Second-language Teaching Methods PDF

Second-language learning Chapter 7 Second-language teaching methods 7.1 Characterizing the essentials of methods Second-language teaching is a ﬁeld that provides an excellent meeting ground for the many theoretical and practical aspects of psycholinguistics to come together. It is here that we have a chance to see how ideas of human lan- guage and learning interconnect. In our view, language-teaching methods may be conveniently character- ized according to three principal dimensions (Steinberg, 1993): (1) Language Focus: Speech Communication vs. Literature; (2) Meaning Learning: Direct Experience vs. Translation; and (3) Grammar Learning: Induction vs. Explica- tion. These dimensions involve theories which have been realized in principal second-language teaching methods. A brief description of each of these dimensions, some aspects of which are also considered elsewhere in this book, follows. 7.1.1 Language Focus: Speech Communication vs. Literature Methods can be divided into two categories of focus, those that teach langu- age through the speech of the target language (the ‘target language’ being the language to be learned) and those that approach the target language through reading and writing. Except for Grammar–Translation, which focuses on reading, writing, and the translation of written words, most other methods focus on speech and the use of speech in communication. A principal aim of Grammar–Translation is often to get students to be able to read, and, ultimately, to read literary works and documents. Other proponents of the method see literacy as a foundation and a means for approaching speech communication. The problem with starting out with literacy when the goal is speech is that students may never get to the speech stage unless they go to a school where they may come into contact with ﬂuent instructors. Even at a university, though, the focus may remain on literacy, as is the case in Japan and Russia, for example. 138 7 Second-language teaching methods Generally, the proponents of speech-based methods regard Grammar– Translation (GT) as their ultimate enemy, since they consider communication through speech to be primary in the learning of language. Speech-based methods attempt to provide a speech environment in which students may learn the target language. Reading and writing may be used, but only to reinforce what is initially learned in speech. 7.1.2 Meaning Learning: Direct Experience vs. Translation In providing the meaning of target language items, translation may be used, as is commonly the case with the GT method. For example, English-speaking students studying Italian may be told that ‘libro’ means ‘book’, or that ‘¿Come sta?’ means ‘How are you?’ Thus the native language (in this case, English) is used to provide the meaning for the target language (Italian). The meanings of single vocabulary items and entire phrases and sentences may be learned in this way. This is very different, though, from acquiring meaning by being exposed to actual objects, events, or situations in which the target language is used. For example, the learner can be shown a book and hear the teacher say ‘libro’, or see two persons meet, with one saying to the other ‘¿Come sta?’ The meaning here is to be learned through direct experience and not by the use of the native language to provide translation. 7.1.3 Grammar Learning: Induction vs. Explication Explication involves explanation, in the native language, of the grammatical rules and structures of the second language. For example, a teacher can explain to Japanese students in the Japanese language that English has a Subject + Verb + Object ordering of basic sentence constituents. (Japanese has a Subject + Object + Verb ordering.) In learning the same by induction, however, students would have to discover the order of constituents on their own. It would be necessary for them to hear sentences of the sort, ‘Mary caught the ball’, while experiencing a situation in which such an action (or a picture of the action) occurs. In this way they would discover for themselves, through self-analysis, i.e. induction, that English has a Subject + Verb + Object ordering. 7.2 Traditional methods: Grammar–Translation, Natural, Direct, Audiolingual With the above three dimensions in mind, let us now examine some other major second-language teaching methods. For a more in-depth treatment of the three oldest methods, Grammar–Translation, the Natural Method, 139 Second-language learning and the Direct Method, the reader should refer to the works of Kelly (1969), Titone (1968), and Darian (1972). For consideration of the historical movement between the old and new methods see Howatt (1984), and for an overview of most current methods see Richards and Rodgers (2001). Since the 1980s little that is new has happened in teaching methods. Some theorists, such as H. Douglas Brown, even contend that the age of methods has passed. Under the heading of Traditional Methods, we shall consider the following: (1) the Grammar–Translation Method, (2) the Natural Method, (3) the Direct Method, and (4) the Audiolingual Method. 7.2.1 The Grammar–Translation Method Features of GT Grammar–Translation (GT) essentially involves two components: (1) the explicit explanation of grammatical rules using the native language, and (2) the use of translation, in the native language, to explain the meaning of vocabulary and structures. Translation is the oldest of the components and is probably the oldest of all formal teaching methods, having been used in ancient Greece and Rome and elsewhere in the ancient world. The grammar aspect of GT was rather limited in those times since grammatical knowledge itself was limited. It was later in Europe, particularly in the seventeenth century, that intensive and detailed studies of various languages were con- ducted. With this spirit of the Renaissance came an interest, too, in the under- standing and teaching of ordinary vernacular (non-Classical) languages. The teaching of grammar went hand in hand with translation for the teaching of a second language, with both relying on the use of the native language to impart knowledge. With the growth of grammatical knowledge, however, the grammatical component played a greater role in teaching, eventually dominating the translation aspect. By the end of the eighteenth century in Europe it had become a full partner in the method. The growth of the grammatical component continues to the present day. Rules are explained by the teacher, then memorized, recited, and applied by the student. Typically, textbooks using GT have lessons that include a reading passage in the target language, a list of vocabulary items and their transla- tions, and an explanation in the native language of important points of grammar exempliﬁed in the text. The lesson often ends with a series of exer- cises, ranging from straight translation to questions on points of grammar. Translation is typically done from the target language into the native lan- guage, with reverse translation (from the native language into the target language) seldom being done. The teacher will spend most of the class time explaining