Communicative Approach
The Communicative Approach, also known as communicative language teaching (CLT), emphasizes interaction and problem solving as both the means and the ultimate goal of learningEnglish - or any language. As such, it tends to emphasise activities such as role play, pair workand group work.
It switched traditional language teaching's emphasis on grammar, and the teacher-centredclassroom, to that of the active use of authentic language in learning and acquisition.[1]
Contents
[hide]Outline[edit]
CLT is interested in giving students the skills to be able to communicate under various circumstances. As such, it places less emphasis on the learning of specific grammatical rules and more on obtaining native-speaker-like fluency and pronunciation. Students are assessed on their level of communicative competence rather than on their explicit knowledge.
It is more of an approach or philosophy than a highly structured methodology. David Nunanfamously listed five key elements to the communicative approach:[2]
- An emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target language.
- The introduction of authentic texts into the learning situation.
- The provision of opportunities for learners to focus, not only on the language but also on thelearning process itself.
- An enhancement of the learner's own personal experiences as important contributing elements to classroom learning.
- An attempt to link classroom language learning with language activation outside the classroom.
History[edit]
Communicative language teaching has been the centre of language teaching discussions since the late 1960s (Savignon & Berns, 1984, p.4). Over the years it had become clear to its proponents that mastering grammatical forms and structures did not prepare the learners well enough to use the language they are learning effectively when communicating with others. As a result, situational language teaching and its theoretical conjectures were questioned by British linguists. Some of the linguists had the task of providing the Council of Europe with a standardized programme for foreign language teaching. D. A. Wilkins was one of them, and his work has had the greatest impact on current materials for language teaching (Savignon & Berns, 1984, p.10). He analyzed the existing syllabus types (grammatical and situational) and the communicative meanings that a language learner needs to understand.
In place of the existing syllabus Wilkins proposed a notional syllabus. This syllabus was not organized in terms of grammatical structures but rather specified what meanings the learners needed in order to communicate. What began as a development only in Britain has expanded since the mid 1970’s. Now it is seen as an approach that pursues two main goals.
The first one is “to make communicative competence the goal of language teaching” and the second one, “to develop procedures for the teaching of the four language skills that acknowledge the interdependence of language and communication” (Richards & Rodgers, 2001, p.155). Another important name associated with communicative language teaching is A. P. R. Howatt. He differentiates between a “strong” and a “weak” version of communicative language teaching.
Howatt states that “a strong version is the development of a language through communication” (1984, p.279) doesn’t mean reactivating existing knowledge of the language but rather prompting the development of the language system itself. However, the “weak” version focuses on providing the learner with sufficient opportunities to speak the language and to put that in the centre of language teaching (Howatt, 1984, p.279).
Theory and characteristics[edit]
As the name implies, the central concept in communicative language teaching is “communicative competence” (Richards & Rodgers, 2001, p.159). This covers both the spoken and written language and all four language skills. As Oxford states, the “development of communicative competence requires realistic interaction among learners using meaningful, contextualized language” (1990, p.8).
Learning strategies, like allowing learners to become more self-directed and more independent in learning the new language help them to participate actively in communication. In her book “Interpreting Communicative Language Teaching: Contexts and Concerns in Teacher Education” Savignon includes a useful summary of the eight characteristics of communicative language teaching by the linguist M. Berns:
1) Language teaching is based on a view of language as communication. That is, language is seen as a social tool that speakers use to make meaning; speakers communicate about something to someone for some purpose, either orally or in writing.
2) Diversity is recognized and accepted as part of language development and use in second language learners and users, as it is with first language users.
3) A learner’s competence is considered in relative, not in absolute, terms.
4) More than one variety of the language is recognized as a viable model for learning and teaching.
5) Culture is recognized as instrumental in shaping speaker’s communicative competence, in both their first and subsequent languages.
6) No single methodology or fixed set of techniques is prescribed.
7) Language use is recognized as serving ideational, interpersonal, and textual functions and is related to the development of learner’s competence in each.
8) It is essential that learners be engaged in doing things with language – that is, that they use language for a variety of purposes in all phases of learning (2002, p.6).
One major feature of communicative language teaching is pair and group work. This type of work “is suggested to encourage students to use and practice functions and forms” (Richards& Rodgers, 2001, p.171). That helps the students to become more independent and to accept responsibility.
Learner and teacher roles[edit]
Communicative language teaching emphasizes “self-direction for the learners”. (Oxford, 1990, p.10) As the teacher won’t be around to guide them the whole time, especially not when the learners speak the language outside the classroom they are expected to take on a greater degree of responsibility for their own learning. According to Oxford, “this is essential to the active development of the new language” (1990, p.4). The learner should enter into situations where communication takes place as much as possible to increase his or her communicative proficiency.
Teachers no longer rely on activities that require repetition, accuracy and the memorization ofsentences and grammatical patterns; instead, they require the learners to negotiate meaning and to interact meaningfully in the new language. Learners have to participate in classroom activities based on a cooperative rather than individualistic approach to learning; they need to listen to their peers in order to carry out group work successfully.
The teacher adopts different roles. On the one hand she is a “facilitator, a guide and a helper” and on the other hand a “coordinator, an idea-person and a co-communicator” (Oxford, 1990, p.10). She talks less and listens more to the students’ output. In addition to that, the teacher also identifies the students’ learning strategies and helps the students to improve them if necessary and shows them how to work independently. Instructional tasks become less important and fade into the background. That doesn’t mean that they aren’t used at all, but with less significance.
These changes give the teacher more scope for variety and creativity and she gives up her status as a person of authority in a teacher-learner hierarchy. It is the teacher’s responsibility to be creative and prepare appropriate material at home. The teacher can also assume other roles, for example the needs analyst, the counselor or the group process manager (see Richards & Rodgers, 2001).
Materials and how they can be used[edit]
Materials play an important role in communicative language teaching. They provide the basis for communication among the learners. According to Richards & Rodgers, there are three basic types of material (2001, p.168). These are text-based materials, task-based materials and realia.
Text-based material like textbooks will, if designed on CLT principles, offer the learners many kinds of prompts on which they can build up conversations. They will typically contain visual cues, pictures and sentence fragments which the learners can use as a starting point for conversation. Other books consist of different texts the teacher can use for pair work. Both learners get texts with different information and the task is to ask each other questions to get to know the content of the missing piece.
Task-based material consists of exercise handbooks, cue cards, activity cards, pair-communication practice materials and student-interaction practice booklets.
Pair-communication practice material contains material contains two sets of material for a pair of students. It is similar to a task using text-based material. Both students have different kinds of information and through communication they need to put the parts together. Other pair-work tasks involve one student as an interviewer and the other one the interviewee. Topics can range from personal experience and telling the other person about one’s own life and preferences to talking about a topic that was discussed in the news recently or is still up-to-date.
Using realia in communicative language teaching means using authentic material, for example newspaper articles, photos, maps, symbols, and many more. Material which can be touched and held makes speaking and learning more concrete and meaningful. Maps can be used to describe the way from one point to another and photos can be used for describing where things are placed, in front of, on top of or underneath something, and so on.
A classic example of a communicative classroom activity is the “jigsaw-activity”: As Richards points out, “functional communication activities require students to use their language resources to overcome an information gap or solve a problem” (2006, p.18). Usually the class is divided into several groups and each group has a different piece of information needed to complete an activity. The task of the class is to fit all the pieces together to complete the whole. They must use their language resources and communicative strategies to communicate with each other in order to get the information the groups do not have.
An example of a “jigsaw-activity” would be the following: The teacher prepares a topic that’s interesting for the students and fits into the curriculum. For example the students could learn about Britain when introducing the country. The teacher splits the class into four to five groups, depending on the number of students. He/she does this by counting from A- D/E and afterwards all the A’s, B’s, and so on sit together. Every group gets a text containing information on Britain, for example about politics, sights or differences to Germany. The learners take notes and help each other when questions arise. They are then rearranged into groups containing a person from group A, one from B, one from C, and so on. Now the learners discuss and exchange the information they worked on in the first groups so that everyone has all the information about Britain and is able to answer questions the teacher could ask. This activity forces the pupils to talk, even the ones who do not normally speak that much in class, because they are all dependent on the information another student has.
Advantages and disadvantages[edit]
The most obvious advantage in communicative language teaching is that of the increase of fluency in the target language. This enables the learners to be more confident when interacting with other people and they also enjoy talking more. The approach also leads to gains in the areas of grammatical/sociolinguistic/discourse/strategic competence through communication.
One major disadvantage might be that it is difficult for the teacher alone to check the language use of every student, especially in a big class. The students are allowed to make mistakes but they need to be corrected – preferably not whilst in the middle of a conversation - by the teacher in order to improve and so as not to make the same mistake again and again. Therefore it is not helpful if there’s only one teacher for one class.
Another point concerning the teacher might be that it depends on the teacher how motivating or boring the lesson will be. The teacher needs to prepare the material at home and needs to make it as motivating and creative as possible so that the students find the tasks meaningful and motivating, and are eager to communicate with each other.
A critical look[edit]
In 1985, Michael Swan published his "A critical look at the Communicative Approach" in the ELT Journal (Parts 1[3] and 2[4]) to which Henry Widdowson, the leading guru of the communicative approach, replied.[5][6]
In the first part of his "Critical look", after acknowledging the major contributions the Communicative Approach has made to modern foreign language teaching, Swan points out two, complementary, drawbacks, based on what he perceives is its dogmatic approach: the apparent "belief that students do not possess, or cannot transfer from their mother tongue, normal communication skills" and "the 'whole-system' fallacy" which "arises when the linguist, over-excited about his or her analysis of a piece of language or behaviour, sets out to teach everything that has been observed (often including the metalanguage used to describe the phenomena), without stopping to ask how much of the teaching is (a) new to the students and (b) relevant to their needs."[3]
In his second article, Swan states that the "real issue is not which syllabus to put first: it is how to integrate eight or so syllabuses (functional, notional, situational, topic, phonological, lexical, structural, skills) into a sensible teaching programme" and that "A good language course is likely to include lessons which concentrate on particular structures, lessons which deal with areas of vocabulary, lessons on functions, situation-based lessons, pronunciation lessons, lessons on productive and receptive skills, and several other kinds of component... reconciling a large number of different and often conflicting priorities...".[4] He goes on to point out that students already know how to "convey information, define, apologize and so on" in their own languages and that "what they need to learn is how to do these things in English". He argues that once they know how to "carry out the main communicative functions", according to the course, students still need to learn most of the language, i.e. the vocabulary.[4]
برچسبها:
|
There are various English teaching methodologies that you can use while in the classroom. We will quickly show you how to use the most simple and common one, the PPP Approach to Communicative Language Teaching. The 3Ps stand for Presentation, Practice, and Production. Presentation The presentation stage involves explaining to your students what the goals of the lesson are so that they can understand what it is you are teaching and why. This is the stage where you, as the teacher, will explain/introduce the new vocabulary/key expressions to your students. Practice The practice stage involves students practicing the target language in a controlled manner (by themselves, in pairs, or in a group setting). Activities meant for drilling the language may be used to guide the students in a more productive manner. Activities may include repeating the target language after the teacher either individually or in chorus, completing sentences or dialogues, asking and answering questions, and matching sentences. Production Students are encouraged to make use of the language in a less controlled manner. The aim is for them to make the language “their own” by providing a suitable context for usage. Typical activities for this stage are role play, communications task, and Q&A games.
|
برچسبها:
Communicative Language Teaching (The Communicative Approach)
As the language theories underlying the Audiolingual method and theSitiuational Language Teachingmethod were questioned by prominent linguists like Chomsky (1957) during the 1960s, a new trend of language teaching paved its way into classrooms. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) Which is an approach to the teaching of second and foreign languages, emphasizes interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of learning a language. It is also referred to as “Communicative Approach”. Historically, CLT has been seen as a response to the Audio-Lingual Method (ALM), and as an extension or development of the Notional-Functional Syllabus. Task-based language learning, a more recent refinement of CLT, has gained considerably in popularity.
Shortcomings of structuralism and behaviorism
The theories underlying the audiolingual method and the situational language teaching were widely criticized during the 1960s. Noam Chomsky, for instance, rejected the structuralist view of language and demonstrated that there is a distinction between performance and competence. The goal of the linguist is to study the linguistic competence native speakers are endowed with. He also showed, rightly, that structuralism and behaviorism were unable to account for one fundamental aspect of language, namely the creativity and uniqueness of individual sentences. A child is able to produce an infinite number of sentences that s/he has never encountered. This makes the factors of imitation, repetition and habit formation weak arguments to account for any language learning theory.
A shift towards communicative proficiency
The increasing interdependency between the European countries necessitated a need for a greater effort to teach adults the principal languages of the continent. New goals were set in language teaching profession:
- The paramount importance of communication aspects of language.
- The increasing interest in meaningful learning.
- The growing centrality of the learner in teaching processes.
- The subordinate importance of structural teaching of language.
Notional / functional dimension of language
Applied linguists and philosophers addressed another fundamental dimension of language: the functional and communicative potential of language. The speech act theory showed that we do something when we speak a language. We use language ( cf Halliday 1975)
- to get things,
- to control behavior,
- to create interaction with others,
- to express personal feelings,
- to learn,
- to create a world of imagination,
- to communicate information.
Besides applied linguists emphasized a teaching of language based on communicative proficiency rather than mastery of structures. instead of describing the core of language through traditional concepts of grammar and vocabulary, they (Van Ek & Alexander, 1975; Wilkins, 1976) attempted to show the systems of meaning underlying the communicative use of language. They described two kinds of meanings.
- Notional categories: concepts such as time, sequence; quantity, location, frequency.
- Functional categories: requests offers, complaints, invitation …
In other words, a “notion” is a particular context in which people communicate. A “function” is a specific purpose for a speaker in a given context. For example, the “notion,” of shopping requires numerous language “functions,” such as asking about prices or features of a product and bargaining.
One language competence or numerous competences?
For Chomsky the focus of linguistics was to describe the linguistic competencethat enables speakers to produce grammatically correct sentences. Dell Hymes held, however, that such a view of linguistic theory was sterile and that it failed to picture all the aspects of language. He advocated the need of a theory that incorporate communication competence. It must be a definition of what a speaker needs to know in order to be communicatively competent in a speech community.
Later Canale and Swaine (1980) described four dimensions of communicative competence.
- Grammatical competence: refers to what Chomsky calls linguistic competence.
- Sociolinguistic competence: refers to an understanding of the social context in which communication takes place (role relationships, shared beliefs and information between participants …)
- Discourse competence: refers to the interpretation of individual messsage elements in terms of their interconnectedness and how meaning is represented in relationship to the entire discourse or text.
- Strategic competence: refers to the coping strategies that participants use to initiate terminate, maintain, repair and redirect communication
Learning theory
According to the the communicative approach, in order for learning to take place, emphasis must be put on the importance of these variables:
- Communication: activities that involve real communication promote learning.
- Tasks: activities in which language is used to carry out meaningful tasks supports the learning process.
- Meaning: language that is meaningful and authentic to the learner boosts learning.
Acquiring or learning?
Stephen Krashen later advocated in his language learning theory that there should be a distinction between learning and acquiring. He sees acquisition as the basic process involved in developing language proficiency and distinguishes this process from learning. Acquisition is an unconscious process that involves the naturalistic development of language proficiency while learning is the conscious internalisation of the rules of language. It results in explicit knowledge about the forms of language and the ability to verbalize this knowledge. Learning according to Krashen can not lead to acquisition.
Syllabus
Communicative language teaching syllabus organizes the teaching according to the notional and functional categories of language rather than according to its structures.It concentrates on the following:
- Interactions: using language to communicate,
- Tasks: using language to perform meaningful tasks
- Learner: puting the learner’s interesets, needs in the forefront.
Merits of CLT
There are many advantages in teaching according to the communicative approach:
- CLT is a holistic appraoch. It doesn’t focus only on the traditional structural syllabus. It takes into consideration communicative dimension of language.
- CLT provides vitality and motivation within the classroom.
- CLT is a learner centered approach. It capitalizes on the interests and needs of the learner.
- In a world where communication of information and information technology have broken new considerable ground, CLT can play an important role in education.
Criticism
- Notional syllabus was criticized as merely replacing one kind of list, namely a list of grammatical structures, with another list of notions and functions.
- The various categories of language functions are overlapping and not systematically graded like the structures of the language.
- The communicative approach focuses on the use of language in everyday situations, or the functional aspects of language, and less on the formal structures. There must be a certain balance between the two.It gives priority to meanings and rules of use rather than to grammar and rules of structure. Such concentration on language behavior may result in negative consequences in the sense that important structures and rules would be left out.
- The approach relies extensively on the functional-notational syllabus which places heavy demands on the learners.
- A major principle underlying this approach is its emphasis on learners’ needs and interests. This implies that every teacher should modify the syllabus to fit the needs of the learners.
- The requirements are difficult. Not all classrooms can allow for group work activities and for teaching aids and materials.
In spite of its critics, CLT has gained widespread acceptance in the world of language study. CLT can succeed, as long as teachers don’t completely reject the need for the structure provided by grammar. Teachers must strive for moderation and don’t neglect the merits of other methods. CLT, in the hands of a balanced teacher, can bring new life and joy to the classroom. Its vitality makes it an important contributor to language learning approaches.
Read more on the Communicative Approach. Check Richards & Rogers’ book:Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (Cambridge Language Teaching Library)
References
H. Douglas Brown (1987).Principles of language learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice Hall
Richards, Jack C. and Theodore S. Rodgers (1986). Approaches and methods in language teaching: A description and analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Other sources: Wikipedia – CLT
برچسبها:
Communicative language teaching
Communicative language teaching (CLT), or the communicative approach, is anapproach to language teaching that emphasizes interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of study.
