Recently I got to go to a fourth grade math class. They were studying rectangular prisms.
The kids had all brought in boxes from home. The first thing they did
was cut them up: unfolded them so that the six faces were connected but
lying flat. Of course, depending on how the kids cut them up, they
ended up with a bunch of different shapes.
At that point, the teacher wrote the day's goal up on the board.
They do this in every class, in every grade. It must be required as part
of the Japanese curriculum. In English classes, they call it the "aim"
or "task" for the day. The kids usually have to copy it onto their
worksheets or into their notebooks. The goal for this class was to think
about that shape that you get when you unfold a box. What is that called? Apparently in English it's called a net.
Like this guy: http://d43fweuh3sg51.cloudfront.net/media/alfresco/u/pr/KAET/Rectangular%20Prism%20and%20Its%20Net%20Math%20Interactive_b9dfd995-90d8-4420-95e4-d0c03a9fb365/rectangular-prism-net.jpg
The teacher handed out graph paper and told them to draw the net
for a 3x4x5 rectangular prism. He got them started by drawing two of the
faces up on the board, but then let them finish it themselves. When
they were done, they cut it out and checked that they could fold it into
a box. For the kids who finished early, he challenged them to think of
different ways to draw nets. One kid came up with three different ways.
What struck me the most about the class is how relaxed the pace was.
They really only did two things in the class: first they cut up a box
into a net, and then they drew a net and folded it into a box. It was
also really hands on, and the teacher let the kids think for themselves
about how to draw the net. Only one or two of the kids seemed to find
drawing the net confusing, and since it was so slow paced, the teacher
had plenty of time to go over and help them out.
Me, I spend most of my time in English class. Thinking about English from the perspective of someone who's not a
native speaker can be pretty mind blowing. I've noticed all kinds of
crazy things about the English language that I never noticed before.
For example, what's the difference between "will" and "going to?"
"I'll call her."
"I'm going to call her."
You'd say "I'll" if you just made up your mind to call her on the spot.
Someone reminds you that you have to call her and you say, ok fine I'll
You'd say "I'm going to" if it's something you
already planned to do. Someone says, oh no, I forgot we were supposed to
call her! and you say, no, it's cool, I'm going to do it.
If the phone rang and you rushed to pick it up, you'd say "I'll get it!" because it's a spur of the moment decision.
On the other hand, "I will call her" sounds emphatic and
formal. Maybe you're trying to convince someone that you'll really do
What's the difference between "just now" and "right now"?
"He was here just now." (but he's not any more)
"He's here right now." (and still is)
And this is more Japanese-specific, but it always sounds more
natural for them to say, "Because I was cold, I put on my jacket."
Instead of, "I put on my jacket because I was cold." Apparently we
English-speakers like to cut to the chase and offer a reason later, but
Japanese people prefer to soften you up with the
reason before they tell you what they did.
And then there's this debacle:
I don't know how anybody who picks up English as a second language ever gets this 100% right. Try explaining to someone that when you start writing your paragraph about a village in Alaska, you call it "a village" because your audience doesn't know it yet, so it's just some random nonspecific village in their minds. But once you've introduced it, it becomes "the village" because everyone knows that you are talking about that one village up there in Alaska.
And by the way, I play soccer, but I also play "the" piano. What's up with that?