the grammar points, while occasionally questioning students about a particular translation or having students read aloud and explain the meaning of what they have read. 140 7 Second-language teaching methods Advantages of GT Despite the method’s indifference to speech and oral communication, and despite its being disparaged by leading language educators for such an indifference, the GT method has enjoyed and continues to enjoy acceptance in many countries around the world. This may seem a mystery, until one looks at the important advantages of GT: 1. Non-ﬂuent teachers can teach large classes. The method can be applied by teachers (1) who lack verbal ﬂuency in the target language, both in terms of understanding and producing speech, and by teachers (2) who have an incomplete knowledge of the language. This situation is common in many countries, typically underdeveloped ones, where knowledgeable teachers are scarce. It is not uncommon in such countries for teachers to be placed in a class with 40, 50, and more students. In effect, language learning is treated as a mass lecture course where, typically, students only meet once a week. 2. Self-study is possible. The method also lends itself well to self-study. By using books, students can study on their own outside the classroom. There is much that they can learn from studying and reading on their own. Of importance, too, is the fact that the method is appropriate for all levels of learners. From the introductory to the very advanced, there is an abundance of materials available for classroom use. 3. Adapts to changing linguistic and psychological theories. One of GT’s strongest points is its capacity to adapt to ever-changing linguistic and psychological theories. The distinguishing feature of the method, the explication of grammar, can easily be adapted to new ideas and theories. Grammatical explanations can be couched in the linguistic theory of the day. Whether a grammatical point is to be explained according to Chomsky’s or Bloomﬁeld’s theory of grammar is of no concern to the method – GT is neutral with respect to any speciﬁc grammar. Whatever grammar it is fed, that is the grammar it will explain. Similarly GT is neutral about whether a Behaviourist or a Mentalist psychological theory is applied. In this way, GT need never become obsolete from a linguistic or psycho- logical point of view. The fact that it thrived under Structural linguistics and Behaviouristic psychology did not prevent it from thriving under Mentalism and Mentalistic linguistics. Success and failure Almost everyone who has theorized second-language teaching methods has criticized GT. They believe that there has to be a better way to teach lan- guage. Yet, despite sustaining centuries of attack by opposing methods GT survives. Although we, too, are members of the opposition we do recognize 141 Second-language learning that GT is not a failure. It could not be a failure and last for hundreds of years. It is a fact that many students can learn an important part of a second language through GT. Where GT fails, however, relates to its secondary treatment of commun- icative oral skills. Students who pass through many years of strict GT training often come out unable to comprehend or utter sentences at a level that allows them to engage in even simple conversations. Then, too, GT cannot be used with young children: young children cannot read or write and are unable to understand grammatical explanations. Perhaps this is a blessing in disguise for countries that are predisposed to GT, such as Japan. Since Japanese children in the early grades are often taught English and other languages, and since this cannot be done through GT, more natural speech- communication-based techniques are going to have to be used. 7.2.2 The Natural Method The Natural Method as a product of the Enlightenment The Natural Method (NM) developed as a reaction to Grammar–Translation and was the outgrowth of scientiﬁc thought on the nature of language and language learning. Such knowledge ﬂowered in Europe with inspiration from the work of Comenius (1568), Rousseau (1780), and other theorists such as Pestalozzi (1801). The philosophy of the Enlightenment during the eighteenth century was particularly concerned with the natural state of human beings. Questions about the natural development of humans and their language became of great interest. NM began to be formed early in the nineteenth century and by the latter part of that century the method had become ﬁrmly established through the writings of such as Sauveur (1878) and Gouin (1880). Gouin observed chil- dren learning language and noticed that this occurred within the context of meaning-related situations (see Chapter 1). This observation of children’s language learning was then applied to second-language teaching methods for children and adults. Natural order of language learning The approach to language learning, where ‘natural is best’, so to speak, led to a method of teaching that stressed the value of introducing a second language to a learner exactly as the native language had been experienced. The model for the Natural Method of second-language learning was the child learning its native language. This meant adherence to the natural sequence of the child’s acquiring its ﬁrst language, i.e. (1) speech compre- hension, (2) speech production, and, much later, (3) reading and (4) writing. Grammar was not taught directly. Rather, grammatical rules and structures were to be learned through induction (self-analysis) by experiencing speech 142 7 Second-language teaching methods in a situational context. Meaning was to be gained through experience and exposure to objects, situations, and events; translation was to be avoided. Typically, teachers would not use prepared situations or material. Learning was through ‘spontaneous’ conversation and demonstration, all of which was done in the target language and supported with gestures and actions. The teacher used language appropriate to the students’ level of understanding, much in the way parents would with a child. The method was totally oriented towards the acquisition of oral skills. Student participation in situational activities was the essence of this kind of second-language learning. Advantages and disadvantages The great advantage of NM was that by exposure to natural language in a natural context, learners could acquire a speech capability both in under- standing and production. However, one problem for this method is that it requires the teacher to create interesting situations so that students may be naturally exposed to language. This, and the reliance on spontaneous speech, places an extremely heavy burden on even the best of teachers. Besides possessing an undue amount of ingenuity teachers must, of course, be ﬂuent in the target language. Such a demand cannot always be met, particularly if mass education is involved. Class size, too, could be a problem, since the number of students must be quite small, usually less than 15. Actually, the problems mentioned here are not unique to NM. Indeed, all speech-based methods have similar problems, given their emphasis on exposure to natural speech and student participation in a variety of communicative situations. 