Advising for Language Learning

University of Hull

28 - 29 July, 1999

The summer conference on Language Advising, the third in the series, once again attracted delegates from a wide range of backgrounds and institutions. Encouragingly, more participants were in posts as advisers, reflecting the growth in the profession. The conference took the form of a series of papers and practical workshops, focusing both on the theory underpinning advising and on day-to-day practicalities.

Day one commenced with an inspiring plenary session entitled ‘The Learner: self-made man or man-made self ?’ by Philip Riley (Centre de Recherches et d’Applications P�dagogiques en Langues , CRAPEL, Universit� de Nancy) which he admitted to be "theoretical". In spite of the accuracy of the description, the paper was delivered with such clarity and evident enthusiasm, that it was comprehensible to all as well as entertaining. Dealing with issues of individual learner identity, autonomy and authority, as personified by the adviser, it gave rise to the question of whether a learner can indeed be autonomous when confronted by an adviser. This potentially intractable problem can, however, be resolved through discourse, a subject to which the proceedings subsequently returned.

The second paper, also with a theoretical tenor, ‘The language adviser / counsellor: roles, functions and tools’, given by Marina Mozzon-McPherson (University of Hull) balanced the equation in that it examined the identity of the adviser and considered the implications of terminology on the wide panoply of roles fulfilled. The critical function of discourse as a tool to assist learners in reflecting on their perceptions of both themselves as learners and on language learning per se proved an apposite development to Philip Riley’s paper. The focus on the complementary role in relation to teaching was a topic to which all could readily relate and the same was true of the issues relating to the learning environment and the skills of an adviser. A great deal of food for thought was given to those already advising and to those considering embarking upon advising.

‘Support for the learner: the role of metacognition in open and distance learning’ drew on the experience of Stella Hurd (Open University). She described some of the particular problems which beset students of French following a distance learning course and how enhancement of their metacognitive skills contributed to resolving them.

‘The Virtual Language Adviser’ by Andy Hagyard (University of Lincolnshire and Humberside) gave delegates the opportunity to see a very different type of support available for language students by browsing the extensive web-based system developed at that institution. From feedback received, this innovative approach to advising was of great interest.

The final session of the day was of a practical nature, dealing with ‘Setting up a Tandem Programme : problems, possibilities and considerations’. Initially Judy Jowers (University of Hull) described the current system of tandem learning, administered by the Advisory Service in the Language Institute at Hull, mentioning not only its strengths but also its weaknesses. It is not accredited but supports a large body of learners in one aspect of autonomous learning. The focus then switched to the University of Manchester , where Sandra Truscott and John Morley have recently succeeded in setting up a more formal, accredited scheme in addition to one analogous to Hull’s. John having described the programme, Sandra called for delegates to participate in a stimulating group exercise to devise ways of overcoming the problems encountered in setting up this type of tandem programme.

Delegates were able to see a demonstration of Merlin, an award-winning web-based learning environment, by Debra Marsh (University of Hull). Whilst initially developed to support distance learning of EFL, it has now been extended to other disciplines. Those who made the effort to attend the presentation were rewarded with a demonstration of the environment, an overview of the range of applications currently under development and the opportunity to explore some of the issues associated with Internet-based learner support.

‘Analysing learners’ needs : a first step towards independent learning’, Annegret Jamieson, Miranda van Rossum and Judy Jowers (University of Hull), started with a general introduction to needs analyses, followed by two brief case studies of needs analyses used in a Dutch and a German module. This led to active participation in the evaluation of various models and culminated in a lively discussion on the very importance of needs analysis.

A welcome change came in the shape of Russel Whitehead’s entertaining presentation : ‘The interlanguage strategies of Roberto Benigni in "Down by Law"’. The video clips illustrated very aptly the type of strategies which can be used by learners and suggested by advisers. No doubt the visual and humorous nature of the presentation and discussion made it all the more memorable.

Participation was predictably demanded in the session on ‘Responding to Others’ by Steve Page, (University of Hull) of the Counselling Service. A listening assessment exercise designed to ascertain the type of response (empathic /asking for information /critical ) given to various statements proved to be quite illuminating, especially to those of us who are already advisers and certainly gave rise to reflection. A pair exercise in listening and summarising was likewise revealing; responding for 5 minutes to the question ‘What would you die for ?’ called for some real introspection ...

Marina Mozzon McPherson’s second paper, ‘The discourse of advising for language’ used transcript data from advising sessions as a basis for analysis and group discussions, relating to a set of micro and macro skills employed by ‘good’ advisers. Again we were encouraged to review our own practices, which must be beneficial.

The final set of presentations were from the University of Salford, ‘Two Pilot Language advising Projects at Salford’. The first of the projects was presented by Roselyne Edwards and Christina Flanagan, who described the project they set up offering advice, on an optional basis, to a restricted number of non-specialist students. In spite of various obstacles, the uptake was encouraging, as was the feedback they received from those learners who participated. As a result, a wider ranging project is to be embarked upon in the future. The second project, presented by Linda Altshul, involved e-mail advising and was again on a small scale but very well received by her learners.

The roundtable and summing up were very brief indeed as the general feeling seemed to be that heads were buzzing with ideas and time was needed for reflection on them. The overall atmosphere of the conference was very open, offering a forum for the exchange of experiences. Advisers perhaps require peer group support as much as do learners.

Judy Jowers
University of Hull