Contents
[hide]
Background[edit]
Societal influences[edit]
Communicative language teaching rose to prominence in the 1970s and early 1980s as a result of many disparate developments in both Europe and the United States.[1] First, there was an increased demand for language learning, particularly in Europe. The advent of theEuropean Common Market led to widespread European migration, and consequently there was a large population of people who needed to learn a foreign language for work or for personal reasons.[2] At the same time, children were increasingly able to learn foreign languages in school. The number of secondary schools offering languages rose worldwide in the 1960s and 1970s as part of a general trend of curriculum-broadening and modernization, and foreign-language study ceased to be confined to the elite academies. In Britain, the introduction of comprehensive schools meant that almost all children had the opportunity to study foreign languages.[3]
This increased demand put pressure on educators to change their teaching methods. Traditional methods such as grammar translation assumed that students were aiming for mastery of the target language, and that students were willing to study for years before expecting to use the language in real life. However, these assumptions were challenged by adult learners who were busy with work, and by schoolchildren who were less academically able. Educators realized that to motivate these students an approach with a more immediate payoff was necessary.[3]
The trend of progressivism in education provided a further pressure for educators to change their methods.[3] Progressivism holds that active learning is more effective than passive learning,[4] and as this idea gained traction in schools there was a general shift towards using techniques where students were more actively involved, such as group work. Foreign-language education was no exception to this trend, and teachers sought to find new methods that could better embody this shift in thinking.[3]
Academic influences[edit]
The development of communicative language teaching was also helped by new academic ideas. In Britain, applied linguists began to doubt the efficacy of situational language teaching, the dominant method in that country at the time. This was partly in response to Chomsky’s insights into the nature of language. Chomsky had shown that the structural theories of language prevalent at the time could not explain the creativity and variety evident in real communication.[2] In addition, British applied linguists such as Christopher Candlin andHenry Widdowson began to see that a focus on structure was also not helping language students. They saw a need for students to develop communicative skill and functional competence in addition to mastering language structures.[2]
In the United States, the linguist and anthropologist Dell Hymes developed the concept ofcommunicative competence. This was a reaction to Chomsky’s concept of the linguistic competence of an ideal native speaker.[1] Communicative competence redefined what it meant to “know” a language; in addition to speakers having mastery over the structural elements of language, according to communicative competence they must also be able to use those structural elements appropriately in different social situations.[1] This is neatly summed up by Hymes’s statement, “There are rules of use without which the rules of grammar would be useless.”[3] Hymes did not make a concrete formulation of communicative competence, but subsequent authors have tied the concept to language teaching, notably Michael Canale.[3]
Communicative syllabuses[edit]
An influential development in the history of communicative language teaching was the work of the Council of Europe in creating new language syllabuses. Education was a high priority for the Council of Europe, and they set out to provide syllabuses that would meet the needs of European immigrants.[2] Among the studies used by the council when designing the course was one by the British linguist, D. A. Wilkins, that defined language using “notions” and “functions”, rather than more traditional categories of grammar and vocabulary. Notional categories include concepts such as time, location, frequency, and quantity, and functional categories include communicative acts such as offers, complaints, denials, and requests. These syllabuses were widely used.[2]
Communicative language-learning materials were also developed in Germany. There was a new emphasis on personal freedom in German education at the time, an attitude exemplified in the philosophy of Jürgen Habermas.[1] To fulfill this goal, educators developed materials that allowed learners to choose what they wanted to communicate freely. These materials concentrated on the various different social meanings a given item of grammar could have, and were structured in such a way that learners could choose how to progress through the course themselves.[1] The materials were used in teacher training courses and workshops to encourage teachers to change to using a communicative syllabus. Two similar projects were also undertaken by Candlin at Lancaster University, and by Holec at the University of Nancy.[1]
Meanwhile, at the University of Illinois, there was a study that investigated the effects of the explicit teaching of learning strategies to language learners. The study encouraged learners to take risks while communicating, and to use constructs other than rote memorized patterns. At the study’s conclusion, students who were taught communicatively fared no worse on grammatical tests than students that had been taught with traditional methods, but they performed significantly better in tests of communicative ability. This was the case even for beginners.[1] As a result of this study, supplemental communicative activities were created for the French CRÉDIF course Voix et Visages de la France. These materials focused on classroom autonomy, and learners were taught various phrases they could use to negotiate meaning, such as “What’s the word for …” and “I don’t understand”.[1]
Outline[edit]
CLT is usually characterized as a broad approach to teaching, rather than as a teachingmethod with a clearly defined set of classroom practices. As such, it is most often defined as a list of general principles or features. One of the most recognized of these lists is David Nunan’s (1991) five features of CLT:
- An emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target language.
- The introduction of authentic texts into the learning situation.
- The provision of opportunities for learners to focus, not only on language but also on the learning process itself.
- An enhancement of the learner’s own personal experiences as important contributing elements to classroom learning.
- An attempt to link classroom language learning with language activities outside the classroom.
These five features are claimed by practitioners of CLT to show that they are very interested in the needs and desires of their learners as well as the connection between the language as it is taught in their class and as it used outside the classroom. Under this broad umbrella definition, any teaching practice that helps students develop their communicative competencein an authentic context is deemed an acceptable and beneficial form of instruction. Thus, in the classroom CLT often takes the form of pair and group work requiring negotiation and cooperation between learners, fluency-based activities that encourage learners to develop their confidence, role-plays in which students practise and develop language functions, as well as judicious use of grammar and pronunciation focused activities.
In the mid 1990s the Dogma 95 manifesto influenced language teaching through the Dogme language teaching movement, who proposed that published materials can stifle the communicative approach. As such the aim of the Dogme approach to language teaching is to focus on real conversations about real subjects so that communication is the engine of learning. This communication may lead to explanation, but that this in turn will lead to further communication.[5]
Classroom activities[edit]
Classroom activities used in communicative language teaching include the following:
- Role-play
- Interviews
- information gap
- Games
- Language exchanges
- Surveys
- Pair-work
- Learning by teaching
However, not all courses that utilize the Communicative Language approach will restrict their activities solely to these. Some courses will have the students take occasional grammar quizzes, or prepare at home using non-communicative drills, for instance. William Glasser's "control theory" exemplifies his attempts to empower students and give them voice by focusing on their basic, human needs: Unless students are given power, they may exert what little power they have to thwart learning and achievement through inappropriate behavior and mediocrity. Thus, it is important for teachers to give students voice, especially in the current educational climate, which is dominated by standardization and testing (Simmons and Page, 2010).[6]
Critiques of CLT[edit]
One of the most famous attacks on communicative language teaching was offered by Michael Swan in the English Language Teaching Journal in 1985.[7] Henry Widdowson responded in defense of CLT, also in the ELT Journal (1985 39(3):158-161). More recently other writers (e.g. Bax[8]) have critiqued CLT for paying insufficient attention to the context in which teaching and learning take place, though CLT has also been defended against this charge (e.g. Harmer 2003[9]).
Often, the communicative approach is deemed a success if the teacher understands the student. But, if the teacher is from the same region as the student, the teacher will understand errors resulting from an influence from their first language. Native speakers of the target language may still have difficulty understanding them. This observation may call for new thinking on and adaptation of the communicative approach. The adapted communicative approach should be a simulation where the teacher pretends to understand only what any regular speaker of the target language would and reacts accordingly (Hattum 2006[10]).
برچسبها:
برچسبها:
Community Language Learning
Introduction :It takes its principles from the “Counseling Learning Approach” developed
by Charles A. Curran.
It was created especially for Adult Learners who might fear to appear foolish ;
so the teacher becomes a Language Counselor , he understands them and leads
them to overcome their fears .
It follows Krashen’s Monitor Theory (Affective Filter Hypothesis) and the
Cognitive Theory where the human mind is active .
| TECHNIQUES
Build relationship |
PRINCIPLES
Tape Recording |
Conclusion
Learning is Persons (no superior/inferior)
Learning is Dynamic & Creative
LESSON PLAN
Course title : Teaching French/ESL to Adult Learners (1st session)
Place : Private Language Institute
Frequency : Twice a week
Time : 2 hours (Evenings)
Number of Stud : 10
Objective (Approximately)
To be able to greet people , introduce oneself/others , ask for/give information
(The students design the syllabus in some way)
Materials
Chairs in a circle
Tape recorder
Introduction
Teacher greets students , introduces himself
& students introduce themselves (native language)
Teacher explains what students will be doing :
a- conversation in French/ESL with teacher’s help (+ time limit)
b- conversation tape-recorded
c- create a transcript
d- various activities using the language on the transcript
· pronunciation (Human Computer)
· create sentences (group work)
· conjugate verbs
· reconstruct conversation
· describe a picture
Lesson Presentation
Teacher gives clear directions :
Student raises his hand , teacher comes behind him
Student says phrase/sentence in native language
Teacher helps him say it in target language
Record target language only
Listen to recording
Teacher sits and asks students how they feel about the experience
They listen to the conversation
Teacher plays tape again + writes French/ESL sentences on the board
+ waits for volunteers to give native language equivalents
(Students don’t write anything down)
Teacher writes French/ESL translation
Teacher asks students to relax and just listen while he reads/plays the transcript
3 times .
Post-Lesson Activities
Human Computer : practice pronunciation
(Stud. Raises hand , teacher comes behind him
Stud. says a word/sentence/number of sentences in any language
Teacher gives back only correct French/English and stops only when
student stops.)
Group work : create new sentences based on transcript
each group reads his sentences
Closure
Teacher asks the students to talk about the experience .
ASSESSMENT
Paragraph writing or Oral Interview
PRACTICE SENTENCES
(Suggestions: they would be in French/English)
Good evening
How are you?
I’m fine , thank you /I’m not well
Why?
Because I have a headache
What is your name?