7.2.3 The Direct Method The Direct Method develops from the Natural Method The Direct Method (DM), appearing in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, developed from the Natural Method. Like the Natural Method, it emphasized the learning of speech, acquiring meaning in environmental context, and learning grammar through induction. The advocates of DM, while approving of the Natural Method, sought to improve upon it by providing systematic procedures based on scientiﬁc knowledge of linguistics and psychology. For example, in psychology, Franke in the 1880s argued for the exclusive use of the second language in the class- room and discussed the importance of the direct connection between mean- ing and form in the second language. The native language was not to be used as an intermediary in any way. The name, Direct Method, incidentally, refers to this direct connection between the second language and meaning. DM theorists believed that by applying scientiﬁc knowledge from psy- chology and linguistics, language learning could be made more efﬁcient, 143 Second-language learning with the result that students would learn faster than they would under the spontaneous and unplanned lessons of the Natural Method. Harold Palmer (1922) was perhaps its most articulate and eminent advocate. DM advocates natural learning but with graded materials Like the Natural Method, DM is mentalistically oriented since it presumes that the learner is a thinking being who can learn abstract language ideas. Also, like the Natural Method, DM relies on learning the language by in- duction. However, unlike the Natural Method, language materials for teach- ing in DM are explicitly preselected and graded on the basis of linguistic complexity. Simple sentences, for example, precede those with relative clauses or in the passive construction. All of this is done for the purpose of making the acquisition task easier for the learner. While there is still much spontaneous use of speech by the teacher, it is considerably less than is the case for the Natural Method. Dialogue and action materials Lessons in DM are mainly devoted to oral communication and follow (as with NM) the acquisition order of the ﬁrst language. Thus speech under- standing precedes speech production, which is then followed by reading and then by writing. Elementary social dialogues are introduced almost immediately: ‘How are you?’, ‘Fine, thanks’, as are questions: ‘Where is... ?’, ‘When is... ?’, ‘Who is... ?’, and commands for action: ‘Stand up’, ‘Sit down’, and ‘Give the book to Mary’. (The similarity here to the fundamentals of the Total Physical Response Method, which was proposed some 50 years later, is important to note and will be discussed later.) Sometimes oral pattern drills and memorization of dialogues were also included in DM lessons. Such techniques were devised and applied for the purpose of giving practice in speech production. Interestingly, these same techniques later came to be used (perhaps more accurately overused) by proponents of the Audiolingual Method. Sometimes, too, translations might be given verbally, as might grammat- ical explanations. However, these were used sparingly. For the most part, DM is typiﬁed by its reliance on natural speech in context and on the students’ mental powers of induction. Teacher ﬂuency and class size The structured nature of the Direct Method is such that, in the hands of a good teacher, it can be used in relatively large classes of 30 or even 40 students, with teachers getting students to speak in chorus. Still, like the Natural Method, DM requires a teacher with some inventiveness and high ﬂuency in the second language. 144 7 Second-language teaching methods Demise of DM With the advent of the Audiolingual Method, DM was crushed. However, after a few decades, DM was reincarnated in the form of some current methods such as Total Physical Response and the Natural Approach. These methods reﬂect many of the essential ideas of DM. 7.2.4 The Audiolingual Method Popularity of American linguistics and psychology and the rise of ALM The phenomenal rise of the Audiolingual Method (ALM) was due to the popularity of the new American linguistic and psychological theories which it incorporated into its foundations. The great popularity and inﬂuence of America itself in the world, following the end of the Second World War, is a factor here. The language analyses provided by American Structural linguists, particularly Charles Fries and the stimulus and response learning psychology provided by American Behaviourists endowed ALM with great credibility. The Direct Method, which implied a Mentalist psychology, went out of fashion, except in Continental Europe (see Chapter 10 for a detailed discussion of Behaviourism and Mentalism). ALM incorporates Structural Linguistics Structural linguists such as Fries regarded sentences as sequences of grammatical word classes or phrases. New sentences would be created by substituting words within a word class. For example, a sequence such as Article + Adjective + Noun + Verb + Article + Noun could yield a large number of sentences such as ‘The rich boy bought a car’ and ‘The friendly girl kissed the boy’, by substituting members of the same grammatical class. Because Behaviourist psychologists, too, regarded sentences as the simple association of key words (Skinner) or word classes (Staats), it was not much of a step for ALM to adopt sentence patterns as the learning fundamentals for language. Unfortunately for the theory, substitution cannot prevent the creation of sequences like ‘The happy dust memorized the table’, or ‘A poor mountain elapsed the wine’, which also ﬁt the pattern for the sentence ‘The rich boy bought a car’. There were other more serious problems with the theory, which Chomsky (1957, 1959) pointed out. ALM incorporates Behaviourist psychology ALM incorporated Behaviourist psychology (Watson, 1924; Thorndike, 1932; Skinner 1957), which was the dominant school of psychology in America for most of the ﬁrst half of the twentieth century. Behaviourist psychology 145 Second-language learning regarded mind and thinking to be irrelevant for the understanding and production of speech. Language learning was regarded as no different from other types of learning in which a stimulus and response paradigm was operating. Repetition and mechanical drills involving words as stimuli and responses were considered to be the essence of learning. The defects of such a view concerning language and psychology were demonstrated by Chomsky during the 1950s and served as the basis for the subsequent collapse of Structural linguistics in the 1960s, the downfall of Behaviourism, and a rise of Mentalism as the principal explanation for lin- guistic behaviour in the 1970s. Features of ALM The Audiolingual Method incorporated into its methodology many of the same features that the Direct Method had developed, namely, planned situ- ations, graded materials, and such techniques as pattern drills and dialogue memorization (Brooks, 1964). In contrast with DM, the Audiolingual Method almost entirely dropped the use of natural situations and spontaneous speech. There was even a tendency for some ALM advocates, such as Moulton, to reduce the meaningfulness of the speech that was taught – a practice that was frowned on by Fries, one of the founders of ALM. Demise of ALM In its time ALM generated an enormous amount of enthusiasm. Teachers everywhere lined up to teach second languages according to principles that reﬂected the latest scientiﬁc word on how humans learn language. However, the fact is that ALM failed to produce the ﬂuent communicating speakers it had promised. All that remains of ALM today is the occasional use of Pattern Practice drills as an auxiliary exercise. 