The Michel Thomas Method

This weekend I stumbled upon the 1997 BBC documentary The Language Master. (Click here for a YouTube link.) The protagonist is Michel Thomas. He was born in Poland but made his way across Europe, where he was part of the French resistance in the second World War. Eventually he worked for American counter-intelligence and was credited with the arrest of hundreds of Nazi war criminals and locating documents. He was said to be an excellent communicator and used non-violent interrogation techniques.

After the war, he emigrated to the U.S. and became a language instructor to Hollywood stars. He would not explain his methods, but his results brought ringing endorsements. Celebrities would part with their cash for a quick and intensive learning session, and they all claimed that his method really worked. The Language Master was the first recorded session showing snippets of Michel Thomas teaching French to six students in the UK. He spent five full days with the students who had little to no French background and were considered below average in terms of language learning ability. Most of them had failed their foreign language exams.

The first thing Michel does when he meets the students is to push all the standard classroom furniture to the side. The students help unload a truck with rugs and comfortable chairs. No desks are needed. There is no writing, reading or memorization. Michel's philosophy is that students must be in as relaxed an environment as possible so they have maximum “openness” to learning, particularly given many of them have negative associations with language learning. He even tells them that if they forget a word, it is his fault as the teacher, not theirs. The students are nervous when they first meet him, but after a while they get comfortable speaking French. They know the grammar and are able to translate what he says in English into French. The students are amazed at their own ability to learn, and their confidence is restored.

A key aspect of the method has to do with Michel’s long experience in multiple languages. Others describe his approach as “breaking language learning into very small parts and then putting it back together”. It’s as if he has discovered the underlying fundamental structure (at least for Romance languages) and knows how to aid the learner reconstruct the grammar and recall the words by making connections to things they already know. The edifice is then built block by block. He never describes his strategy, and is reluctant to “give it away” to academics who want to dissect his approach and compare it to extant methods. That his method “works” is for him the proof in the pudding.

Watching the documentary made me think about my own teaching strategy. I’ve never considered that students should feel comfortable. Rather, my teaching philosophy for many years has aimed at having most students be at the edge of their comfort zone. Too comfortable, and they think it is too easy and don’t learn. Too difficult and they get frustrated and shut down. I try to give some additional help to the struggling low end of the class, and at the other end of the spectrum I try to include a little to keep the high end motivated and interested. My class sizes are clearly larger than Michel’s. He works with many of his clients one-on-one. (He also has a tape series where you can learn, in your own comfortable setting, by listening to his voice and going through his method – even if you don’t understand how or why it works.)

Another difference is that his approach is time-intensive and immersive. Perhaps this is part of why schools such as Colorado College and Quest University are built on the block system. Maybe I should try teaching an intensive class during the summer or January intersession. Would I teach it very differently compared to what I do now, where my class meets for 3-4 hours per week rather than per day? It seems that I should take advantage of the intensive format for a different kind of learning. (Is there a different kind in chemistry?) I’d never really thought deeply about how I would change my approach. Maybe in the future when I don’t think the experience would be energy-draining, I should challenge myself to give it a try.

Listening to testimonials from students and teachers (who had experience of learning from Michel), I wondered if the “atomization” of language learning followed by subsequent reconstruction also works in my field of chemistry. Is the atom the fundamental building block in teaching chemistry? While this is the first thing that came to mind, maybe it should be the chemical bond. (I'm biased because this is my area of expertise.) Maybe there’s an equivalent grammar and syntax to thinking chemically. I’d like to think that I do “think” chemically, but I’m not sure I can describe what that means with any precision. Nor do I know the point where chemistry suddenly “clicked” for me. (My first two years of chemistry I had very little conceptual understanding, but I had developed good exam-taking strategies.)

This is something I should think about much more carefully. Is there a way to break down chemistry (or physical science more broadly) and reconstruct it so that the learning is much smoother? I don’t know. The advice section of my course website stresses doing the pre-reading, working problems, persevering, working hard, and putting in lots and lots of effort. The Michel Thomas method, by contrast, seems almost effortless on the part of the students. Michel makes it look easy as the instructor, but clearly he has done a lot of hard work to develop and hone his method. He also seems very attuned to his students individually. In the documentary, this trait is juxtaposed with his counter-intelligence experience and his ability to read people and “coax information” out of them. Perhaps that’s a skill that can be developed as a teacher. Certainly experience has taught me where some of the stumbling blocks are, and in my office hours I am sometimes able to work with the student one-on-one to get pass their individual roadblock(s). Perhaps this also says something about the problems of mass education where the tutor-pupil relationship is diluted in a large class.

I have no answers. And perhaps my own roadblock comes from running around doing all my duties as a faculty member. Maybe I haven’t taken the time to be comfortable, relaxed, and to immerse myself in thinking more carefully about this issue. I should figure out when my next sabbatical is scheduled. Or perhaps I should make some work “lifestyle” changes so I can free up some relaxing think-time. Perhaps over a soothing cup of tea! Who will be my muse though?