My name is …
Nice to meet you / Pleased to meet you
Why are you studying French?
I have always wanted to study French.
Where are you from?
I’m from ….
برچسبها:
Second and Foreign Language Teaching Methods
This module provides a description of the basic principles and procedures of the most recognized and commonly used approaches and methods for teaching a second or foreign language. Each approach or method has an articulated theoretical orientation and a collection of strategies and learning activities designed to reach the specified goals and achieve the learning outcomes of the teaching and learning processes.
Jill Kerper Mora
The following approaches and methods are described below:
Total Physical Response Approach
Click here for a link to an overview of the history of second or foreign language teaching.
Theoretical Orientations to L2 Methods & Approaches
There are four general orientations among modern second-language methods and approaches:
1. STRUCTURAL/LINGUISTIC: Based on beliefs about the structure of language and descriptive or contrastive linguistics. Involves isolation of grammatical and syntactic elements of L2 taught either deductively or inductively in a predetermined sequence. Often involves much meta-linguistic content or "learning about the language" in order to learn the language.
2. COGNITIVE: Based on theories of learning applied specifically to second language learning. Focus is on the learning strategies that are compatible with the learners own style. L2 content is selected according to concepts and techniques that facilitate generalizations about the language, memorization and "competence" leading to "performance".
3. AFFECTIVE/INTERPERSONAL: Focuses on the psychological and affective pre-dispositions of the learner that enhance or inhibit learning. Emphasizes interaction among and between teacher and students and the atmosphere of the learning situation as well as students' motivation for learning. Based on concepts adapted from counseling and social psychology.
4. FUNCTIONAL/COMMUNICATIVE: Based on theories of language acquisition, often referred to as the "natural" approach, and on the use of language for communication. Encompasses multiple aspects of the communicative act, with language structures selected according to their utility in achieving a communicative purpose. Instruction is concerned with the input students receive, comprehension of the "message" of language and student involvement at the students' level of competence.
The Grammar-Translation Approach
This approach was historically used in teaching Greek and Latin. The approach was generalized to teaching modern languages.
Classes are taught in the students' mother tongue, with little active use of the target language. Vocabulary is taught in the form of isolated word lists. Elaborate explanations of grammar are always provided. Grammar instruction provides the rules for putting words together; instruction often focuses on the form and inflection of words. Reading of difficult texts is begun early in the course of study. Little attention is paid to the content of texts, which are treated as exercises in grammatical analysis. Often the only drills are exercises in translating disconnected sentences from the target language into the mother tongue, and vice versa. Little or no attention is given to pronunciation.
The Direct Approach
This approach was developed initially as a reaction to the grammar-translation approach in an attempt to integrate more use of the target language in instruction.
Lessons begin with a dialogue using a modern conversational style in the target language. Material is first presented orally with actions or pictures. The mother tongue is NEVER, NEVER used. There is no translation. The preferred type of exercise is a series of questions in the target language based on the dialogue or an anecdotal narrative. Questions are answered in the target language. Grammar is taught inductively--rules are generalized from the practice and experience with the target language. Verbs are used first and systematically conjugated only much later after some oral mastery of the target language. Advanced students read literature for comprehension and pleasure. Literary texts are not analyzed grammatically. The culture associated with the target language is also taught inductively. Culture is considered an important aspect of learning the language.
The Reading Approach
This approach is selected for practical and academic reasons. For specific uses of the language in graduate or scientific studies. The approach is for people who do not travel abroad for whom reading is the one usable skill in a foreign language.
The priority in studying the target language is first, reading ability and second, current and/or historical knowledge of the country where the target language is spoken.Only the grammar necessary for reading comprehension and fluency is taught. Minimal attention is paid to pronunciation or gaining conversational skills in the target language. From the beginning, a great amount of reading is done in L2, both in and out of class. The vocabulary of the early reading passages and texts is strictly controlled for difficulty. Vocabulary is expanded as quickly as possible, since the acquisition of vocabulary is considered more important that grammatical skill.Translation reappears in this approach as a respectable classroom procedure related to comprehension of the written text.
The Audiolingual Method
This method is based on the principles of behavior psychology. It adapted many of the principles and procedures of the Direct Method, in part as a reaction to the lack of speaking skills of the Reading Approach.
New material is presented in the form of a dialogue. Based on the principle that language learning is habit formation, the method fosters dependence on mimicry, memorization of set phrases and over-learning. Structures are sequenced and taught one at a time. Structural patterns are taught using repetitive drills. Little or no grammatical explanations are provided; grammar is taught inductively. Skills are sequenced: Listening, speaking, reading and writing are developed in order.Vocabulary is strictly limited and learned in context. Teaching points are determined by contrastive analysis between L1 and L2. There is abundant use of language laboratories, tapes and visual aids. There is an extended pre-reading period at the beginning of the course. Great importance is given to precise native-like pronunciation. Use of the mother tongue by the teacher is permitted, but discouraged among and by the students. Successful responses are reinforced; great care is taken to prevent learner errors. There is a tendency to focus on manipulation of the target language and to disregard content and meaning.
Hints for Using Audio-lingual Drills in L2 Teaching
1. The teacher must be careful to insure that all of the utterances which students will make are actually within the practiced pattern. For example, the use of the AUX verb have should not suddenly switch to have as a main verb.
2. Drills should be conducted as rapidly as possibly so as to insure automaticity and to establish a system.
3. Ignore all but gross errors of pronunciation when drilling for grammar practice.
4. Use of shortcuts to keep the pace o drills at a maximum. Use hand motions, signal cards, notes, etc. to cue response. You are a choir director.
5. Use normal English stress, intonation, and juncture patterns conscientiously.
6. Drill material should always be meaningful. If the content words are not known, teach their meanings.
7. Intersperse short periods of drill (about 10 minutes) with very brief alternative activities to avoid fatigue and boredom.
8. Introduce the drill in this way:
a. Focus (by writing on the board, for example)
b. Exemplify (by speaking model sentences)
c. Explain (if a simple grammatical explanation is needed)
d. Drill
9. Don’t stand in one place; move about the room standing next to as many different students as possible to spot check their production. Thus you will know who to give more practice to during individual drilling.
10. Use the "backward buildup" technique for long and/or difficult patterns.
--tomorrow
--in the cafeteria tomorrow
--will be eating in the cafeteria tomorrow
--Those boys will be eating in the cafeteria tomorrow.
11. Arrange to present drills in the order of increasing complexity of student response. The question is: How much internal organization or decision making must the student do in order to make a response in this drill. Thus: imitation first, single-slot substitution next, then free response last.
Community Language Learning
Curran, C.A. (1976). Counseling-Learning in Second Languages. Apple River, Illinois: Apple River Press, 1976.
This methodology created by Charles Curran is not based on the usual methods by which languages are taught. Rather the approach is patterned upon counseling techniques and adapted to the peculiar anxiety and threat as well as the personal and language problems a person encounters in the learning of foreign languages. Consequently, the learner is not thought of as a student but as a client. The native instructors of the language are not considered teachers but, rather are trained in counseling skills adapted to their roles as language counselors.
The language-counseling relationship begins with the client's linguistic confusion and conflict. The aim of the language counselor's skill is first to communicate an empathy for the client's threatened inadequate state and to aid him linguistically. Then slowly the teacher-counselor strives to enable him to arrive at his own increasingly independent language adequacy. This process is furthered by the language counselor's ability to establish a warm, understanding, and accepting relationship, thus becoming an "other-language self" for the client. The process involves five stages of adaptation:
STAGE 1
The client is completely dependent on the language counselor.
1. First, he expresses only to the counselor and in English what he wishes to say to the group. Each group member overhears this English exchange but no other members of the group are involved in the interaction.
2. The counselor then reflects these ideas back to the client in the foreign language in a warm, accepting tone, in simple language in phrases of five or six words.
3. The client turns to the group and presents his ideas in the foreign language. He has the counselor's aid if he mispronounces or hesitates on a word or phrase. This is the client's maximum security stage.
STAGE 2
1. Same as above.
2. The client turns and begins to speak the foreign language directly to the group.
3. The counselor aids only as the client hesitates or turns for help. These small independent steps are signs of positive confidence and hope.
STAGE 3
1. The client speaks directly to the group in the foreign language. This presumes that the group has now acquired the ability to understand his simple phrases.
2. Same as 3 above. This presumes the client's greater confidence, independence, and proportionate insight into the relationship of phrases, grammar, and ideas. Translation is given only when a group member desires it.
STAGE 4
1. The client is now speaking freely and complexly in the foreign language. Presumes group's understanding.
2. The counselor directly intervenes in grammatical error, mispronunciation, or where aid in complex expression is needed. The client is sufficiently secure to take correction.
STAGE 5
1. Same as stage 4.
2. The counselor intervenes not only to offer correction but to add idioms and more elegant constructions.
3. At this stage the client can become counselor to the group in stages 1, 2, and 3.
The Silent Way
Gattegno, C. (1972).Teaching Foreign Languages in Schools: The Silent Way. New York City: Educational Solutions.