7.3 Offbeat methods appear then disappear: Cognitive Code, Community Language Learning, Silent Way, Suggestopedia Since the downfall of the Audiolingual Method in the 1960s, a number of new methods have arisen. However, only a small number have managed to survive, and fewer still have managed to thrive. Four that have not sur- vived are Cognitive Code, Community Language Learning, Silent Way, and Suggestopedia. Some adherents are sprinkled about, just as there are some Audiolingualists around, but the methods are disappearing with the passing of their proponents. 146 7 Second-language teaching methods 7.4 Contemporary methods: Total Physical Response, Communicative Language Teaching, Natural Approach, Content-Based Instruction, Task-Based Language Teaching, Computer- Assisted Language Learning 7.4.1 Total Physical Response Rationale of the method Total Physical Response, frequently referred to as TPR, is very much a ‘natural’-type method: speech understanding precedes speech production, which, in turn, precedes reading and writing. Only the target language is used in the classroom and meaning is derived from actual objects and situ- ations. Students are encouraged to induce rules on their own and speak when they are ready. Again, as with other natural-type methods, things go best with a small number of students. James Asher, the founder of TPR in the 1970s, considers its unique char- acteristic to be the learners’ performance of physical actions in response to the teacher’s commands in the target language (Asher, 1966, 1969, 1977; Asher et al., 1974). His idea is that memory will be enhanced by motor activity with the result that language will be more easily remembered and accessed. Inter- estingly, this idea and the other major ideas comprising TPR are to be found in the Direct Method, particularly with Herald Palmer in the book, English Through Actions (Palmer and Palmer, 1925). Asher, though, has emphasized physical activity much more than did Palmer. In any case, there is no doubt that TPR is a very useful method and one that deserves attention. Classroom materials and activities Initially, in a classroom of beginners in English for example, commands are given such as ‘Stand up’, ‘Sit down’, ‘Open the door’, ‘Walk to the table’, ‘Point to the table’, ‘Point to the door’, ‘Where is the table?’, ‘Where is the book?’, etc. Soon after, sometimes even within the same class hour, state- ments or questions are paired with commands: ‘This is a book. Give the book to Susie’, ‘The book is on the table. Put the book on the chair’, ‘Who has the book? You? All right. Give the book to Anne’, ‘Where is the ball? On the table? All right. Tony, bring me the ball.’ After the proper groundwork has been laid, students are presented with more complex sentences, like ‘Give the book to Bob and give the pen to Jean’, ‘Walk to the table and then turn around’, ‘Take the yellow card and place it under the book’, ‘If you have a blue card then raise your hand’, ‘If you have the big card then place it under the small card’. 147 Second-language learning From the beginning the student is introduced to whole sentences in con- text. The teacher demonstrates the meaning of the words and sentences by pointing to the objects and by acting on the commands for all to see. It is claimed that with this method a student can easily learn around 25 new lexical items in an hour, along with a variety of structures. Based on our experience, we believe this to be true. In fact, with regard to vocabulary, the number could be much higher. A demonstration project: Japanese students learn German Japanese students in a psycholinguistics class in Japan, which was taught by the ﬁrst author of this book, were given a TPR demonstration lesson in German by a colleague, Rudolf Schulte-Pelkum. The students, who had not learned German before, in just a little over an hour, learned to understand more than 50 different words as well as a variety of imperative sentences (‘Stand up’, ‘Turn around’, ‘Open the door’, ‘Close the door’, ‘Give the ball to Karen and give the book to Emil’). (The students were given German names.) While hesitant in their action at ﬁrst, the students soon gained in conﬁdence, performing their tasks swiftly and with assurance. Such beha- viour is a direct measure of their progress in speech comprehension. Interestingly, when a videotape of this TPR German lesson was shown to Japanese students in other classes, they learned about the same number of items. They did not perform any actions but simply observed what was happening on the tape. Observation was sufﬁcient for learning! Whether the students who performed the actions retained more over time than the stu- dents who simply observed the actions was not measured, unfortunately. TPR would predict that doing the action would solidify memory. Advancing with TPR After the teacher has determined that the students are ﬁrm in understanding what they have learned, they are then encouraged to speak. They are asked to give commands to their classmates with their classmates performing the actions. Games can be devised to encourage speaking. TPR has essentially the same advantages and limitations as the Direct Method. Students do learn to communicate in speech in a natural way and also relatively quickly. In order for this to happen, however, they must have ﬂuent and creative teachers. Nowadays, though, perhaps the teacher need not be especially creative since a great deal of curriculum material has been developed and published for TPR instruction. TPR is best used for the early phases of second-language learning. With more advanced language knowledge, actions become less useful and relevant to communication. Then, too, there is the problem of homework. Once out of the classroom, there is little a student can do to review or gain know- ledge unless recordings are made. In this regard, adopting the Grammar– Translation method along with TPR might be one good solution. 148 7 Second-language teaching methods Children vs. adults One problem with adults with TPR relates to its special reliance on action (‘Physical Response’). For social reasons, many adults, more so than children, may feel embarrassed marching around a room doing things. While the required action could be modiﬁed to lessen this problem, there is not much else a teacher can do to remedy this situation. Adults may become more accepting in time, though, especially after they see their teacher doing the same things that they are obliged to do. TPR works especially well with children, but with adults it may be best utilized in combination with other methods. Thus, TPR should not be viewed as a self-contained method that is applicable to all language-teaching con- texts. Nevertheless, with such ﬂexibility, it may well be considered the best of the speech-based teaching methods. 7.4.2 Communicative Language Teaching In the early 1970s, Wilkins (1972) proposed a system of dividing communica- tive speech into two aspects: functions and notions. Functions (called Speech Acts in linguistics) involve requests, denials, complaints, excuses, etc. and are expressed through whole sentences. Essentially the learner is provided with a means for performing a given function. For example, learners may be told that there are various ways to make a request: they may be told ‘Shut the window’, ‘Please shut the window’, ‘Would you shut the window?’, ‘Would you mind shutting the window?’, ‘Will you be so kind as to shut the window?’, etc. (Wilkins, 1976, p. 51). Notions are expressions of frequency, quantity, location, etc. These are typically words or phrases within a sentence. For example, students may learn ‘I often go to the movies’, ‘I have a lot of friends’, and ‘He’s standing by the window’. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) presumes that students want to communicate and it helps them to do just that. Lessons often start with the GT-like exercise. This may be the simultaneous reading and listening to a dialogue based on a real-life everyday situation, such as greeting a friend or buying something in a shop. Initially, there is no translation and no explanation of the structures involved, although the method does not exclude native language aids if that is what the students feel they need for a particular point. There is total reliance on situations and the students’ desire to com- municate within those situations. This kind of teaching stresses communication and allows anything into the classroom so long as it will further the communicative ability of the student. This can include GT-type translations and grammatical explanations in the native language. Or, if a teacher feels that an Audiolingual technique such as drilling a phrase a number of times might help a student, then the 149 Second-language learning teacher does it, so long as the practised phrase or sentence is later used in a meaningful situation. Often, there are phrases or sentences which a student starts to create, but has trouble with. For example, if a student would like to say in English something like ‘I wish I could have gone’ but can get out only ‘I wish...’, the teacher might model the whole sentence a few times, let the student repeat it a few times, and then return to the situation in which the student was trying to use it and let him or her use it. (This technique seems to be taken from the Community Language Learning counselling method used by Curran and LaForge in the 1970s.) Later, there might even be an explanation of the grammar involved, or even a structure drill, such as letting the student substitute other past par- ticiples in a sentence: ‘I wish I could have eaten it’, ‘I wish I could have done it’, ‘I wish I could have seen it’. However, such techniques are only employed in the interest of assisting the students to communicate their ideas. In comparing Communicative Language Teaching with strictly speech- oriented methods such as the Direct Method, Total Physical Response, and the Natural Approach (to follow), we can see that there are marked differ- ences. CLT permits reading and writing almost immediately, as long as it serves the cause of communication. It also permits grammatical explana- tions, not relying totally on the student learning by induction. Furthermore, it permits translation. Given the above, it would appear that CLT is not so much a particular method as an eclectic method that borrows, as it does, aspects of other methods, such as Grammar–Translation, Audiolingual, Community Lan- guage Learning, and TPR. The concern of CLT’s advocates is to get people to communicate by any means possible. It is probably because of its eclecti- cism that CLT has become one of the most widespread of teaching methods in use today. This is especially so in the United Kingdom where so many of its originators and developers have been active (Wilkins, 1976; Alexander, 1978; Widdowson, 1978; Brumﬁt and Johnson, 1979; Yalden, 1983). 7.4.3 The Natural Approach Speech understanding to precede production The Natural Approach (NA) is the name given by Terrell (1977, 1982) and Krashen (Krashen and Terrell, 1983) to their ‘new philosophy of language teaching’ developed in the early 1980s. It is to be distinguished from the nineteenth-century Natural Method, although NA has a number of similar- ities with that and with other natural speech-based methods such as the Direct Method and TPR. (Really, not so ‘new’ after all.) Yet, perhaps the Natural Approach is more of an attempt to provide a theoretical description 150 7 Second-language teaching methods of the processes involved in second-language acquisition than it is a body of innovative techniques for teaching. In accord with the Natural Method, Direct Method, and TPR, the import- ance of listening comprehension and delayed speech production is stressed in the Natural Approach. Production is delayed until the student is believed to be ready. The idea that you can only effectively produce speech that you already understand is in keeping with the understanding-precedes- production aspect of native-language acquisition. Graded materials and syntax by induction As for grammatical structures and rules, these are seldom explained and are expected to be acquired by receiving appropriate language input. In this respect, sentences are presented in a simple-to-complex grading and at a level that may be slightly higher than students can understand. This is very similar to the Direct Method and TPR. NA deﬁnes itself as a method for developing basic personal communica- tive skills, oral and written. Goals of the method would include the ability to engage in simple conversational exchanges, to understand announcements in public places, to read newspapers, write personal letters, etc. Like most other speech-based methods, teachers of the Natural Approach make ample use of pictures, objects, charts, and situations in the classroom as the source of language input. The Affective Filter Such personal learning factors as motivation, self-conﬁdence, and anxiety are given special consideration in NA. These constitute what Krashen calls the learner’s ‘Affective Filter’ and play a signiﬁcant role in gaining a language. A ‘low’ condition of the Affective Filter is said to be most desirable, for in such a case students would be highly motivated, very conﬁdent, and under little stress. Such desirable conditions can be fostered if, for example, students are allowed to communicate in situations without having to worry about any grammatical mistakes they may make. On the other hand, a ‘high’ con- dition of the Affective Filter would have the opposite effect, blocking any learning through too much anxiety and low motivation. However, there are other views that hold that Affective Filter factors such as anxiety can actually be useful for language learning. Scovel (1978) con- tends that a student may have ‘facilitating’ anxiety, which pushes them to greater efforts, rather than ‘debilitating’ anxiety which is the type of anxiety that the ‘Affective Filter’ is most concerned with. Then, too, according to Skehan (1989), high motivation may be a result of language learning under conditions of little stress as well as a cause of that learning as in the premise of the Affective Filter. For example, a learner with high motivation who succeeds in learning would, as a result, probably have their motivation 151 Second-language learning increase even more. The opposite would be true for a learner with initial low motivation: the low motivation would lead to failure in learning, de- creasing motivation for further learning. It is thus not clear to what extent motivation is a cause (as Krashen and Terrell posit) or an effect of language- learning success. While it is probably the case that students learn better when they are motivated, not over-anxious, and when they feel relaxed and receive encouragement for their efforts, to label this an ‘Affective Filter’ is rather pretentious, but harmless, academic jargon. It is odd though that Terrell and Krashen, who are such advocates of simulating a child’s natural language acquisition, should posit an Affective Filter at all, since even children who are raised in anxiety-ridden homes do learn their native language. The Monitor Hypothesis and the acquisition-learning distinction The Natural Approach differentiates between acquiring and learning a second language (Krashen, 1982). Acquisition is said to involve a kind of inductive process similar to that which occurs in the acquisition of the native language. Such a process is claimed to be automatic and unconscious. Learning, on the other hand, is said to involve a formal process by which one consciously learns rules such as those taught by a teacher. According to Krashen, language knowledge that is ‘learned’ never becomes unconscious or automatic as does knowledge that is ‘acquired’. (We would like the reader to note that we make no such distinction, and we use the terms ‘learning’ and ‘acquisition’ interchangeably throughout this book.) The distinction is based on Krashen’s so-called Monitor Hypothesis. According to the hypothesis, ‘learned’ rules are always monitored, i.e. con- sciously applied in the production of sentences. No such ‘monitoring’ of speech production, however, is said to occur with a grammar that has been ‘acquired’. It is because of the monitoring process that Krashen claims that once students ‘learn’ grammar (instead of ‘acquiring’ it) they will be unable to use it unconsciously, and thus effortlessly, in production. The ‘learned’ system can only be applied under certain conditions adequate for ‘monitoring’. Only when learners have adequate time, are focused on grammatical form, and know the rule of the grammar can they produce speech using what they have ‘learned’. For example, the ‘learned’ system might be used during a language test or during writing. The conse- quence of the limited application of the ‘learned’ system is that the teaching of grammar rules by explication is frowned on by advocates of the Natural Approach. Criticism of the Monitor Hypothesis The Monitor Hypothesis has been subjected to severe criticism by many theorists, such as McLaughlin (1978), Bialystok (1979, 1981), Gregg (1984) 152 7 Second-language teaching methods and Steinberg (1993). Krashen has not really answered his critics, nor has he provided convincing evidence in support of his claim that knowledge gained from the presentation of rules and their explanations cannot become uncon- scious and automatic (Krashen and Pon, 1975; Krashen and Scarcella, 1978). The validity of the Monitor Hypothesis, therefore, is very much in doubt. The distinction is counterintuitive An alternative to the Monitor Hypothesis is provided by a model of learn- ing proposed by Bialystok (1979, 1981) in which consciously learned lan- guage can become automatic and unconscious through practice. Certainly, Krashen’s claim is counterintuitive to what many people experience when they produce sentences in a second language. For example, according to Krashen, English speakers who are told in their ﬁrst Japanese lesson that Japanese has a Subject + Object + Verb ordering would continue to con- sciously monitor this ordering even after six weeks or more. This was certainly not the experience of the ﬁrst author of this book who had lived in Japan. Initial awareness disappears rather quickly. Of course, there are times when second-language learners do become aware of applying certain grammatical rules in the construction of sentences. However, this typically occurs only in the early stages when the learner has not yet integrated that knowledge well enough. Monitoring awareness also occurs with ‘acquisition’ Actually, monitoring awareness may occur even when rules are acquired by induction. Language problems are forever occurring to the second- language learner and such problems will often be considered consciously. For example, an English learner of Japanese could have ﬁgured out on his or her own what a certain verb ending in Japanese means and then pro- perly use that ending. This might prompt the learner to consciously think more about other verb endings and how they relate to one another. Such ‘monitoring’ will aid, not hinder, acquisition. Arithmetic and the acquisition-learning distinction Let us approach the adequacy of Krashen’s acquisition-learning distinction from another point of view, one which includes an area of knowledge dif- ferent from but still quite relevant to language, that is, arithmetic. Suppose we ask you now to divide 954 by 6, and to do it as quickly as possible. (You can do it on paper or in your head.) Do you have the answer? Now, were you conscious of every step of the process whereby you came up with this answer? Let us ask you, if, according to one common method of division that we shall use, you were aware that your ﬁrst step was to begin by considering the single leftmost (not rightmost) digit of 954, the number to be divided? That is, 9. 153 Second-language learning Then, were you aware of deciding that, since 6 is less than 9, you must subtract 6 and so have 3 remaining? Were you aware that because the remainder was less than 6 you would write a 1 for the beginning of your answer? What did you then do with that 3? Were you conscious of having to place it in front of the next leftmost single digit of 954, which is 5, and then treat the two digits of 3 and 5 as 35? Next you divided 35 by 6 and got an answer of 5. But how did you do that? Were you conscious of dipping into the multiplication table (1 × 1 = 1, 1 × 2 = 2, 1 × 3 = 3... 6 × 4 = 24, 6 × 5 = 30, 6 × 6 = 36, etc.), which you had memorized years ago in elementary school? You needed that knowledge to determine that the product of 30, which is produced by 6 × 5, will bring you closest to 35 without exceeding it; 24 would not be as close as 30, and 36 would exceed that number, and therefore you selected 5 as an answer and you then placed that 5 to the rightmost of your answer of 1. You would then have 15 and be on your way to completing the answer. Were you aware of all the steps that would bring you to the answer of 159? Not likely! Yet, all of these steps were taught to you explicitly in the classroom, and, through your teachers’ explanation of the process, you ‘learned’ the process. Now, certainly, while the initial learning was formal and presented through explication, nevertheless, through time and practice, the rules of the process became largely unconscious and automatic. Krashen’s claim, therefore, that learning never becomes unconscious and automatic is one that cannot be upheld with regard to arithmetic know- ledge. This being so, there is no reason to believe that a special case should be made for one particular kind of knowledge, language knowledge. Clearly, much of the learning that is gained in a formal situation can become uncon- scious and automatic. Since Krashen’s acquisition-learning distinction is not a valid one, there is no good reason to suppose that teaching grammar by explication in a second-language situation cannot, at times, be beneﬁcial. Such grammar knowledge may later become unconscious and automatic- ally used. Rules can be taught Since there is no sound reason to ban the formal teaching of all rules in the classroom, simple rules can be taught directly. The learner can internalize them so that they can be used later in an automatic and unconscious manner. Of course, if a teacher spends too much time on explaining rules, the results might be as Terrell and Krashen predict. Then, too, there are some very good ways to teach more complex rules than by traditional statement and example. The student can be presented with data and given a chance to discover the rule on his or her own. These are what Ellis (1994) refers to as ‘consciousness raising’ tasks. After the stu- dents have had an opportunity to ﬁgure out the rule for themselves, the 154 7 Second-language teaching methods teacher can then make certain that everyone understands the rule under consideration. The sensible teacher will strike a balance with direct speech experience, consciousness-raising tasks, and rule explication. 7.4.4 Content-Based Instruction Content in language teaching is most frequently deﬁned as the substance or subject matter that we learn or communicate through language (Richards and Rodgers, 2001, p. 204). Content-Based Instruction (CBI) is based on the same principles and on the same psychological and linguistic orientation as Communicative Language Teaching; therefore, it might be better to say that CBI is an approach to language instruction, rather than a separate method. CBI differs from CLT in its focus on instructional input: CBI organizes language teaching around the subject that students need to master, rather than around a linguistic syllabus, and uses the target language as a means to present the subject matter. The core principles and techniques of CBI are outlined in Mohan (1986), Brinton et al. (1989), Stryker and Leaver (1993), Stoller (1997), and Richards and Rodgers (2001). Language features CBI is built upon three main features. First, language is focused on as a means for getting information. Information is constructed and delivered in texts and discourse. Thus, language instruction is based on texts and discourse, and not only on sentences, clauses and phrases. Second, because real world language skills such as comprehension and production, and reading and writing, are intertwined, so too should language instruction involve master- ing several skills together. Third, it is assumed that language is purposeful. People learn a second language more successfully when they use this lan- guage to get information, which is interesting, useful, and leads to a desired goal. Thus, it becomes essential for the learners to realize the purpose of the language samples they are studying, and link it to their own goals. CBI understands speech communication on the one hand, and literacy on the other hand, as two aspects of the same goal to achieve. No separate grammatical instruction becomes necessary, because grammar is seen as a component in the operaion of other skills. Then, too, grammar is more often explained than presented for learning by induction. The teacher is responsible for ﬁnding relevant grammatical material to ﬁt into the topic or theme to be learned. Quite often this material needs to be modiﬁed by the teacher to be accessible for the students. This may involve simpliﬁcation (e.g. use of shorter units and clauses), well formedness (e.g. using few deviations from stand- ard usage), explicitness (e.g. speaking with non-reduced pronunciation), regularization (e.g. use of canonical word order), and redundancy (e.g. high- lighting important material through simultaneous use of several linguistic mechanisms) (Stryker and Leaver, 1993). 155 Second-language learning Teaching procedures In most CBI courses, the syllabus is organized around speciﬁc topics and subtopics, which are chosen in accordance with language learning goals. Richards and Rodgers (2001) refer to the organization of the Intensive Lan- guage Course at the Free University of Berlin, which consists of a sequence of modules spread over the academic year. The topical themes of the modules are Drugs, Religious Persuasion, Advertising, Britain and the Race Ques- tion, Native Americans, Modern Architecture, Microchip Technology, and the like. A typical ESP course for the Department of Economy in Ulyanovsk State University, Russia, where the second author used to teach, consists of units on Fundamentals of Management, Distribution, Money and Banking, Securities, etc. In a CBI class students might read a text, make notes, listen to a tape recording, and respond orally or in a written form; they might study letters, reports, book chapters, or they might be involved in meetings and discus- sions; every type of activity being included into a subject topic. Teaching materials and activities are selected according to the extent to which they match the type of programme. The materials must be authentic, of the type that is typically used with the subject matter of the content course in native-language instruction. Advantages and disadvantages of CBI The teacher is required to play a very active role in the process of learning: they must match student’s speciﬁc interests with appropriate language material which they might need to pursue academic goals. Students are supposed to ‘understand their own learning process and... take charge of their own learning from the very start’ (Stryker and Leaver, 1993, p. 286). Most CBI courses expect students to support each other, sometimes becom- ing sources of content themselves, sharing their experience of the subject. However, the quantity of new material might be overwhelming for some students, who now have to master both a new subject matter and new language skills. Some students in CBI courses have been reported to prefer more structured, traditional classrooms (Richards and Rodgers, 2001, p. 213). As for teachers, who mostly have been trained to teach language skills rather than a certain subject, they have to cope with a double workload, spending large amounts of time and energy to prepare for classes. Given such burdens for the students and teacher, the teacher might simply take the easy way out and run a Grammar–Translation class! 7.4.5 Task-Based Language Teaching Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) is yet another offspring of Com- municative Language Teaching. Unlike other approaches, TBLT focuses more 156 7 Second-language teaching methods directly on the instructional factor, stressing the importance of specially designed instructional tasks as the basis of learning. The main idea is that learners learn the target language by interacting communicatively and pur- posefully while engaged in the activities (Feez, 1998). Task deﬁnitions vary, however (see Nunan, 1989; Pica, 1994; Skehan, 1998). Most often a task is deﬁned as an activity or goal that is carried out using language, such as ﬁnding a solution to a puzzle, reading a map and giving directions, making a telephone call, writing a letter, or reading a set of instructions and assem- bling a toy. The task should also involve a communicative act on its own, that is, the task should provide a sense of completeness. Theory of language TBLT relies upon a theory of learning rather than a theory of language. The core concepts are given in Feez (1998). They boil down to the following three assumptions. First, learners are considered to learn the target language better when they are engaged in a meaningful activity. Second, a task is exactly what stimulates communication and regulates information input and out- put. Third, tasks will serve to improve learner motivation and promote learning because they typically use authentic materials. Advantages and disadvantages of TBLT The use of tasks and puzzles as a unit in curriculum has always been a good idea, and, in fact, such tasks are widely used in language instruction nowadays. However, TBLT’s reliance on tasks as the main vehicle of in- struction opens the approach for criticism. TBLT-based language teaching programmes did not enjoy much success. The basic claim of TBLT as a more effective basis for teaching than other language teaching approaches is still far from being a fact, is the conclusion of Richards and Rodgers (2001, pp. 223– 41). 7.4.6 Computer-Assisted Language Learning Work in Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL) began as early as the 1960s when the idea of using a computer for language instruction devel- oped. Still, by 1980, in a survey of 1810 foreign language departments in America published in Modern Language Journal, of the 602 who responded, only 62 made use of CALL systems: CALL was evaluated as prospective, but hardly useful for mass instruction purposes because of cost (Olsen, 1980). With the introduction of microchip technology, and then the invention of the Internet, things have changed dramatically. Computers became cheaper, smaller, and more powerful, and as a result, their role in education has grown immensely. By the beginning of the 1990s, a survey conducted in elementary through university educational institutions in the United States 157 Second-language learning indicated that almost every student had access to a computer (Ely, 1995). Another study reported that a majority of colleges and universities across Canada were using CALL (Kidd, 1997), while in the USA, more than 40 states provide educators with some sort of Internet access, with at least 20 per cent of public school teachers reporting using computers for teaching or curriculum design (Harris, 1998). Advantages and disadvantages of CALL The greatest beneﬁt of CALL is the fact that it is largely oriented to the individual learner: a computer program delivers exactly the material a learner needs and the process of learning can go at the learner’s pace. If necessary, a computer program can be used for mere drilling to get language skills automated by providing a variety of structured exercises on any grammati- cal or lexical problem. A computer program can be used at home, and a student can spend as much time as he or she needs to master a language skill. In a classroom setting, CALL can signiﬁcantly enlarge the class capac- ity without increasing teaching staff. CALL is still far from being used widely due to a number of problems, particularly with regard to different computer operational systems, such as lack of good software and incompatibility of a Mac program with Windows or Linux. At present, CALL is only a helpful auxiliary technique in learning the target language. 7.5 Goals must be considered in the selection of a teaching method It is safe to say that students will learn something from any method. No method is a total failure because, in all methods, students are exposed to the data of a second language and are given the opportunity to learn. Thus, to the disappointment of all, there is no magic method. No method has yet been devised that will permit people over the age of 12 or so to learn a second language as effortlessly as they did their native language. Still, teachers can do much to make the experience for a learner rewarding and enjoyable, whatever method is employed. In judging the relative merits of teaching methods, one must consider goals. Just what is the purpose of having people learn a second language? If the ability to speak and understand a second language is the primary goal, then a speech-based method would be best for them. If, on the other hand, the ability to read and write is the primary goal, then perhaps Grammar– Translation could be the method of choice. The goals of a nation are important in determining second-language teach- ing programmes in the school system. One country may wish to promote 158 7 Second-language teaching methods the study of reading and translation of scientiﬁc material from a second language, and would, therefore, wish to stress the knowledge that is gained through reading. In such a case, the Grammar–Translation Method may well be appropriate. Other countries, however, may regard communication through speech as the highest priority. As such, speech-based methods may be preferred, providing, of course, that adequate ﬁnances are available for the specialized training of teachers in such methods and that the school system can afford teaching classes with small numbers of students. When large numbers of students are to be taught and few teachers are available, Grammar–Translation might well be chosen by default, since, practically speaking, no other choice is viable. A teacher who can afford the luxury of selecting a method for the class- room might well consider putting together a personal method of second- language teaching. For example, with both speech and literacy as objectives, one could use Communicative Language Teaching and then supplement it with physical activities (from Total Physical Response), pattern practice drills (from the Audiolingual Method), and explication and translation (from the Grammar–Translation method). Most methods will have some feature that can beneﬁt the language learner. 159

Second-language Teaching Methods PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript