teaching Russian

[Richard Robin]

Kateryna (and everyone else on SEELANGS),

Wayles Browne's picture is accurate.  But then...

*Ph.D. programs in methodology. *One *can* get a Ph.D. in Russian with an
emphasis on second language acquisition (SLA) at a school like Bryn Mawr, or
in Slavic Linguistics with lots of work in SLA/pedagogy through the
linguistics department at a place like University of Wisconsin. Or one can
go to a program with a specialty in something like Russian for Heritage
Speakers (e.g. UCLA). In addition there are many more schools that
concentrate on Slavic literature or linguistics, but that have strong
mentoring programs in teaching Russian. I could mention maybe a dozen big
graduate programs off the top of my head, but if I did, I would invariably
(and unfairly) leave someone out.

*Who gets jobs? *In terms of employability in higher education, my view is
that those who make classroom pedagogy and/or SLA their declared specialty
and who can actually contribute something to the field (research, innovative
materials — rather than just teach language courses in the classroom) will
get and keep jobs - either tenure track or "virtual" tenure track ( i.e. not
in danger of being cut). One has only to think of the names at methodology
panels at AATSEEL or who contribute to this list for evidence.

*What good is coursework in methodology?* *Courses* offered in an SLA
graduate program are more geared towards either research into various
aspects of language acquisition and pedagogy or the application of that
research. We don't really teach "methods" (first do this, then do that).
Rather we teach how to set realistic instructional goals, what activities
might help students meet those goals, and which kinds of learners respond
well to which kinds of activities. We also concentrate on how to give
learners strategies for acquiring language on their own as they become more
advanced and strategies for using the little language they have effectively.
Courses are good  getting at that big picture. They inform curricular
planning. They provide a grab bag of possible activities for each goal
level. They tell us about the role of target-environment study ( e.g. study
abroad). They suggest ways of using technology. They show us what tools are
available to assess our students' progress. They address issues of
motivation. They also tells us how to do experiment to check old assumptions
ad try new things.

Teachers need to know all those things to one degree or another. If you want
permanent college employment, you need excel in some of those things as
demonstrated by either research or innovative materials.

And you have to be a good teacher.

*Being a good teacher. *But knowing a lot *about *teaching and language
acquisition doesn't guarantee good teaching. For that, you need four things:


1.  An basic instinct about what good language teaching is
2.  Experience watching effective teaching - lots of it at various levels
3.  A good mentor (or even better - mentors - with various styles, even if
the approach is the same)
4.  The ability to set instructional goals and figure out ways that your
students can meet them.

Of those four things, only the last is addressed by coursework.

*РКИ в США (RKI). *Of course, native speakers of Russian with no previous
experience in RKI, especially with American students, need to fill in some
gaps:
1.  What is the starting point for American students learning a foreign
language (especially a Level Three Difficulty language like Russian)
2.  What's hard about Russian for American learners?

In the 1950s, 60s, and 70s, one might have suggested that Russians with no
previous RKI experience familiarize themselves with the comparative
structures of both languages before attempting to teach. Today I think that
in addition to coursework, we would want such aspiring teachers to examine a
good Russian language program, watch effective classroom teaching, and to
teach in tandem with effective teachers of Russian.

What about methodology courses taken in Russia? They lack the all important
component of mentoring and watching. You don't get to see master teachers of
Russian teaching beginning American students in an American college or high
school milieu.

High school: I hesitate to comment on the prospects for high school
employment. Maybe someone can chime in.

*And again mentoring. *Reality of our field is that Russian (literature,
linguistics, pedagogy) is very small. Everyone knows everyone else - or at
worst, knows someone who knows someone. So having a good methodological
mentor is important. The good mentors are known throughout the field. A good
mentor will give you good training. And if you're a talented teacher whose
career prospects look promising, your mentor will vouch for you, and you'll
be taken seriously in a job search.

One more thing, Kateryna. The people on SEELANGS know that I am sometimes a
little... ah, outspoken. So listen to all the other opinions as well.

-Rich Robin


-- 
Richard M. Robin, Ph.D.
Director Russian Language Program
Technical Advisor, GW Language Сenter
The George Washington University
Washington, DC 20008
202-994-7081
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Russkiy tekst v UTF-8