Procedures
This method created by Caleb Gattegno begins by using a set of colored rods and verbal commands in order to achieve the following:
To avoid the use of the vernacular. To create simple linguistic situations that remain under the complete control of the teacher To pass on to the learners the responsibility for the utterances of the descriptions of the objects shown or the actions performed. To let the teacher concentrate on what the students say and how they are saying it, drawing their attention to the differences in pronunciation and the flow of words. To generate a serious game-like situation in which the rules are implicitly agreed upon by giving meaning to the gestures of the teacher and his mime. To permit almost from the start a switch from the lone voice of the teacher using the foreign language to a number of voices using it. This introduces components of pitch, timbre and intensity that will constantly reduce the impact of one voice and hence reduce imitation and encourage personal production of one's own brand of the sounds.
To provide the support of perception and action to the intellectual guess of what the noises mean, thus bring in the arsenal of the usual criteria of experience already developed and automatic in one's use of the mother tongue. To provide a duration of spontaneous speech upon which the teacher and the students can work to obtain a similarity of melody to the one heard, thus providing melodic integrative schemata from the start.
Materials
The complete set of materials utilized as the language learning progresses include:
A set of colored wooden rods A set of wall charts containing words of a "functional" vocabulary and some additional ones; a pointer for use with the charts in Visual Dictation A color coded phonic chart(s) Tapes or discs, as required; films Drawings and pictures, and a set of accompanying worksheets Transparencies, three texts, a Book of Stories, worksheets.
The Communicative Approach
What is communicative competence?
- Communicative competence is the progressive acquisition of the ability to use a language to achieve one's communicative purpose.
- Communicative competence involves the negotiation of meaning between meaning between two or more persons sharing the same symbolic system.
- Communicative competence applies to both spoken and written language.
- Communicative competence is context specific based on the situation, the role of the participants and the appropriate choices of register and style. For example: The variation of language used by persons in different jobs or professions can be either formal or informal. The use of jargon or slang may or may not be appropriate.
- Communicative competence represents a shift in focus from the grammatical to the communicative properties of the language; i.e. the functions of language and the process of discourse.
- Communicative competence requires the mastery of the production and comprehension of communicative acts or speech acts that are relevant to the needs of the L2 learner.
Characteristics of the Communicative Classroom
- The classroom is devoted primarily to activities that foster acquisition of L2. Learning activities involving practice and drill are assigned as homework.
- The instructor does not correct speech errors directly.
- Students are allowed to respond in the target language, their native language, or a mixture of the two.
- The focus of all learning and speaking activities is on the interchange of a message that the acquirer understands and wishes to transmit, i.e. meaningful communication.
- The students receive comprehensible input in a low-anxiety environment and are personally involved in class activities. Comprehensible input has the following major components:
a. a context
b. gestures and other body language cues
c. a message to be comprehended
d. a knowledge of the meaning of key lexical items in the utterance
Stages of language acquisition in the communicative approach
1. Comprehension or pre-production
a. Total physical response
b. Answer with names--objects, students, pictures
2. Early speech production
a. Yes-no questions
b. Either-or questions
c. Single/two-word answers
d. Open-ended questions
e. Open dialogs
f. Interviews
3. Speech emerges
a. Games and recreational activities
b. Content activities
c. Humanistic-affective activities
d. Information-problem-solving activities
Functional-Notional Approach
Finocchiaro, M. & Brumfit, C. (1983). The Functional-Notional Approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
This method of language teaching is categorized along with others under the rubric of a communicative approach. The method stresses a means of organizing a language syllabus. The emphasis is on breaking down the global concept of language into units of analysis in terms of communicative situations in which they are used.
Notions are meaning elements that may be expressed through nouns, pronouns, verbs, prepositions, conjunctions, adjectives or adverbs. The use of particular notions depends on three major factors: a. the functions b. the elements in the situation, and c. the topic being discussed.
A situation may affect variations of language such as the use of dialects, the formality or informality of the language and the mode of expression. Situation includes the following elements:
A. The persons taking part in the speech act
B. The place where the conversation occurs
C. The time the speech act is taking place
D. The topic or activity that is being discussed
Exponents are the language utterances or statements that stem from the function, the situation and the topic.
Code is the shared language of a community of speakers.
Code-switching is a change or switch in code during the speech act, which many theorists believe is purposeful behavior to convey bonding, language prestige or other elements of interpersonal relations between the speakers.
Functional Categories of Language
Mary Finocchiaro (1983, p. 65-66) has placed the functional categories under five headings as noted below: personal, interpersonal, directive, referential, andimaginative.
Personal = Clarifying or arranging one’s ideas; expressing one’s thoughts or feelings: love, joy, pleasure, happiness, surprise, likes, satisfaction, dislikes, disappointment, distress, pain, anger, anguish, fear, anxiety, sorrow, frustration, annoyance at missed opportunities, moral, intellectual and social concerns; and the everyday feelings of hunger, thirst, fatigue, sleepiness, cold, or warmth
Interpersonal = Enabling us to establish and maintain desirable social and working relationships: Enabling us to establish and maintain desirable social and working relationships:
- greetings and leave takings
- introducing people to others
- identifying oneself to others
- expressing joy at another’s success
- expressing concern for other people’s welfare
- extending and accepting invitations
- refusing invitations politely or making alternative arrangements
- making appointments for meetings
- breaking appointments politely and arranging another mutually convenient time
- apologizing
- excusing oneself and accepting excuses for not meeting commitments
- indicating agreement or disagreement
- interrupting another speaker politely
- changing an embarrassing subject
- receiving visitors and paying visits to others
- offering food or drinks and accepting or declining politely
- sharing wishes, hopes, desires, problems
- making promises and committing oneself to some action
- complimenting someone
- making excuses
- expressing and acknowledging gratitude
Directive = Attempting to influence the actions of others; accepting or refusing direction:
- making suggestions in which the speaker is included
- making requests; making suggestions
- refusing to accept a suggestion or a request but offering an alternative
- persuading someone to change his point of view
- requesting and granting permission
- asking for help and responding to a plea for help
- forbidding someone to do something; issuing a command
- giving and responding to instructions
- warning someone
- discouraging someone from pursuing a course of action
- establishing guidelines and deadlines for the completion of actions
- asking for directions or instructions
Referential = talking or reporting about things, actions, events, or people in the environment in the past or in the future; talking about language (what is termed the metalinguistic function: = talking or reporting about things, actions, events, or people in the environment in the past or in the future; talking about language (what is termed the metalinguistic function:
- identifying items or people in the classroom, the school the home, the community
- asking for a description of someone or something
- defining something or a language item or asking for a definition
- paraphrasing, summarizing, or translating (L1 to L2 or vice versa)
- explaining or asking for explanations of how something works
- comparing or contrasting things
- discussing possibilities, probabilities, or capabilities of doing something
- requesting or reporting facts about events or actions
- evaluating the results of an action or event
Imaginative = Discussions involving elements of creativity and artistic expression
- discussing a poem, a story, a piece of music, a play, a painting, a film, a TV program, etc.
- expanding ideas suggested by other or by a piece of literature or reading material
- creating rhymes, poetry, stories or plays
- recombining familiar dialogs or passages creatively
- suggesting original beginnings or endings to dialogs or stories
- solving problems or mysteries
Total Physical Response
Asher, J.C. (1979). Learning Another Language Through Actions. San Jose, California: AccuPrint.
James J. Asher defines the Total Physical Response (TPR) method as one that combines information and skills through the use of the kinesthetic sensory system. This combination of skills allows the student to assimilate information and skills at a rapid rate. As a result, this success leads to a high degree of motivation. The basic tenets are:
Understanding the spoken language before developing the skills of speaking. Imperatives are the main structures to transfer or communicate information. The student is not forced to speak, but is allowed an individual readiness period and allowed to spontaneously begin to speak when the student feels comfortable and confident in understanding and producing the utterances.
TECHNIQUE
Step I The teacher says the commands as he himself performs the action.
Step 2 The teacher says the command as both the teacher and the students then perform the action.
Step 3 The teacher says the command but only students perform the action
Step 4 The teacher tells one student at a time to do commands
Step 5 The roles of teacher and student are reversed. Students give commands to teacher and to other students.
Step 6 The teacher and student allow for command expansion or produces new sentences.
The Natural Approach
The Natural Approach and the Communicative Approach share a common theoretical and philosophical base.The Natural Approach to L2 teaching is based on the following hypotheses:
1. The acquisition-learning distinction hypothesis
Adults can "get" a second language much as they learn their first language, through informal, implicit, subconscious learning. The conscious, explicit, formal linguistic knowledge of a language is a different, and often non-essential process.
2. The natural order of acquisition hypothesis
L2 learners acquire forms in a predictable order. This order very closely parallels the acquisition of grammatical and syntactic structures in the first language.
3. The monitor hypothesis
Fluency in L2 comes from the acquisition process. Learning produces a "monitoring" or editor of performance. The application of the monitor function requires time, focus on form and knowledge of the rule.
4. The input hypothesis
Language is acquired through comprehensible input. If an L2 learner is at a certain stage in language acquisition and he/she understands something that includes a structure at the next stage, this helps him/her to acquire that structure. Thus, the i+1 concept, where i= the stage of acquisition.
5. The affective hypothesis
People with certain personalities and certain motivations perform better in L2 acquisition. Learners with high self-esteem and high levels of self-confidence acquire L2 faster. Also, certain low-anxiety pleasant situations are more conducive to L2 acquisition.
6. The filter hypothesis
There exists an affective filter or "mental block" that can prevent input from "getting in." Pedagogically, the more that is done to lower the filter, the more acquisition can take place. A low filter is achieved through low-anxiety, relaxation, non-defensiveness.
7. The aptitude hypothesis
There is such a thing as a language learning aptitude. This aptitude can be measured and is highly correlated with general learning aptitude. However, aptitude relates more to learning while attitude relates more to acquisition.
8. The first language hypothesis
The L2 learner will naturally substitute competence in L1 for competence in L2. Learners should not be forced to use the L1 to generate L2 performance. A silent period and insertion of L1 into L2 utterances should be expected and tolerated.
9. The textuality hypothesis
The event-structures of experience are textual in nature and will be easier to produce, understand, and recall to the extent that discourse or text is motivated and structured episodically. Consequently, L2 teaching materials are more successful when they incorporate principles of good story writing along with sound linguistic analysis.
10. The expectancy hypothesis
Discourse has a type of "cognitive momentum." The activation of correct expectancies will enhance the processing of textual structures. Consequently, L2 learners must be guided to develop the sort of native-speaker "intuitions" that make discourse predictable.
.
برچسبها:
Language pedagogy
Language education may take place as a general school subject, in a specialized language school, or out of school with a rich selection of proprietary methods online and in books, CDs and DVDs. There are many methods of teaching languages. Some have fallen into relative obscurity and others are widely used; still others have a small following, but offer useful insights.
There are three principal views
- The structural view treats language as a system of structurally related elements to code meaning (e.g. grammar).
- The functional view sees language as a vehicle to express or accomplish a certain function, such as requesting something.
- The interactive view sees language as a vehicle for the creation and maintenance of social relations, focusing on patterns of moves, acts, negotiation and interaction found in conversational exchanges. This view has been fairly dominant since the 1980s.[1]
Contents
[hide]- 1 Methodology
- 2 Structural methods
- 3 Functional methods
- 4 Interactive methods
- 4.1 Direct method
- 4.2 The series method
- 4.3 Communicative language teaching
- 4.4 Language immersion
- 4.5 Silent Way
- 4.6 Community Language Learning
- 4.7 Suggestopedia
- 4.8 Natural Approach
- 4.9 Total Physical Response
- 4.10 Teaching Proficiency through Reading and Storytelling
- 4.11 Dogme language teaching
- 5 Proprietary methods
Methodology[edit]
In the late 1800s and most of the 1900s, language teaching was usually conceived in terms ofmethod. In seeking to improve teaching practices, teachers and researchers would typically try to find out which method was the most effective.[2] However, method is an ambiguous concept in language teaching, and has been used in many different ways. According to Bell, this variety in use "offers a challenge for anyone wishing to enter into the analysis or deconstruction of methods".[3]
Approach, method and technique
In 1963, Anthony formulated a framework to describe various language teaching methods, which consisted three levels: approach, method, and technique.[4] According to Anthony, "The arrangement is hierarchical. The organizational key is that techniques carry out a method which is consistent with an approach."[5] His concept of approach was of a set of principles or ideas about the nature of language learning which would be consistent over time; "an approach is axiomatic".[5] His method was more procedural; "an overall plan for the orderly presentation of language material, no part of which contradicts, and all of which is based upon, the selected approach."[5] Finally, his concept of technique referred to the actual implementation in the language classroom; "a particular trick, stratagem, or contrivance used to accomplish an immediate objective."[5] He saw techniques as being consistent with a given method and by extension, with a given approach.[4]
A method is a plan for presenting the language material to be learned and should be based upon a selected approach. In order for an approach to be translated into a method, an instructional system must be designed considering the objectives of the teaching/learning, how the content is to be selected and organized, the types of tasks to be performed, the roles of students and the roles of teachers. A technique is a very specific, concrete stratagem or trick designed to accomplish an immediate objective. Such are derived from the controlling method, and less-directly, with the approach.[1]
Anthony's framework was welcomed by the language teaching community when it was introduced, and it was seen as a useful way of classifying different teaching practices.[6]However, it did not clearly define the difference between approach, method, and technique, and Kumaravadivelu reports that due to this ambiguity there was "widespread dissatisfaction" with it.[6] Anthony himself recognized the limitations of his framework, and was open to the idea of improvements being made to it.[6]
Approach, design and procedure[edit]
Richards and Rogers' 1982 approach expanded on Anthony’s three-level framework; however, instead of approach, method and technique, they chose the terms approach,design, and procedure.[7] Their concept of approach was similar to Anthony's, but theirdesign and procedure were of broader scope than Anthony's method and technique.[7] Theirdesign referred to all major practical implications in the classroom, such as syllabus design, types of activities to be used in the classroom, and student and teacher roles; procedurereferred to different behaviors, practices and techniques observed in the classroom.[7] These new terms were intended to address limitations in Anthony's framework,[8] and also gave them specific criteria by which they could evaluate different "methods".[9] This evaluation process was a key way that their formulation differed from Anthony's, as Anthony's framework was intended as purely descriptive.
Despite Richards and Rogers' efforts to clearly define approach, design, and procedure, their framework has been criticized by Kumaravadivelu for having "an element of artificiality in its conception and an element of subjectivity in its operation".[10] Kumaravadivelu also points to similar objections raised by Pennyworth and by the Routledge Encyclopedia of Language Teaching and Learning.[10] Brown also questions the suitability of Richards and Rogers' termdesign; he points out that in English teaching design is usually used to refer specifically to curriculum design, rather than the broad definition Richards and Rogers used] Most current teacher training manuals favor the terms approach, method, and technique.
Structural methods
Grammar-translation method
The grammar translation method instructs students in grammar, and provides vocabulary with direct translations to memorize. It was the predominant method in Europe in the 19th century. Most instructors now acknowledge that this method is ineffective by itself.[citation needed] It is now most commonly used in the traditional instruction of the classical languages, however it remains the most commonly practiced method of English teaching in Japan.[citation needed]
At school, the teaching of grammar consists of a process of training in the rules of a language which must make it possible to all the students to correctly express their opinion, to understand the remarks which are addressed to them and to analyze the texts which they read. The objective is that by the time they leave college, the pupil controls the tools of the language which are the vocabulary, grammar and the orthography, to be able to read, understand and write texts in various contexts. The teaching of grammar examines texts, and develops awareness that language constitutes a system which can be analyzed. This knowledge is acquired gradually, by traversing the facts of language and the syntactic mechanisms, going from simplest to the most complex. The exercises according to the program of the course must untiringly be practiced to allow the assimilation of the rules stated in the course.[citation needed] That supposes that the teacher corrects the exercises. The pupil can follow his progress in practicing the language by comparing his results. Thus can he adapt the grammatical rules and control little by little the internal logic of the syntactic system. The grammatical analysis of sentences constitutes the objective of the teaching of grammar at the school. Its practice makes it possible to recognize a text as a coherent whole and conditions the training of a foreign language. Grammatical terminology serves this objective. Grammar makes it possible for each one to understand how the mother tongue functions, in order to give him the capacity to communicate its thought.
Audio-lingual method
The audio-lingual method was developed in the USA around World War II when governments realized that they needed more people who could conduct conversations fluently in a variety of languages, work as interpreters, code-room assistants, and translators. However, since foreign language instruction in that country was heavily focused on reading instruction, no textbooks, other materials or courses existed at the time, so new methods and materials had to be devised. For example, the U.S. Army Specialized Training Program created intensive programs based on the techniques Leonard Bloomfield and other linguists devised for Native American languages, where students interacted intensively with native speakers and a linguist in guided conversations designed to decode its basic grammar and learn the vocabulary. This "informant method" had great success with its small class sizes and motivated learners.
The U.S. Army Specialized Training Program only lasted a few years, but it gained a lot of attention from the popular press and the academic community. Charles Fries set up the first English Language Institute at the University of Michigan, to train English as a second or foreign language teachers. Similar programs were created later at Georgetown University,University of Texas among others based on the methods and techniques used by the military. The developing method had much in common with the British oral approach although the two developed independently. The main difference was the developing audio-lingual methods allegiance to structural linguistics, focusing on grammar and contrastive analysis to find differences between the student's native language and the target language in order to prepare specific materials to address potential problems. These materials strongly emphasized drill as a way to avoid or eliminate these problems.
This first version of the method was originally called the oral method, the aural-oral method or the structural approach. The audio-lingual method truly began to take shape near the end of the 1950s, this time due government pressure resulting from the space race. Courses and techniques were redesigned to add insights from behaviorist psychology to the structural linguistics and constructive analysis already being used. Under this method, students listen to or view recordings of language models acting in situations. Students practice with a variety of drills, and the instructor emphasizes the use of the target language at all times. The idea is that by reinforcing 'correct' behaviors, students will make them into habits
The typical structure of a chapter employing the Audio-Lingual-Method (ALM—and there was even a text book entitled ALM [1963]) was usually standardized as follows: 1. First item was a dialog in the foreign language (FL) to be memorized by the student. The teacher would go over it the day before. 2. There were then questions in the FL about the dialog to be answered by the student(s) in the target language. 3. Often a brief introduction to the grammar of the chapter was next, including the verb(s) and conjugations. 4. The mainstay of the chapter was "pattern practice," which were drills expecting "automatic" responses from the student(s) as a noun, verb conjugation, or agreeing adjective was to be inserted in the blank in the text (or during the teacher's pause). The teacher could have the student use the book or not use it, relative to how homework was assigned. Depending on time, the class could respond as a chorus, or the teacher could pick individuals to respond. It was really a sort of "mimicry-memorization." And it was "Julian Dakin in 'The Language Laboratory and Language Learning' (Longman 1973) who coined the phrase 'meaningless drills' to describe pattern practice of the kind inspired by the above ideas." 5. There was a vocabulary list, sometimes with translations to the mother tongue. 6. The chapter usually ended with a short reading exercise.
Due to weaknesses in performance, and more importantly because of Noam Chomsky's theoretical attack on language learning as a set of habits, audio-lingual methods are rarely the primary method of instruction today. However, elements of the method still survive in many textbooks.
Functional methods
The oral approach and situational language teaching
The oral approach was developed from the 1930s to the 1960s by British applied linguists such as Harold Palmer and A.S. Hornsby. They were familiar with the direct method as well as the work of 19th-century applied linguists such as Otto Jesperson and Daniel Jones but attempted to formally develop a more scientifically founded approach to teaching English than was evidenced by the direct method.[1]
A number of large-scale investigations about language learning and the increased emphasis on reading skills in the 1920s led to the notion of "vocabulary control". It was discovered that languages have a core basic vocabulary of about 2,000 words that occur frequently in written texts, and it was assumed that mastery of these would greatly aid reading comprehension. Parallel to this was the notion of "grammar control", emphasizing the sentence patterns most-commonly found in spoken conversation. Such patterns were incorporated into dictionaries and handbooks for students. The principal difference between the oral approach and the direct method was that methods devised under this approach would have theoretical principles guiding the selection of content, gradation of difficulty of exercises and the presentation of such material and exercises. The main proposed benefit was that such theoretically based organization of content would result in a less-confusing sequence of learning events with better contextualization of the vocabulary and grammatical patterns presented.[1] Last but not least, all language points were to be presented in "situations". Emphasis on this point led to the approach's second name. Proponents claim that this approach leads to students' acquiring good habits to be repeated in their corresponding situations. Teaching methods stress PPP (presentation (introduction of new material in context), practice (a controlled practice phase) and production (activities designed for less-controlled practice)).
Although this approach is all but unknown among language teachers today, elements of it have had long-lasting effects on language teaching, being the basis of many widely used English as a Second/Foreign Language textbooks as late as the 1980s and elements of it still appear in current texts.[1] Many of the structural elements of this approach were called into question in the 1960s, causing modifications of this method that led to communicative language teaching. However, its emphasis on oral practice, grammar and sentence patterns still finds widespread support among language teachers and remains popular in countries where foreign language syllabuses are still heavily based on grammar.
Directed practice
Directed practice has students repeat phrases. This method is used by U.S. diplomatic courses. It can quickly provide a phrasebook-type knowledge of the language. Within these limits, the student's usage is accurate and precise. However the student's choice of what to say is not flexible.
Interactive methods
Direct method
The direct method, sometimes also called natural method, is a method that refrains from using the learners' native language and just uses the target language. It was established in Germany and France around 1900 and is best represented by the methods devised by Berlitz and de Sauzé, although neither claims originality and it has been re-invented under other names.[14] The direct method operates on the idea that second language learning must be an imitation of first language learning, as this is the natural way humans learn any language: a child never relies on another language to learn its first language, and thus the mother tongue is not necessary to learn a foreign language. This method places great stress on correct pronunciation and the target language from outset. It advocates teaching of oral skills at the expense of every traditional aim of language teaching. Such methods rely on directly representing an experience into a linguistic construct rather than relying on abstractions like mimicry, translation and memorizing grammar rules and vocabulary
According to this method, printed language and text must be kept away from second language learners for as long as possible, just as a first language learner does not use printed words until he has good grasp of speech. Learning of writing and spelling should be delayed until after the printed word has been introduced, and grammar and translation should also be avoided because this would involve the application of the learner's first language. All above items must be avoided because they hinder the acquisition of a good oral proficiency.
The method relies on a step-by-step progression based on question-and-answer sessions which begin with naming common objects such as doors, pencils, floors, etc. It provides a motivating start as the learner begins using a foreign language almost immediately. Lessons progress to verb forms and other grammatical structures with the goal of learning about thirty new words per lesson.[14]
The series method
In the 19th century, Francois Gouin went to Hamburg to learn German. Based on his experience as a Latin teacher, he thought the best way to do this would be memorize a German grammar book and a table of its 248 irregular verbs. However, when he went to the academy to test his new language skills, he was disappointed to find out that he could not understand anything. Trying again, he similarly memorized the 800 root words of the language as well as re-memorizing the grammar and verb forms. However, the results were the same. During this time, he had isolated himself from people around him, so he tried to learn by listening, imitating and conversing with the Germans around him, but found that his carefully constructed sentences often caused native German speakers to laugh. Again he tried a more classical approach, translation, and even memorizing the entire dictionary but had no better luck.[14]
When he returned home, he found that his three-year-old nephew had learned to speakFrench. He noticed the boy was very curious and upon his first visit to a mill, he wanted to see everything and be told the name of everything. After digesting the experience silently, he then reenacted his experiences in play, talking about what he learned to whoever would listen or to himself. Gouin decided that language learning was a matter of transforming perceptions into conceptions, using language to represent what one experiences. Language is not an arbitrary set of conventions but a way of thinking and representing the world to oneself. It is not a conditioning process, but one in which the learner actively organizes his perceptions into linguistics concepts.[1
The series method is a variety of the direct method in that experiences are directly connected to the target language. Gouin felt that such direct "translation" of experience into words, makes for a "living language". (p59) Gouin also noticed that children organize concepts in succession of time, relating a sequence of concepts in the same order. Gouin suggested that students learn a language more quickly and retain it better if it is presented through a chronological sequence of events. Students learn sentences based on an action such as leaving a house in the order in which such would be performed. Gouin found that if the series of sentences are shuffled, their memorization becomes nearly impossible. For this, Gouin preceded psycholinguistic theory of the 20th century. He found that people will memorize events in a logical sequence, even if they are not presented in that order. He also discovered a second insight into memory called "incubation". Linguistic concepts take time to settle in the memory. The learner must use the new concepts frequently after presentation, either by thinking or by speaking, in order to master them. His last crucial observation was that language was learned in sentences with the verb as the most crucial component. Gouin would write a series in two columns: one with the complete sentences and the other with only the verb. With only the verb elements visible, he would have students recite the sequence of actions in full sentences of no more than twenty-five sentences. Another exercise involved having the teacher solicit a sequence of sentences by basically ask him/her what s/he would do next. While Gouin believed that language was rule-governed, he did not believe it should be explicitly taught.
His course was organized on elements of human society and the natural world. He estimated that a language could be learned with 800 to 900 hours of instruction over a series of 4000 exercises and no homework. The idea was that each of the exercises would force the student to think about the vocabulary in terms of its relationship with the natural world. While there is evidence that the method can work extremely well, it has some serious flaws. One of which is the teaching of subjective language, where the students must make judgments about what is experienced in the world (e.g. "bad" and "good") as such do not relate easily to one single common experience. However, the real weakness is that the method is entirely based on one experience of a three-year-old. Gouin did not observe the child's earlier language development such as naming (where only nouns are learned) or the role that stories have in human language development. What distinguishes the series method from the direct method is that vocabulary must be learned by translation from the native language, at least in the beginning.[14]
Communicative language teaching
Communicative language teaching(CLT), also known as the Communicative Approach, emphasizes interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of learning a language. Despite a number of criticisms[15] it continues to be popular, particularly in Europe, whereconstructivist views on language learning and education in general dominate academic discourse. Although the 'Communicative Language Teaching' is not so much a method on its own as it is an approach.[16]
In recent years, task-based language learning (TBLL), also known as task-based language teaching (TBLT) or task-based instruction (TBI), has grown steadily in popularity. TBLL is a further refinement of the CLT approach, emphasizing the successful completion of tasks as both the organizing feature and the basis for assessment of language instruction. Dogme language teaching shares a philosophy with TBL, although differs in approach.[17] Dogme is a communicative approach, and encourages teaching without published textbooks and instead focusing on conversational communication among the learners and the teacher.[18]
Language immersion
Language immersion in school contexts delivers academic content through the medium of a foreign language, providing support for L2 learning and first language maintenance. There are three main types of immersion education programs in the United States: foreign language immersion, dual immersion, and indigenous immersion.
Foreign language immersion programs in the U.S. are designed for students whose home language is English. In the early immersion model, for all or part of the school day elementary school children receive their content (academic) instruction through the medium of another language: Spanish, French, German, Chinese, Japanese, etc. In early total immersion models, children receive all the regular kindergarten and first grade content through the medium of the immersion language; English reading is introduced later, often in the second grade. Most content (math, science, social studies, art, music) continues to be taught through the immersion language. In early partial immersion models, part of the school day (usually 50%) delivers content through the immersion language, and part delivers it through English. French-language immersion programs are common in Canada in the provincial school systems, as part of the drive towards bilingualism and are increasing in number in the United States in public school systems (Curtain & Dahlbert, 2004). Branaman & Rhodes (1998) report that between 1987 and 1997 the percentage of elementary programs offering foreign language education in the U.S. through immersion grew from 2% to 8% and Curtain & Dahlberg (2004) report 278 foreign language immersion programs in 29 states. Research by Swain and others (Genesee 1987) demonstrate much higher levels of proficiency achieved by children in foreign language immersion programs than in traditional foreign language education elementary school models.
