TOP NOTCH PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT SERIES
Issue 1
MAKING ENGLISH
UNFORGETTABLE
Enhancing Acquisition in the EFL Setting
Joan Saslow and Allen Ascher
These “three R’s”
ensure memorablility
in the EFL setting :
RELEVANCE
Adult EFL learners need English
to communicate with both
native and non-native speakers
of English. Content of lessons
and materials should reflect
that reality.
RE-ENTRY
Adult EFL learners lack
exposure to repeated English
input outside the classroom,
so lessons and materials must
serve as delivery vehicles of real-
world language input. This is
key to avoiding fossilization.
REINFORCEMENT
Adult EFL learners need to
feel they are making progress.
Ensuring that students view
tangible progress on a daily
basis reinforces their enthusiasm
for learning English.
©2005 Joan Saslow and Allen Ascher
I studied it for ten years and I can’t speak
“English? a word!
”
Such is the self-critical lament heard everywhere people study English
outside of the English-speaking world (the “EFL setting”). Is the set-
ting itself interfering with the learner’s ability to “remember”
language well enough to use it competently and confidently? If so,
why should this be? What can be done about it? And, if English is so
hard to learn, why does everyone keep trying?
Today’s adult learner knows that in virtually any profession, English
is an essential skill. World economies and cultures are increasingly
interconnected and interdependent—politically, socially, and techno-
logically. Multinational companies consist of confederations of
offices in numerous countries, and English has thus become a conven-
ient lingua franca. Indeed, according to Ricardo Schutz’s study, 75%
of all international communication in writing, 80% of all information
in the world’s computers, and 90% of Internet content are in English.
More than ten years ago, the British Council reported, “English is the
main language of books, newspapers, airports and air-traffic control,
international business and academic conferences, science, technology,
diplomacy, sport, international competitions, pop music, and adver-
tising.” And we know that the importance of English has only
increased since then. As one example of the primacy of English in
international business, in fiscal 2002 the global Japanese company
Matsushita employed 245,922 people worldwide, only 28% of
whom were Japanese. “We need English-speaking managers who
can explain Matsushita’s corporate philosophy to overseas affiliates
and train employees there,” said Shigeru Mizuno of the management
development team.
And it has been commonly agreed that, of the English inadequate vocabulary, and almost all have difficulty
speakers in the world today, between 60 and 80% are not understanding rapid native speech.
native speakers. The British Council’s landmark English
2000 project predicted that over a billion people would Qualitative factors affecting learner
be studying English by the year 2000. In fact, according achievement. More importantly, the success of
to David Crystal in 1997, “A conservative estimate is that English instruction in the EFL setting is also compro-
1,200,000,000 to 1,500,000,000 people in the world are mised by qualitative factors: the paucity of authentic
reasonably competent in English.” English input and the almost total lack of opportunity
for authentic practice outside the classroom.
So, if English is an essential life skill for all
who work, travel, or merely inhabit today’s No teacher alone can possibly provide
world, how can English language educa-
A hundred seventy- enough quantity or quality of input, nor
tors—as a profession—accelerate, promote, five hours might construct enough opportunities for practice,
and ensure communicative competence in to even come near to matching the impact
seem like a lot of of an authentic English-speaking environ-
EFL learners? Essentially, the question is:
How can we make English unforgettable? instruction – until ment. Materials must, therefore, be the
teacher’s partner in repairing the deficits
Quantitative factors affecting one realizes that of the setting.
learner achievement. In light of the there are only 168
fact that many learners feel shame at their In our view, however, most textbooks used
hours in one week! in the EFL setting don’t provide adequate
lack of communicative ability, especially
their poor ability to understand and use So one year’s study or repeated input; almost none recycle
material enough for it to be remembered,
spoken English after years of instruction, amounts to not and the amount of practice included
it’s important for us to examine our
expectations. Just what are reasonable
much more than one doesn’t approach the quantity necessary
expectations, given the reality of the EFL week’s time! to create confident competency. And text-
setting? One simply can’t ignore the purely books tend to approach classroom learning
quantitative element in estimating total as a linear process, with vocabulary and
instructional contact hours in this setting. A typical grammar taught one following the other like footsteps on
academic year is between 30 and 40 weeks, with a march, until the “syllabus” is ”covered” with virtually
instructional times varying widely: normally from as no integration along the way.
few as three hours of instruction per week to five; more, In contrast, the language-learning experience in an envi-
of course, in intensive courses. However, calculating ronment in which the learner is surrounded by the target
five hours of instruction per week for 35 weeks yields language is more three-dimensional, with exposures and
175 hours. A hundred seventy-five hours might seem like practice reinforcing each other and the student’s facility
a lot of instruction—until one realizes that there are only growing geometrically. It is, as Diane Larsen-Freeman
168 hours in one week! So one year’s study amounts to puts it, “dynamic, complex, and nonlinear.” Multiple,
not much more than one week’s time! varied, and repeated exposures to target language provide
No one would expect to master a language in just a few an inescapable echo; immediate opportunities to practice
weeks, but quantitatively that is what several years of abound, and previously learned language can be continu-
instruction actually is. Taking that into account, the level ally observed in similar, though not identical, contexts.
learners reach after four or five years is really quite good; The environment itself makes language “unforgettable.”
perhaps they are what Crystal called “reasonably compe- No wonder study in an English-speaking country is such
tent,” in spite of their self-criticism. We know the level a powerful learning experience. The dilemma, then, fac-
most learners reach from instruction alone: although ing the profession is how to overcome the quantitative
there are wide differences among learners, most speak and qualitative factors inherent in the EFL setting that
hesitantly yet functionally with grammatical errors and make achievement of communicative competence seem
so elusive.

2
The importance of models. Many deliberate
choices can be made in the EFL setting that will greatly
increase the impact of instruction. Although the class-
room can never fully duplicate the experience of living,
traveling to, or studying in the English-speaking world,
it can be much enriched. The following section will
examine pedagogical devices that promote memorability
and greatly increase acquisition and competence.
An unfortunate aspect of currently popular methodolo-
gies has been a reduction in input for observation in the
classroom. Describing his experience teaching Bosnian
zero beginners in the U.K., author Robert O’Neill
describes the frustration of learners confronted with what
he describes as “production-obsessed” methodology and
its relentless insistence on elicitation. Students needed
more opportunities to process language before being
expected to use it productively.
It has been our experience, having taught adults of all lev-
els in both the EFL and the ESL settings, that in the ESL
setting—where students have an opportunity to observe
spoken and written English outside of class—it is reason-
able and beneficial to devote most class time asking them
to “produce.” In the input-rich ESL setting, students are
consolidating and using language observed in the envi-
ronment. Less class time needs to be devoted to
classroom presentation and observation. In the EFL
setting, on the other hand, which is “input-poor,”
insisting that students speak without enough opportunity
to observe leads them to silent panic, the consequence of
which is that only the most able students participate in
class. A further consequence of depriving learners of
opportunities to observe “new language” is that their lan-
guage becomes fossilized, and their ability to engage in
discussions doesn’t grow commensurately with the time
they spend in English study.
Cultural factors also confound the problem of over-
reliance on elicitation. Students from some cultures are
naturally reticent and less likely to “speak up.” But even
adult learners who are not particularly shy, no matter
how motivated and anxious to speak, are often ashamed
to reveal their lack of ability and embarrassed to speak
incorrectly. So, paradoxically, some features of our
“communicative” methodologies work against the very
communicative goals we strive for.
We believe it is impossible to overestimate the importance
of observation as a first (and ongoing) step. Michael
3
Lewis talks about the need for opportunities to observe,
hypothesize, and experiment with new language.
Supporting this concept is the fact that most learners
who experience immersion in another language—such
as occurs when traveling or living in another country—
report that snatches of observed or heard language
remain in their memory and that they silently repeat that
language to themselves like a refrain, further leading to
its memorability, acquisition, and use. Therefore, when
input from the environment outside the classroom is
lacking, the classroom and learning materials themselves
must serve as the vehicle for that input, bringing language
back numerous times for the student to notice and
remember in the same way.
Though input must form an important part of English
language instruction in all settings and at all levels—its
inclusion in classrooms and materials is all the more
crucial in the EFL setting. Input should consist of aural
and written models—conversational and non-conversa-
tional—that students can observe and practice. In the
last century, during the audiolingual phase of language
teaching history, “dialogs” formed the core of instruction,
and the mechanical repetition and substitution drills used
to practice them led to their rejection as non-cognitive
“behaviorism.”
Though the criticism was valid, the fault lay more in the
pedagogy of (what many saw as) “mindless parroting”
than in the dialogs themselves. That fact notwithstanding,
in the EFL setting one of the most regrettable conse-
quences of the reaction to audiolingualism was the
reduction or even disappearance of conversation models
in the “communicative,” “learner-centered,” and “task-
based” textbooks that followed. But learners need models
of the way people really speak English to make up for
what’s lacking in the environment. Such models are an
essential point of departure on the road to expression
and should not be neglected.
A model, however, is not only something to observe: it
is an effective productive practice medium. Here also
recent materials have de-emphasized or ignored the
crucial first step of using the conversational model for
personalization. Following a comprehensive study of the
most widely used English course books, in 1996 Saslow
reported: “Another casualty of recent teaching approach-
es is practice: safe, controlled, limited practice of new
language. Often this step is skipped, and students are
expected to produce new language freely before they
are ready—with the inevitable results: minimal expression
and lack of confidence.”
Since models maximize both exposure and practice, they
contribute to making language unforgettable. However,
keeping in mind the pitfalls of audiolingual methodology,
intensive practice and personalization of models—rather
than mindless substituting of poorly known vocabulary
into them—is what makes them valuable. Controlled
personalized practice of a good model prepares the
learner to later pull practical language “out of his or
her pocket” and transfer it to diverse speaking situations.
And for students who need to use English—today’s
students—this practice phase must not be skipped.
What makes an effective conversation
model? Conversation models are most valuable
when they are practical, short, and transferable to
other situations. The following beginning-level model
exhibits these three characteristics:
A: Why don’t we play basketball sometime?
B: Great idea. When’s good for you?
A: Tomorrow at three?
B: Sorry, I can’t. I have to meet my sister at
the airport.
A: How about Wednesday at five?
B: That sounds great.
The model above is practical: it’s an exchange that often
occurs when two people want to get together for some
sort of activity (not only sports!), so students can readily
see its value. It’s short, and therefore easy to remember.
And it’s transferable: all parts of this conversation model
can change to fit reality; for example, different activities
can be suggested, different days and times can be substi-
tuted, and other excuses can be offered.
As an illustration of transferability, see the following
“conversation guide” of the same conversation model.
Having learned activities vocabulary earlier, students can
manipulate the conversation model in their own way.
A: Why don’t we _____ sometime?
B: Great idea. When’s good for you?
A: _____?
B: Sorry, I can’t. _____.
A: How about _____?
B: _____.
4
In the classroom, this conversation can be practiced
numerous times, each time with a different partner,
inserting true and personalized information to contribute
to its memorability. Moreover, an implicit corollary
benefit of this conversation model is that it permits
practice of can and have to, making it an extremely
efficient way to increase its impact on the learning
process. Beginning and intermediate students in the EFL
setting derive great value from this sort of controlled
practice and it should not be denied them.
Not all models, however, impart equal value. To
contrast, let’s look at an ineffective conversation model
that doesn’t lead to memorability.
B: Can you help me? I’m trying to copy
this memo.
A: First, open the cover and put the paper on
the glass.
B: Like this?
A: Yes. Then, choose the number of copies you
want. Next, close the cover and press the
START button.
B: Thanks for your help.
Let’s apply the same test. On the surface it appears to
be practical: one often asks others for help operating
something or doing something. However, upon examina-
tion we see that it is only practical insofar as it only
applies to the specifics of operating a photocopier. The
only productive purpose it serves is for rote memoriza-
tion, which—educators agree—primarily fosters
short-term memory. It cannot easily be “transferred” (or
personalized) because a completely new set of vocabulary
items would be needed to make any changes to the
request for help in the model. It can only be used to dis-
cuss working a photocopier. If we convert the model to a
conversation guide, as above, it is difficult to imagine a
pair of beginning-level students using it to ask for help in
operating, say, a microwave oven or a vacuum cleaner.
B: Can you help me? I’m trying to _____.
A: First, _____.
B: Like this?
A: Yes. Then, _____. Next, _____.
B: Thanks for your help.
The learner would need to know the names of different whether content is relevant or irrelevant to their real
parts and operations for each machine substituted for the needs outside the classroom. Relevant content in a text-
photocopier (that you “push” a vacuum cleaner and book is irresistible; irrelevant content is irritating and
“choose attachments,” that you “select” a time and viewed as a waste of time.
“place food on a turntable” in a microwave, etc.)
Experience and the necessity of covering the syllabus tell Let’s start by examining how adult EFL learners may use
us, however, that bringing random vocabulary in and not English. As mentioned earlier, the odds that they will use
practicing it is distracting and causes us to lose continuity English to communicate with non-native speakers of
and impact. English are as high, if not higher, as the
odds that they will use it with native
Such conversation models are not useful speakers. They may use it while traveling,
Adults can see
or practical in classrooms in the EFL set- working, or studying in an English-speak-
ting since they don’t provide transferable immediately whether ing or non-English speaking country.
input or contribute to the memorability content is relevant or And they may use it to communicate with
of the original model itself. And returning native speakers and non-native speakers
to the quantitative factor, working with irrelevant to their who are visiting their own countries.
such a model wastes the scarce time real needs outside Some practical contexts that come to
students have in which to learn English. mind in those settings are: ordering
Activities must all contribute to the
the classroom. and paying in restaurants, renting cars,
enrichment of the learning experience. Relevant content in a checking into and out of hotels, finding
textbook is irresistible; a doctor in a foreign country, helping
When examining textbooks that have someone find a dentist who speaks
conversation models, then, it is recom- irrelevant content is English in one’s own country, complaining
mended that one examine the models to
irritating and viewed when something goes wrong, meeting and
see if they can be personalized by using greeting people whose cultures are differ-
known vocabulary and structure so they as a waste of time. ent from one’s own, apologizing, asking
contribute to memorability—and there- for information, describing one’s own
fore “usability”—in the world outside a culture and traditions, etc.
classroom.
In the not-so-distant past, the orientation of textbooks
Relevant content for adult students. Adult and lessons was entirely to prepare students to communi-
learners around the world have certain characteristics cate with native speakers of English and to be familiar
that should guide us to effective decisions about content with the culture of what Kachru calls the “inner circle.”
and pedagogy. Meeting these needs can make English The content of materials teaching “American English”
“irresistible” to adults. was heavily infused with information about the culture
Adult learners: of the United States, and the content of materials teaching
• choose to enroll and pay money for it (unlike “British English” provided similar information about the
adolescents or children, who are enrolled by others). culture of the United Kingdom. The assumption that any-
• have a real need for English, and therefore demand one learning English should be prepared to function in an
practical content. English-speaking country or culture was unquestioned.

• have limited time, either because they have a job
or must learn English FOR a job.
• don’t want to be infantilized by the classroom
experience; they are adults and don’t want to be
embarrassed by their mistakes.
• need to observe results.
All topics, themes, models, and content presented should
have obvious practical use. Adults can see immediately
5
But today’s adult student is preparing to use English for
international communication in a variety of situations—
whether in foreign countries or at home—in which he or
she may encounter unfamiliar cultural norms from a vari-
ety of cultures. The content of material and lessons must
now reflect that. The center of most students’ English-
speaking worlds is no longer the United States or Britain.
Cultural fluency. While it’s not the role of the text- activities that follow should contribute obviously to
book, the teacher, or the lesson to teach students detailed the achievement of the goal. As an example:
cultural information about people they may or might not
Supposing a communication goal of, “Learn to order
encounter in their lives outside of class or outside of their
and pay for a meal in a restaurant,” the following is a
country of origin, it is helpful to prepare students to cope
sequence of presentations and activities that could make
with anticipated differences. “Cultural fluency”—making
up that class session:
students aware that certain traditions are likely to be dif-
ferent from their own—enables them to 1. Vocabulary presentation: Foods.
communicate appropriately and to avoid
embarrassment. For example, a student
In our experience, 2. Vocabulary practice: A contextualized
controlled practice exercise follows so
traveling for business or pleasure may when newly learned that students understand and can use that
need to take a taxi but be unsure about language is not used vocabulary in a specific, limited context.
whether the driver will expect a tip and if
so how much. Students can learn how to and elicited repeatedly 3. Conversation models and controlled
practice: Ordering from a menu, making
ask a hotel concierge, “Is it customary to it is quickly forgotten; food choices, expressing preferences
tip the taxi driver?”—or answer such a
question from a visitor. Or if business
or at best it becomes in food.
travelers attend a company meeting out- available to the learner 4. Additional social language: Com-
side of their home country, they should municating with a waiter or waitress (for
only receptively.
feel able to say, “Are most people in the example: “We’re ready to order,” “We’ll
office on a first-name basis?” or “Excuse Unfortunately, many take the check, please,” “Do you accept
me. I don’t know the custom here. How textbooks fail students credit cards?”).
would you like to be addressed?” or 5. Listening comprehension: Students
“Please call me Kim.” They should also
in this regard.
hear a series of conversations between
feel prepared to answer such questions people eating in a restaurant and predict
from a visitor to their country. This kind what they will say next, using the social language from
of language content is “irresistible” to adults because the list above.
they all know the potential embarrassment that ensues
with feeling awkward or, even worse, with doing some- 6. Free practice: Groups of students practice the commu-
thing that would be offensive to people of another nication goal: “order and pay for a meal.” They role-play
culture. When irresistible language content is included in diners and servers at tables, using real menus and their
a course or textbook, students are motivated, pay atten- own personalized responses. They apply the new vocabu-
tion, and re-enroll: all conducive to language mastery. lary, the conversation models, and the additional social
language they learned in the lesson. In this way, students
Seeing one’s own progress. Another essential leave class knowing they have achieved the goal and see-
factor in creating irresistible instruction is enabling ing that they can do something they couldn’t do before
students to see their own progress. Students who see they came to class. This confirmation of progress devel-
concrete success are enthusiastic about studying English, ops enthusiasm and contributes to the irresistibility of
and nothing motivates like success. In a recent study by language instruction.
the National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and
Literacy (NCSALL), two of the three supports to learner Integration and multiplication. In our experi-
persistence demonstrated in adult learners were establish- ence, when newly learned language is not used and
ment of a goal by the student and progress toward elicited repeatedly, it is quickly forgotten, or at best it
reaching a goal. becomes available to the learner only receptively.
Unfortunately, many textbooks fail students in this
To provide students with that support, students should regard. As writers trying to construct an ideal offering for
have an opportunity in each class session to understand the student learning in the EFL setting—and in an
the goal and observe their achievement of the goal. Goals attempt to make English unforgettable—we have taken
must be stated, and all presentations, exercises, and the position that there cannot be too many exposures to
6
target language. Integration and multiplication of new
language is crucial if instruction in the EFL setting is to
attempt to approach the quantity and quality of input in
the English-speaking environment.
The challenge, then, is how to present learners with an
adequate number of classroom exposures (“exposures”
here includes both observation and practice) to new
language so they will remember it. One traditional means
of multiplying exposures is to have students incessantly
repeat the new language in order to “memorize” it.
Unfortunately, as we know, this memorizing tends to be
short-term. Repetition is also boring and de-motivating.
Let’s look at two simple qualitative and quantitative
approaches that increase classroom exposures to new
vocabulary.
A qualitative way to maximize exposure without being
repetitive is by constructing context shifts in which the
same new vocabulary or grammar appears naturally.
Clothing vocabulary, for example, taught in an early
unit in a textbook can be re-entered later in a unit on
shopping—and anywhere else possible. Language used
to express regrets about purchases in an early unit can
be re-entered in a unit later on machines. Changing the
context or topic refreshes the learner’s interest and
“recycles” language in an efficient way.
Summary
Although the challenge to learn a language in the EFL
setting is formidable, with quantitative and qualitative
factors compounding the difficulty, we believe creating an
environment within the class that attempts to duplicate
quantitative features of the native language setting is the
most appropriate instructional design for lessons and
materials. Materials need to provide a high quantity of
intensive, authentic, yet comprehensible input for learners
to observe before they make it their own. New language
needs to be deliberately and systematically recycled to
ensure maximum exposure. And numerous opportunities
to practice must be provided to make up for the lack of
such opportunities outside of class.
Finally, recognizing the unique needs of the adult learner,
content should be carefully chosen for its practicality and
relevance to how the adult learner may use it in the real
world. Daily opportunities should be constructed to
allow learners to observe their own progress.
Irresistible and motivating content provides something
learners not only can talk about, but that they will want
to talk about. Thoughtful recycling will ensure memora-
bility—and subsequently experimentation—both
enhancing and maximizing learner achievement.

A quantitative way to maximize exposure is by changing

the “vehicle” that exhibits or “carries” the language.
Using vocabulary as an example of a quantitative
approach to multiplication and integration, as materials
writers, we consider the following amount of integration
in the list below to be a bare minimum. Both within
the textbook unit where it is presented, as well as in
subsequent units, vocabulary should be embedded and
recycled in:
• reading selections and realia
• listening comprehension tape scripts
• example sentences in grammar charts
• grammar exercises
• conversation models and opportunities to practice them
• video scripts
• songs
Instructors should expect that their materials provide
these multiple exposures and intensive, systematic
recycling—anything less leads to “forgetability.”

7
 ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Joan Saslow
Joan Saslow is co-author, with Allen
Ascher, of Top Notch: English for
Today’s World. She was Series Director
of True Colors: An EFL Course for Real
Communication and of True Voices, an
EFL Video Course. She is the author of
Ready to Go: Language, Lifeskills, and Civics; Workplace
Plus: Living and Working in English; Literacy Plus; and of
English in Context: Reading Comprehension for Science
and Technology.
Ms. Saslow has taught in Chile and the United States in a
variety of programs. She taught English at the Binational
Centers of Valparaíso and Viña del Mar, Chile, and French
and English at the Catholic University of Valparaíso. In the
Other topics forthcoming in the
United States, Ms. Saslow taught English as a Foreign
Language to Japanese university students at Marymount
TOP NOTCH PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT SERIES:
College and to international students in Westchester Developing Cultural Fluency
Community College’s intensive English program. She also
taught workplace English at a General Motors auto assem- Beyond Model Conversations:
bly plant. Ms. Saslow’s special interest is in distinguishing Enabling Real Discussions
the needs of the EFL and the ESL learner and creating
materials appropriate for each. She has an M.A. in French A Learner-Supportive Grammar
from the University of Wisconsin.

Allen Ascher
Allen Ascher, formerly Director of the
International English Institute at
Hunter College in New York, has been
a teacher, teacher-trainer, author, and
publisher. He has taught in language
and teacher-training programs in both
REFERENCES
China and the United States. Mr. Ascher specialized in British Council: English 2000. In David Graddol. The Future of
teaching listening and speaking to students at the Beijing English? The British Council. 1997.
Second Foreign Language Institute, to hotel workers at a John P. Comings, Andrea Parrella, and Lisa Soricone: “Helping
major international hotel in China, and to Japanese stu- adults persist: four supports.” NCSALL. 1999.
dents from Chubu University studying English at Ohio David Crystal: English as a Global Language. Cambridge. 1997.
University in the United States. Mr. Ascher taught students B.B. Kachru: “Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism:
of all language backgrounds and abilities at the City the English language in the outer circle.” In R. Quick and H.G.
University of New York, and he trained teachers in the Widdowson (eds) English in the World. Cambridge. 1985.
TESOL Certificate Program at the New School. Mr. Ascher Michael Lewis: The Lexical Approach. Language Teaching
has an M.A. in Applied Linguistics from Ohio University. Publications. 1993.
Joan Saslow: “Real language: the vitamin for the student studying
Mr. Ascher is co-author, with Joan Saslow, of Top Notch. He
English outside the English-speaking world.” Longman. 1996.
is author of Think About Editing: A Grammar Editing Guide
Ricardo Schutz: O Ingles como lingua internacional. sk.com.br/sk-
for ESL Writers. As a publisher, Mr. Ascher played a key
ingl. 2003.
role in the creation of some of the most widely used materi-
Sower, C. (1997). “An attitude of inquiry: An interview with Diane
als for adults, including True Colors, NorthStar, Focus on Larsen-Freeman.” The Language Teacher, 21 (7), 27-28, 37.
Grammar, Global Links, and Ready to Go.
Shinichi Yanagawa: “English, the lingua franca of business.” Daily
Yomiuri On-line. August 10, 2003.
ISBN 0-13-2385210-X