26 un hígado humano desechado y perfundido durante 86 h Este es un hallazgo

A unique feature of the participants of Frame 3 was that they were a diverse group, mainly from Latin America and East Asia. They were less homogenous as a group, compared to the groups in the previous Frames, and were very diverse in their cultures, experiences, and language learning outlooks. This diversity prompted me to investigate the students’ unique points of view where necessary. What was interesting was that even though their homelands were separated by thousands of miles, they each had a common theme in the backstories of their language learning. The way English was taught in normal or conventional schools in their home countries did not inspire interest, and the teacher normally resorted to some form or other of rote learning, without taking the extra step to keep the students engaged. Kenji, from Japan recalls his English lessons back home:

“Every day, the teacher would come in, and tell us to open our books. After that the whole class would be spent translating English to Japanese, and Japanese to English. We learnt grammar as well. But that was it. It was so boring. I felt like I wanted to die every day.” (Interview 5.5.13)

142

At the time of this research, Kenji was a third year university student in Japan, who had come to NZ for the summer holidays. He was a rather proficient speaker of English with a pleasant Japanese accent. When probed further, Kenji revealed that he had stayed in NZ for two years when he was 5 years old, following his father who had intended to migrate to NZ, but returned to Japan after he was unable to secure a good job in NZ. Some questions that arose were: how much of the sentiment he had expressed above had been affected by his previous experience in learning in NZ? Would he have had the same response to how he was taught if he had not had previous exposure to different ways of English teaching? These questions also reflected on questions of a similar vein that I had identified in the previous Frame, but seen from the other side of the coin, which asked how the mismatch between using drama pedagogies and teaching styles could be overcome. However, in the previous Frame, the question had been asked with reference to teaching context that was presumed to not have been exposed to any drama pedagogies in English language learning. If this definition of teaching using drama pedagogies is widened to mean creative teaching strategies found more in the New Zealand context rather than the Asian one, it can be inferred that Kenji’s response provided a partial answer. This was that in his case, being exposed to more creative teaching strategies highlighted the perceived inadequacies of the typical language teaching approach in his home context.

Further interactions with other student participants from Korea and Japan confirmed that the dominant teaching methodology in their home countries was the grammar-translation method. However, contrasting Kenji’s seemingly averse reaction to more traditional, grammar-translation approaches, Ayaka describes how learning language in Japan had benefited her:

“I don’t think I hated English classes. Yes, they were boring, and there were times when I felt really sleepy in class, but I think that my grammar is not bad. When I look at grammar books, I do not feel as panicked as some of my Arab friends. But I have to say, I did not really know how to speak. Before coming to NZ and studying here, I was so scared to speak.” (Interview 6.6.13)

Many theorists speak to the importance of grammar in learning a language, and that inappropriate use of grammar can potentially render communication as useless. However, there has always been a great debate in the ESL/EFL world as to how much grammar should be taught, and whether it should be taught inductively (i.e grammar-translation) or deductively (i.e. Communicative Language Teaching). A further discussion of these differences can be found in Chapter 3.

In relation to learning using translation and grammar, according to participants who were from South America, the situation differed slightly in their own home contexts. Translation did not seem to be high on the preferred methods of teaching English. Juana, a student from Colombia, stated that they only started learning English in high school, and that their learning was mainly limited to “changing verbs to be” (interview, 5.5.13). Out of the group, I considered Juana to be of the lower range of proficiency in the

143

class, as she had not shown the ability to be able to complete the given tasks well, and struggled to communicate her ideas. When asked about what she thought of her own proficiency in English, she acknowledged that she did not really belong in the proficiency range of the class.

“I just wanted to get as much as I could in my time here. I actually wanted to do a business English class, but I did not pass the proficiency test. And I felt that I had already spent enough time in the 400 class (the intermediate) class” (Interview 5.5.13).

Another paricipant, Miguel from Brazil, responded by stating that learning EFL in Brazil was “grammar, grammar, and not much else”. Upon further investigation, Miguel further stated that he had found his EFL experience in Brazil boring, and that he did not remember much of the classes, nor what he had learnt. This theme of comparatively low motivation and engagement in normal EFL classrooms occurred in all three case studies conducted in this research, and will be discussed in more detail later.

Nevertheless, the typical language learning experience did not apply to all the participants. Ronaldo is a 25 year-old Brazilian who considers himself lucky to have ‘escaped’ the typical Brazilian school. He recalls:

“I was one of the lucky ones. My family managed to get me enrolled in a school that had a collaboration with a school in the US, and what we studied was similar to what our sister school in the US studied. We learnt things in English. [The subject] English was taught in English, and the teachers made sure that we learnt the language in interesting ways…I did my US experience for a year, as well, and that was really good. So I think my English is not too bad, though I did find it difficult when I first came to NZ. The accent used to drive me nuts. But now I kind of enjoy it.” (Interview 5.5.13)

Further discussion with Ronaldo revealed that although he had gone to a special school, he had not been isolated from the Brazilian way of life. He knew the conditions in which the other schoolchildren had to learn English, and described them as “bad”, and that the students had no real training on the practical use of English, which he accredited to the worldview of his contemporary peers in mainstream Brazilian schools.

“There is no reason for a typical Brazilian to learn English, unless he has English-speaking friends, or wants to go to the US to work. Mostly though, he will choose to stay in Brazil or maybe go to another country in South America. So a Brazilian speaks Portuguese, and is surrounded by countries that speak Spanish. Even for me, my first language is Portuguese, and my second language is Spanish. I am very fluent in Spanish, and I feel like my English is bad when I compare them.” (Interview 5.5.13)

This came as a surprise to me, as I considered Ronaldo to be the most fluent speaker of English of the whole class, who seemed to have very little trouble in understanding the lessons or carrying out the teaching and learning activities. However, this exchange between us made me draw parallels to the

144

language teaching context in Frame 2, where the participants were rural schoolchildren, who lived in a community where there was no real need to real English, and speaking English could be considered as strange, or a sign that they were ‘putting on airs’.

A student from Chile, who was a qualified veterinarian, offered another insight into her language learning experience in her home country. She said that she would often forget what was taught in class, though she could not pinpoint the exact reason why this happened. When asked how she had learnt English in Chile, she responded it was mainly through reading the textbooks and doing grammar exercises.

To summarise, almost all the participants (with the exception of B2) were current students of English in NZ, who were products of mainstream education in their home countries. Most of them (with the exception of Ayaka) reported that they had not been happy with the way that English had been taught to them, where it was boring, taught in a uninteresting manner, or focussed on what they felt was not the right proportion to their needs (i.e too much grammar, or too much translating).

However, it must also be noted that these reports of accounts of English language learning were personal accounts, and may not necessarily be representative of how English is taught in student’s home countries in their entirety. Nevertheless, they are first-hand accounts that help to inform me of the level of the participants’ proficiency, as well as of their outlook towards using drama as a teaching tool, compared to how they had learnt English from before.

This background information was important for me to assess where the students were at in their attitudes towards language learning, and how they would potentially react to the applied drama lessons.