I've been surviving. (I like to think that years of living in the tropics have acclimatized me somewhat to the heat.) But I also spend most of my day inside air-conditioned rooms.
This is a Quizziz activity on comparative adverbs that I used in my class. I believe that I actually copied this from another account on quizziz, but I've now forgotten where I copied it from (apologies). But I did use it in my class, and it did work well.