Dual immersion programs in the U.S. are designed for students whose home language is English as well as for students whose home language is the immersion language (usually Spanish). The goal is bilingual students with mastery of both English and the immersion language. As in partial foreign language immersion academic content is delivered through the medium of the immersion language for part of the school day, and through English the rest of the school day.
Indigenous immersion programs in the U.S. are designed for American Indian communities desiring to maintain the use of the native language by delivering elementary school content through the medium of that language. Hawaiian Immersion programs are the largest and most successful in this category.
Silent Way
The Silent Way is a discovery learning approach, invented by Caleb Gattegno in the early 1970s. The teacher is usually silent, leaving room for the students to explore the language. They are responsible for their own learning and are encouraged to interact. The role of the teacher is to give clues, not to model the language.
Community Language Learning
The Community Language Learning (CLL) is a method proposed by Charles A. Curran during the 1970s. It is based on the counseling approach in which the teacher is seen as a counselor. It emphasizes the sense of community in the learning group, encourages interaction as a vital aspect of learning, and it considers as a priority the students' feelings and the recognition of struggles in language acquisition. There is no syllabus or textbook to follow and it is the students themselves who determine the content of the lesson. Notably, it incorporates translation and recording techniques.
Suggestopedia
Suggestopedia was a method that experienced popularity especially in past years, with both staunch supporters and very strong critics, some claiming it is based on pseudoscience.
Natural Approach
The natural approach is a language teaching method developed by Stephen Krashen andTracy D. Terrell. They emphasise the learner receiving large amounts of comprehensible input. The Natural Approach can be categorized as part of the comprehension approach to language teaching.
Total Physical Response
In Total Physical Response (TPR), the instructor gives the students commands in the target language and the students act those commands out using whole-body responses. This can be categorized as part of the comprehension approach to language teaching.
Teaching Proficiency through Reading and Storytelling
Teaching Proficiency through Reading and Storytelling (TPR Storytelling or TPRS) was developed by Blaine Ray, a language teacher in California, in the 1990s. At first it was an offshoot of Total Physical Response that also included storytelling, but it has evolved into a method in its own right and has gained a large following among teachers, particularly in the United States. TPR Storytelling can be categorized as part of the comprehension approach to language teaching.
Dogme language teaching
Dogme language teaching is considered to be both a methodology and a movement. Dogme is a communicative approach to language teaching and encourages teaching without published textbooks and instead focusing on conversational communication among the learners and the teacher. It has its roots in an article by the language education author, Scott Thornbury. The Dogme approach is also referred to as “Dogme ELT”, which reflects its origins in the ELT (English language teaching) sector. Although Dogme language teaching gained its name from an analogy with the Dogme 95 film movement (initiated by Lars von Trier), the connection is not considered close.
Proprietary methods
Some methods are tied to a particular company or school, and are not used in mainstream teaching. Besides those mentioned below, there are dozens of competitors, each slightly different.[19] Notable are the computer courses which use speech recognition to give feedback on pronunciation.[20]
Pimsleur method
Pimsleur language learning system is based on the research of and model programs developed by American language teacher Paul Pimsleur. It involves recorded 30-minute lessons to be done daily, with each lesson typically featuring a dialog, revision, and new material. Students are asked to translate phrases into the target language, and occasionally to respond in the target language to lines spoken in the target language. The instruction starts in the student's language but gradually changes to the target language. Several all-audio programs now exist to teach various languages using the Pimsleur Method. The syllabus is the same in all languages.
Michel Thomas Method
Michel Thomas Method is an audio-based teaching system developed by Michel Thomas, a language teacher in the USA. It was originally done in person, although since his death it is done via recorded lessons. The instruction is done entirely in the student's own language, although the student's responses are always expected to be in the target language. The method focuses on constructing long sentences with correct grammar and building student confidence. There is no listening practice, and there is no reading or writing. The syllabus is ordered around the easiest and most useful features of the language, and as such is different for each language.
برچسبها:
Modern Teaching Methods
As mentioned above, the modern language teacher doesn't follow one rigid method, but applies the Principled Eclecticism approach - fitting the method to the learner, not vice versa.
This means choosing the techniques and activities that are appropriate for each particular task, context and learner, with a focus on motivation and helping learners become independent and inspired to learn more.
The explanation of Principled Eclecticism also includes a useful ten-point guide for teachers and language students on the best teaching and learning techniques.
Fitting the method to the learner, not vice versa
Today the professional language teacher has a good grounding in the various techniques and new approaches, and they know and understand the history and evolution of teaching methodologies.
The modern teacher will in fact use a variety of methodologies and approaches, choosing techniques from each method that they consider effective and applying them according to the learning context and objectives. They prepare their lessons to facilitate the understanding of the new language being taught and do not rely on one specific 'best method'.
Some Examples
- The teacher proposes a variety of exercises, both written and oral, to improve the learner's accuracy, fluency and communicative ability.
- The teacher corrects errors immediately if the scope of the classroom activity isaccuracy, but if the scope of the activity is fluency these errors will be corrected later on.
- The teacher develops all four linguistic capabilities (reading, writing, listening and speaking).
- To improve pronunciation the teacher uses drills, where students repeat automatically the phrases spoken by the teacher.
- The teacher helps the student personalize the use of grammatical and lexical elements used in class.
- The teacher understands that a didactic program has to include not only grammar and lexis, but also linguistic functions, colloquialisms, idioms, etc.
- The teacher introduces exercises of guided discovery for new grammar rules.
- At times the teacher may translate - but only if they know both languages very well and believe it is the most efficient way to provide the meaning of a new concept in that moment, especially for abstract ideas.
- The teacher is committed to developing a wide range of resources in order to give relevant, stimulating, and productive lessons.
It is impossible to do everything if only one method is used. As a result, professional EFL teachers follow what is described as the Principled Eclecticism approach, where students are also encouraged to be autonomous in their learning.
However, some private schools and training companies still prefer to promote a specific in-house branded method or approach, though often mainly for commercial or marketing reasons rather than for didactic reasons.
The Way Ahead
The respected author and American university professor, Douglas Brown, provides a list of the 'ten commandments' for effective language learning, applied to both ESL teachers and learners:
| For EFL Teachers | For Language Learners |
|---|---|
| Lower inhibitions | Fear not! |
| Encourage risk-taking | Dive in |
| Build self-confidence | Believe in yourself |
| Develop intrinsic motivation | Seize the day |
| Engage in cooperative learning | Work with your team |
| Use right-brain processes | Get the BIG picture |
| Promote ambiguity tolerance | Cope with the chaos |
| Practice intuition | Follow your hunches |
| Process error feedback | Make mistakes work FOR you |
| Set personal goals | Set your own goals |
From his book Principles of Language Learning & Teaching (Pearson Longman, 2001)
These recommendations aim to promote learner autonomy and stress the importance of self-motivation. Through guided discovery, language learners should not expect the teacher to deliver everything to them neatly packaged, wielding some new magic teaching method, but should take charge of their own learning and jump in.
برچسبها:
The Communicative Method is in reality an umbrella term - a broad approach rather than a specific teaching methodology, and has now become the accepted 'standard' in English language teaching.
Communicative Language Teaching is a natural follow-on from the reaction during the 70s against previous methods which over-focused on teaching grammatical structures and template sentences, and which gave little or no importance to how language is actually used practically.
Explanation
"Emphasizes the ability to communicate the meaning of the message, instead of concentrating on grammatical perfection."
The Communicative approach emphasizes the ability to communicate the message in terms of its meaning, instead of concentrating exclusively on grammatical perfection or phonetics. Therefore, the understanding of the second language is evaluated in terms of how much the learners have developed their communicative abilities and competencies.
In essence, it considers using the language to be just as important as actually learning the language.
The Communicative Language Teaching method has various characteristics that distinguish it from previous methods:
- Understanding occurs through active student interaction in the foreign language
- Teaching occurs by using authentic English texts
- Students not only learn the second language but they also learn strategies for understanding
- Importance is given to learners' personal experiences and situations, which are considered as an invaluable contribution to the content of the lessons
- Using the new language in unrehearsed contexts creates learning opportunities outside the classroom
Misconceptions
As the method is a broad approach to teaching English, rather than a rigid series of activities, there are some popular misconceptions of what CLT involves. Learning a language is interactive, co-operative, learner-centered and content-based, but the approach does not mean that learning a second language involves just 'conversation'.
Using the Method
The most common educational model applied in the context of the Communicative Method is the Functional-Notional approach, which emphasizes the organisation of the syllabus. This breaks down the use of language into 5 functional categories that can be more easily analyzed: personal (feelings, etc.), interpersonal (social and working relationships), directive (influencing others), referential (reporting about things, events, people or language itself), and imaginative (creativity and artistic expression).
These 5 broad functions are then delivered by the teacher in the classroom using the '3
Ps' teaching model, which stand for Presentation, Practice and Production.
برچسبها: