METHODOLOGAL APPROACHES Source: Methodological Approaches. Funiber

Arzamendi, J. et al

AIM OF THE SUBJECT

Marianne Celce-Murcia (1980) argues that we need a historical perspective to evaluate innovations

effectively. Foreign language teaching has undergone many changes in the last century and, above

all in the last 30 years. It is important to have a clear perspective on the development and

interrelationship of the different language teaching approaches. Such a perspective is greatly

needed for evaluating the many so-called innovations and new methods being described in journals,

lectures and workshops.

The aim of this subject is to familiarise you with the leading movements which have determined many

of the features of the major teaching methods. The information contained in the different units will

allow you to re-examine the appropriateness of certain techniques in their own context and to

consider the different ideas advocated in educational philosophy and pedagogical theory: these

were developed in order to satisfy both the specific demands or requirements of the period in which

they flourished, and the specific context of the people who adopted them.

A helpful preliminary image to offer is that of teaching as complex drama on a stage. If each of the

many features of teaching is represented by a character, there will be many characters on the

stage, but they may be given different names, not all will have key parts, and some may not talk at

all. Different dramatists would write different plays with the same characters. The same might be said

of English language teaching. There may be common features of teaching at all times in history, but

each period decides on different leading parts, and different names for characters. Characters talk

in different ways at different times, though they may all be talking about (in our case) teaching.

In this subject we shall be exploring a number of approaches or styles of teaching, not seeking to be

definitive, nor to declare that we know the 'best' ways of teaching English.

· The Grammar-Translation Method

· The Direct Method

· The Reading Approach

· Audiolingualism (US)

· The Situational Approach (Brit.)

· The Cognitive Approach

· Total Physical Response

· Community Language Learning

· The Silent Way

· Suggestology or Suggestopedia

· The Natural Approach

· Communicative Approaches (the Lexical Approach and Task-based Learning)

During this subject we shall be developing an awareness of the fact that our discourses about

teaching English are different from the things that we actually do in the classroom, and that this gap

between talking about and doing can be problematic in our work, and could benefit from being

narrowed.

UNIT 1 - INTRODUCTION

1.1 In search of a professional label

No other discipline seems to be so much concerned about methodology as that of Teaching English

as a Foreign or Second Language (TEFL or TESL). The notion of methodology seems to hold a

particular fascination for teachers of English. For many language teachers adherence to a particular

method seems to be part of their professional identity, and yet for all its history of heated debate and

upheaval (is 'grammar' in or out of fashion this year?), methodologists still do not really have any

definitive answers for teachers.

Nowadays, there exist controversies in our profession ranging from the search for a reasonable

language teaching methodology to the search for an appropriate professional name.

The following names and acronyms have been suggested as professional labels and have gained

relatively permanent acceptance:

· TEFL (Teaching/Teachers of English as a Foreign Language): used in educational situations

where instruction in other subjects is not normally given in English.

· TESL (Teaching/Teachers of English as a Second Language): used in educational situations

where English is the partial or universal medium of instruction for other subjects.

· TEAL (Teaching/Teachers of English as an Additional Language): used in parts of Canada in

lieu of TESL to stress the benefits of first-language maintenance.

· TESOL (Teaching/Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages): a cover-term for

teachers working in any of the above situations.

1.2 What do we mean by the terms approach, method and technique? A brief look at

the ELT literature

Edward Anthony (1963) identified three levels of organisation in language teaching, which he termed

approach, method, and technique.

The arrangement is hierarchical. The organisational key is that techniques carry out a method which

is consistent with an approach...

... An approach is a set of correlative assumptions dealing with the nature of language teaching and

learning. An approach is axiomatic. It describes the nature of the subject matter to be taught...

... Method is 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. An approach is axiomatic, a

method is procedural.

Within one approach, there can be many methods...

... A technique is implementational - that which actually takes place in a classroom. It is a particular

trick, stratagem, or contrivance used to accomplish an immediate objective. Techniques must be

consistent with a method, and therefore in harmony with an approach as well. (Anthony 1963:63-7)

According to this model, an approach to language teaching is something that reflects a certain

theory and beliefs about language and language learning. This term is the broadest of the three. A

method is a set of procedures; a system that spells out exactly how to teach a language (what

particular skills and content to teach). Methods are more specific than approaches but less specific

than techniques. A technique is a classroom device or activity and thus represents the narrowest

term of the three. Some techniques are widely used and found in many methods (imitation and

repetition); others are specific to or characteristic of a given method.

Anthony's proposal was simple and comprehensive, but failed to give sufficient attention to the

nature of a method itself. He does not mention the roles of teachers and learners assumed in a

method, for example, nor the role of instructional materials or the form they are expected to take.

For Richards and Rodgers (1986) Anthony's proposal of an analysis of language-teaching practices is

a point of departure; however, they prefer to consider `method' as an umbrella term for the

specification and interrelation of theory and practice, and therefore they prefer to use the terms

approach, design, and procedure.

Following Anthony, the first level in the system, approach, "refers to theories about the nature of

language and language learning that serve as the source of practices and principles in language

teaching." (Richards & Rodgers 1986:16) The second level in the system, design, is the level of method

analysis that specifies the relationship of theories of language and learning to the selection and

organisation of language content (syllabus), to the types of tasks and learning activities, and to the

roles of learners, teachers and materials within the method. The third level, procedure, comprises the

classroom techniques and practices that are consequences of particular approaches and designs.

Finally, the term method refers to a language-teaching philosophy that contains a standardised set

of procedures or principles for teaching a language that are based upon a given set of theoretical

premises about the nature of language and language learning.

The system is illustrated in the figure below.

METHOD

Figure 1.1: Relevant elements of a teaching/learning system (Richards 1985: 17)

In their opinion the three elements help us understand the differences and similarities between one

method and another by showing how these elements are interrelated in language-teaching

practices:

a method is theoretically related to an approach, is organisationally determined by a

design, and is practically realised in procedure. (1986:16)

A number of other ways of conceptualising approaches and methods in language teaching have

been proposed. Mackey, in his book Language Teaching Analysis (1965), elaborated perhaps the

most well-known model of the 1960s, one that focuses primarily on the levels of method and

technique. Mackey's model of language teaching analysis concentrates on the dimensions of

selection, gradation, presentation, and repetition underlying a method. In fact, despite the title of

Mackey's book, his concern is primarily with the analysis of textbooks and their underlying principles of

organisation. His analysis fails to address the level of approach, nor does it deal with the actual

classroom behaviours of teachers and learners, except as these are represented in textbooks.

1.3 Some ingredients of language teaching

In this section we will look at what goes into methods and how these ingredients can be mixed and

processed differently to produce both the well-known 'off the shelf' methods and the 'home-baked',

idiosyncratic teacher versions.

approach design

procedure

These characteristics can be used as criteria for discussion of some of the best known ELT methods, as

we will see in the next units.

We will now look at some variables in more detail. Our goal is to enable you to become better

informed about the nature, strengths, and weaknesses of methods and approaches so that you will

be able to judge them more effectively.

Here is a list of important variables:

· Perceived goals of language learning.

· Decisions about what is to be taught.

· Beliefs about the nature of language.

· Beliefs about the process of language learning/acquisition.

· Amount of prescription for teachers.

· Attitudes to different classroom techniques and activities.

· The role and nature of materials.

· The relative roles of teachers and learners.

· Attitude to the use of learners' native language (L1) in the classroom.

· Attitude to error.

· Beliefs about evaluation and assessment.

Following the terminology proposed by Richards and Rodgers we have included the language

theory behind each method or approach discussed in this subject and, whenever possible, the

learning theory behind it.

1.4 At the level of "approach"

1.4.1 Beliefs about the nature of language

In analysing approaches to language teaching it is evident that an important methodological

variable is the attitude to language itself. In some methods language is treated as a subject which

can be approached in the same way as any other subject on the curriculum, perhaps as a body of

factual information to be digested and memorised. More recently language has come to be viewed

as an aspect of human behaviour and methods have changed to accommodate this. Let us briefly

focus then on the three main trends in language theory that frame the different methods and

approaches discussed in this subject:

A. The first, and the most traditional of the three, is the structural view, the view that language is a

system of structurally related elements for the coding and decoding of language. The target of

language learning is seen to be the mastery of elements of this system, which are generally defined

in terms of phonological units (e.g., phonemes), grammatical units (e.g., morphemes, phrases,

sentences), grammatical operations (e.g., adding, shifting, joining, or transforming elements), and

lexical items (e.g., function words and structure words). As we will see in Unit 2, the Audiolingual

Method embodies this particular view of language, as do contemporary methods such as Total

Physical Response and the Silent Way, both of which will be explored in Unit 3.

B. The second view of language is the British functional view, which considers language as a vehicle

for the expression of functional meaning. The communicative movement in language teaching

subscribes to this view of language (see Unit 4). This theory goes beyond the grammatical

characteristics of language and emphasises both the semantic and communicative dimension.

Firth stated that:

The linguist has to study the `text', i.e., the corpus of utterances, (a) in their linguistic

environment or context, i.e., in relation to surrounding language items, and (b) in their context

of situations, i.e., in relation to non-verbal constituents which have bearing on the utterance,

such as persons, objects and events. (in Stern:1983, p.138)

The functional view leads to a specification and organisation of language teaching content by

categories of meaning and function rather than by elements of structure and grammar. Wilkins'

Notional Syllabuses (1976) is an attempt to spell out the implications of this view of language for

syllabus design. A notional syllabus would include not only elements of grammar and lexis but also

specify the topics, notions, and concepts the learner needs to communicate. (See Unit 4 for a

detailed account of this.) Halliday also elaborated his own linguistic model, based on the theories of

Firth and, together with other authors, he offered a linguistic base for language teaching (Halliday,

McIntosh and Strevens: 1964). See Unit 4 for an account of Halliday's research.

Stern has matched the terms that Linguistics has generated:

Langue Parole

System Use

Code Message

Language Verbal Behaviour

Competence Performance

Form Function

We could say that while Linguistics in general had been exclusively interested in the elements of the

first column and had excluded the rest (considering that they did not belong to a "scientific" study, or

because they did not constitute the "essence" of language, etc.), the functional view took the first

step towards the study of language reflected in the concepts in the right column: these elements

would constitute the study core of the so-called "language sciences" (Hymes: 1974). This change of

orientation would allow a more fruitful focus in language teaching, which became more concerned

with using the language (functionalism) than with knowing the linguistic system (structuralism). You will

see in later units how the debate between structuralism and functionalism affected methodological

proposals in the development of methods and approaches.

As many linguists started to distance themselves from an abstract, structural view of language study,

they started to take social and situational contexts, as well as the attitudes of the speakers, into

consideration. A series of new disciplines arose, under new labels and with new study techniques,

which tried to relate the study of language to the outside world and to the sociological context of

the speakers. These new disciplines were syntax, semantics and pragmatics.

A clear definition of each of these fields is provided by Yule:

Syntax is the study of the relationships between linguistic forms, how they are arranged in

sequence, and which sequences are well-formed. (Yule 1997: 4)

Semantics is the study of the relationships between linguistic forms and entities in the world; that is,

how words literally connect to things. Semantics analysis also attempts to establish the

relationships between verbal descriptions and states of affairs in the world as accurate (true) or

not, regardless of who produces that description (ibid.).

Pragmatics is the study of the relationships between linguistic forms and the users of those forms

(...) one can talk about people's intended meanings, their assumptions, their purposes or goals,

and the kinds of actions (for example, requests) that they are performing when they speak (ibid.)

In one way or another all these disciplines began to question several aspects of language use to

which the grammatical theory of Saussure or Chomsky, for instance, could not give an appropriate

answer. These disciplines, together with Psycholinguistics, Sociolinguistics, and others have

contributed to a better understanding of language use in the last two decades. They have focused

on the problems of meaning, of psychological processes that lead to the production and

understanding of a message, of the way a conversation is organised and works, and of the role of

paralinguistic and non-verbal elements in communicative exchanges.

It was not until the 1980s, though, that all these disciplines began to work in the same direction and at

the same pace, integrating their contributions and offering a new model that reflects the view of

language as communication.

C. The third view of language can be called the interactional view. The view of language as

communication is a complex one. A key concept to understand is that of language as action, that is,

"we do things with words"; this idea arises from the theory of "speech acts" developed by language

philosophers such as J.L. Austin (1962) and J.R. Searle (1969). They advocated that language is much

more than the transmission of information or meaning (locutionary act), since it also expresses an

intention (illocutionary act) and produces an effect on the listener (perlocutionary act).

This view sees language as a vehicle for the realisation of interpersonal relations and for the

performance of social transactions between individuals. Language is seen as a tool for the creation

and maintenance of social relations. Areas of inquiry being drawn on in the development of

interactional approaches to language teaching include interaction analysis, conversation analysis,

and ethnomethodology. Interactional theories focus on the patterns of moves, acts, negotiation, and

interaction found in conversational exchanges.

1.4.2 Beliefs about the process of language learning/acquisition

As regards language theory, we are concerned with a model of language competence and an

account of the basic features of linguistic organisation and language use. As regards learning theory,

we are concerned with an account of the central processes of learning and an account of the

conditions believed to promote successful language learning. These principles may or may not lead

to a method by themselves (see Community Language Learning or Total Physical Response in Unit 3).

The actual process involved in acquiring/learning a language is one of the issues that has caused the

most debate concerning language teaching, and it is a debate which continues to the present day.

For this reason we have devoted an entire subject of the course to this topic (Second Language

Acquisition). Nevertheless, we will analyse those issues in language acquisition that are directly

related to the different methods and approaches discussed in this subject.

Theories of language learning have influenced decisions as to the optimal location of classroom

activities on continua like the following:

a) deductive...........................inductive

The advent of the cognitive approach meant a change of direction from teaching the structures of

the language (deductive) towards making the learner aware of how the language works (inductive),

thus avoiding the direct study of grammatical rules.

b) analytic..............................experiential

During the last two decades there has been a debate about the convenience of adopting an

analytical point of view (focused on the foreign or second language) versus an experiential point of

view (focused on communication). From the 1980s communication has become a common strategy

in the foreign or second language (L2) classroom.

c) habit formation................naturalistic acquisition

The behaviourist theory of learning, so popular in the 1950s and 1960s, was based on repetition and

memorisation techniques. In contrast, Krashen's Monitor Theory (1981) distinguished between

"acquisition" as an unconscious process similar to the process of learning an L1, and "learning" as the

conscious knowledge of formal linguistic rules and how these work.

The concern for knowing how a speaker acquires his/her linguistic competence had already been

raised by Chomsky and his psycholinguistic theories: he rejected the behaviourist view of language

learning and focused his studies on the discovery of language learning processes, asserting that:

· the process of learning an L2 is similar to that of learning an L1.

· the process of linguistic acquisition responds to a mechanism of contrasting hypotheses with

real language use; mistakes show that rules are being internalised.

Despite his above proposals, Chomsky famously voiced the following doubts about the relevance of

his work for language teaching:

I am, frankly, rather sceptical about the significance, for the teacher of languages, of such

insights and understanding as have been attained in Linguistics and Psychology. Surely the

teacher of language would do well to keep informed of progress and discussion in these

fields, and the efforts of linguists and psychologists to approach the problems of language

teaching from a principled point of view are extremely worthwhile, from an intellectual as

well as a social point of view. Still, it is difficult to believe that either Linguistics or Psychology

has achieved a level of theoretical understanding that might enable it to support a

'technology' of language teaching. (Chomsky, 1966)

Ironically, however, Chomsky's ideas are cited as the stimulus for many a development in language

teaching since the mid 1960s.

It goes without saying that no approach to language teaching can have any credibility without firm

foundations in a theory of how language is learnt, for this will inform decisions on all aspects of any

language teaching programme.

1.5 At the level of "method"

In the following units we will be analysing the different methods and approaches and will be

considering the various aspects that characterise them.

1.5.1 The objectives of a method

Most 'off the shelf' methods include some information about the syllabus to be followed and the

learning objectives to be achieved. Depending on the goals of language learning, decisions may

include whether to:

· focus on language-using skills;

· focus on knowledge about language;

· focus on specific situational abilities;

· focus on general competence;

· include aspects of the culture and/or literature of the target language community.

1.5.2 The role of language and grammar

We will refer to how language content is selected and organised within the method or, in other

words, the syllabus model incorporated by the method. We will also have a look at the different types

of learning tasks and teaching activities the method advocates. This is perhaps the variable in which

methods can most easily be seen to differ as this is the interface between more theoretical principles

and practice in the classroom. Techniques and activities are the trademarks of methods.

1.5.3 The roles of learners and teachers

Again we can often see quite radical differences between approaches in the way teacher and

learner roles are specified. Naturally some aspects of teacher role will depend not so much on the

method as on the expectations of the learners, the institution and society. Teacher role can also be

culturally determined (see Unit 5).

The most important distinction we find in learner roles is whether learners are seen as passive empty

vessels to be filled from the 'fountain of wisdom', -the teacher-, or whether learners are seen as active

determiners of their own learning who need little more than guidance and support from their

teacher.

1.5.4 The role of instructional materials

This is another characteristic by which differing approaches are easily identified: a quick flick through

any collection of language teaching materials should be sufficient to uncover its methodological

provenance. While a textbook may be the cornerstone of one method, other methods may require

teachers to select or produce their own materials according to the current needs of their students,

but within certain guidelines, and yet other methods, for example Counselling Language Learning,

may consider it unnecessary to have any materials other than those the learners themselves

produce.

1.6 A few notes on the subject

Within each unit our aim has been to present a comprehensive picture of a particular approach or

method. Some of these methods/approaches have been more popular than others. Some of the

methods examined in the following units include an extensive historical background; when this is

considered to be less relevant, we have stressed linguistic, psychological or educational traditions.

UNIT 2 – THE EARLY METHODS

2.1 Introduction

The purpose of this unit is to review the early history of language teaching methods; we will provide

you with a background for discussion and suggest the issues to keep in mind when analysing these

methods. This is an easy, but also rather dangerous task since one tends to disdain these methods for

being old-fashioned when, in fact, they were very modern when they emerged. Sometimes a closer

reading of old books on language teaching may well surprise; reading Jespersen or Comenius can

give you the impression that what they are saying are great new ideas from the late 1990s. These two

have much in common with each other, although 250 years apart, and the reader will notice many

details and attitudes which are specific to the age, but which coincide with modern ideas.

Like educational systems, methodologies are a product of their times and are equally rooted in the

ideas of their time. And in the same way that ideas have the habit of coming and going out of

fashion, methodologies also go out of fashion. In fact, it is society that determines the content of

education, in the light of the dominant philosophy and (more recently) scientific concepts. Changes

in language teaching methods throughout history have reflected changes in the kind of proficiency

learners need. They have also reflected changes in theories of the nature of language and of

language learning.

This unit will look at the different features of the early methods in the history of language teaching,

the sociological and historical context in which they developed, and their advantages and

disadvantages seen, of course, from the perspective of time.

2.2 Before the 19th century: the need for a method

For many centuries the study of a second language was focused on only two languages, Latin and

Greek. In medieval Europe these languages were learned for the written communication among

scholars, and from the Renaissance on they were the key to all learning, literature, and philosophy.

In the 17th century the European vernacular languages started to gain increasing importance as a

result of political changes in Europe, and their diffusion through the new technology of printing

meant a gradual separation of functions: Latin was still the key to literature and thought, and the

vernacular languages took over their social role as languages of everyday communication. So

methods were adapted to roles: the study of Latin and Greek was relegated to an intellectual

discipline. Latin was no longer used for communication purposes and its study was focused on

learning the grammatical rules and translation (reading and writing). On the other hand, modern

languages were taught by oral methods.

There were occasional attempts to promote alternative approaches to education; Roger Ascham

and Montaigne in the sixteenth century, and Comenius and John Locke in the seventeenth century,

for example, had made specific proposals for curriculum reform and for changes in the way Latin

was taught. The most famous language teacher and methodologist of this time was the Moravian

Jan A. Comenius (1592-1670) and it is significant that his concern was initially with the teaching of

Latin and his works were written in Latin. He gave great importance to the senses and how these, in

combination with the word, helped to understand meaning; physical activity was also important in

the classroom. He is best known for the use of pictures to make language learning meaningful, as a

substitute for the real thing. One of his works, Orbis sensualium pictus (1654), contains a sequence of

numbered picture vocabulary items. Much in Comenius is quite surprisingly modern:

The exemplar should always come first, the precept should always follow, and imitation should always

be insisted on.

The short before the long, the simple before the complex, the general before the particular,

the nearer before the more remote, the regular before the irregular (quoted in Jelinek 1953).

He adopted an inductive approach and was obviously more concerned about teaching the use of

the language than about analysing the language. In his opinion grammar was secondary and the

language classroom was a place where the senses rather than the mind came first. He preferred to

use imitation instead of memorising grammar rules as learning techniques. Initially he would present

his students a limited vocabulary that would become more complex with time. From his point of view,

students needed to be given the opportunity to practise reading and speaking in the classroom.

And yet by the end of his life Comenius was proposing the derivation of language from a pre-learned

set of rules of grammar. What had in fact happened was the dawn of the Age of Reason. As W.

Rowlinson (1994:9) puts it, language for the Cartesian man of reason was governed by logic:

the basic rules of one language were the same as those of all languages. They were embedded in

its grammar and the art of translation was a central one, involving the manipulation of universals.

The grammar-translation method was born as a new, insightful way of approaching language

learning that was exactly in tune with the times, with their emphasis on the primacy of reason, law,

and logic.

2.3 The Grammar-Translation Method

2.3.1 Background

The Grammar-Translation Method emerged in Prussia at the end of the 18th century and became

firmly entrenched in the 19th century. Howatt (1984) points out that the first known text based on this

method dates from 1793 and its author was Johan Christian Fick.

It was rooted in the formal teaching of Latin and Greek. The modern languages were accepted as

recognised areas of study, as a key to a great literature and culture and as being of equal value for

the training of the mind. The teaching methods of these ancient languages were used to teach

modern languages, the same grammatical terminology and techniques were adopted: textbooks

consisted of statements of abstract grammar rules, lists of vocabulary, and sentences for translation.

Nowadays these techniques are still being used, although they are usually combined with other

techniques.

2.3.2 Objectives

The aim of the course was to train students to read literature written in the foreign language and to

write the foreign language accurately. There was very little opportunity to practise the language

orally by means of listening or speaking activities; there was just occasional reading-aloud practice.

2.3.3 A structure-based methodology

Analysing the grammar system of a language was based on deduction techniques: the rules were

first explained, the students learnt them, and afterwards examples were provided. A typical textbook

thus consisted of chapters or lessons organised around grammar points. The linguistic unit on which

language teaching was based was the sentence.

Translation was the technique used to extract meaning from texts and the basic activities developed

in the classroom consisted of teaching grammar rules, and of regular practice in translating

sentences like the following into and out of the target language (L2):

My sons have bought the mirrors.

The cat of my aunt is more treacherous than the dog of your uncle.

The learning process can be summarised as follows: the students try to understand the logic of the

grammar. For this they learn the rules and the exceptions by heart and memorise vocabulary lists.

The result of their learning was an artificial language which would not be considered natural but

literary by a native speaker. The communicative skills were neglected and using the language

actively to express their own meanings was not a learning objective, which is why pronunciation and

intonation were also neglected.

Teachers were more preoccupied with written exercises and lengthy bilingual lists of vocabulary. The

written exercises were repetitive and the language presented was academic and unreal. The most

immediate aim of the teacher was the completion of all the exercises in each lesson and covering all

the lessons contained in the book.

The students' native language (L1) was the medium of instruction and it was used to explain new

items and to enable comparisons to be made between the two languages. The foreign language

was not used in the class to any extent, the only exception being stereotyped reading

comprehension exercises, since students drew the sentences directly from the text in order to answer

the questions.

2.3.4 Teacher and learner roles

The teaching activity was focused on the teacher as he becomes the most relevant figure within the

classroom. He gives a lot of importance to error correction and always looks for grammatical and

lexical accuracy, as the students are expected to attain high standards in translation. However, the

teacher's role in the classroom was not very demanding, since he had no need to be imaginative or

creative in planning the lessons.

On the other hand, the student's role was a passive one: they absorbed the information supplied by

the teacher and afterwards they had to reproduce it in order to satisfy the teacher.

In the mid- and late nineteenth century opposition to the Grammar-Translation Method gradually

developed in several European countries. This Reform Movement, as it was referred to, laid the

foundations for the development of new ways of teaching languages and raised controversies that

have continued to the present day.

2.4 Language teaching innovations in the nineteenth century

In Germany, England, France, and other parts of Europe, new approaches to language teaching

were developed by individual language teaching specialists, each with a specific method for

reforming the teaching of modern languages. Some of these specialists, like C. Marcel, T.

Prendergast, and F. Gouin, did not manage to achieve any lasting impact, though their ideas are of

historical interest.

The work of individual language specialists like these reflects the changing climate of the times in

which they worked. Educators recognised the need for speaking proficiency rather than reading

comprehension, grammar, or literary appreciation as the goal for foreign language programmes;

there was an interest in how children learn languages, which prompted attempts to develop

teaching principles from the observation of child language learning.

But the ideas and methods of Marcel, Prendergast, Gouin, and other innovators were developed

outside the context of established circles of education and hence lacked the means for wider

diffusion, acceptance, and implementation. They were writing at a time when there was not

sufficient organisational structure in the language teaching profession (i.e. in the form of professional

associations, journals, and conferences) to enable new ideas to develop into an educational

movement.

This began to change toward the end of the nineteenth century, however, when more concerted

efforts arose in which the interests of reform-minded language teachers, and linguists, coincided.

Teachers and linguists began to write about the need for new approaches to language teaching,

and through their books, speeches, and articles, the foundation for more widespread pedagogical

reforms was laid. This effort became known as the Reform Movement in language teaching.

2.5 The Reform Movement

From the 1880s, however, linguists like Henry Sweet in England, Wilhelm Viëtor in Germany, and Paul

Passy in France, moving into a more pragmatic and more communicative approach, began to

provide the intellectual leadership needed to give reformist ideas greater credibility and

acceptance. The discipline of Linguistics was revitalised. Phonetics (the scientific analysis and

description of the sound systems of languages) was established, providing new insights into speech

processes. The International Phonetic Association was founded in 1886, and its International Phonetic

Alphabet (IPA) was designed to enable accurate sound transcription for any language. One of the

earliest goals of the association was to improve the teaching of modern languages. In order to do so,

the members of the association advocated:

· the study of the spoken language;

· phonetic training in order to establish good pronunciation habits;

· the use of conversation texts and dialogues to introduce conversational phrases and

idioms;

· an inductive approach to the teaching of grammar

Henry Sweet argued that sound methodological principles should be based on a scientific analysis of

language and a study of psychology. Some of the recommendations contained in his book The

Practical Study of Languages (1899) include arranging what is to be taught in terms of the four skills of

listening, speaking, reading and writing, and grading materials from simple to complex.

In Germany the scholar Wilhem Viëtor published his views in an influential article Language Teaching

Must Start Afresh, which later became the `bible' of the Direct Method.

In 1890 Viëtor himself organised the first national conference that gathered together modern

language teachers concerned about changing the teaching of foreign languages in the direction of

language for "communication". Two years later they formed the Modern Languages Association.

2.5.1 The influence of Phonetics in foreign language teaching

Viëtor, Sweet, and other reformers in the late nineteenth century criticised the grammar-translation

method and shared many beliefs about the principles on which a new approach to teaching foreign

languages should be based:

Well, language teaching methods at present are not much better... Their principal aim is to

teach the contents of the school grammar book and a necessary fund of vocabulary... A list of

grammatical rules is apportioned to each 'lesson' or 'chapter'. (Viëtor 1886, in A.P. Howatt

1984: 355)

... even if you succeeded in stuffing the pupils' heads with the best grammars and the most

comprehensive dictionaries, they still would not know the language! As the well known

philologist Sayce (1879:93) says: 'Language consists of sounds, not of letters, and until this fact is

thoroughly impressed upon the mind, it is useless to expect that languages will ever be studied

alright. Language, moreover, is formed and moulded by the unconscious action of the

community as a whole, and like the life of the community is in constant state of change and

development. Consequently, we cannot compress the grammar of a language into a series of

rigid rules...'. (ibid: 347)

However, they often differed considerably in the specific procedures they advocated for teaching a

language. In general terms they believed that:

1. the spoken language is primary and that this should be reflected in an oral-based

methodology;

2. the findings of phonetics should be applied to teaching and to teacher training;

3. learners should hear the language first, before seeing it in written form;

4. words should be presented in sentences, and sentences should be practised in meaningful

contexts and not be taught as isolated, disconnected elements;

5. the rules of grammar should be taught only after the students have practised the grammar

points in context - that is, grammar should be taught inductively;

6. translation should be avoided, although the mother tongue could be used in order to

explain new words or to check comprehension. (in Richards & Rodgers 1986: 8)

These tenets provided the theoretical foundations for a principled approach to language teaching

and reflect the beginnings of the discipline of Applied Linguistics - that branch of language study

concerned with the scientific study of Second and Foreign Language Teaching and Learning. None

of their proposals assumed the status of a method, however, although many of these tenets were

unofficially taken on board in a wide variety of language teaching contexts.

2.6 The Direct Method

In the middle of the 19th century the origins of what would become the Direct Method were

developed by J.S. Blackie, a Scottish teacher, who in the 1850s was advocating the avoidance of

the mother tongue, the direct association of word with object, and the relegation of grammar to a

subordinate position.

At that time international relation in the fields of Politics and Commerce above all, were gaining

increasing relevance. It seems logical then that the interest was in stressing the ability to use the

foreign language rather than in analysing it. Besides, the fact that the grammar-translation method

did not have interpersonal communication as one of its main goals, made it unsuitable for students

who were not from an academic background.

2.6.1 Its origins as a natural method

The new trends in developing principles for language teaching and learning out of naturalistic

principles in first language learning, led to what has been termed natural methods, and ultimately this

became known as the direct method. Sauveur and others argued that a foreign language could be

taught without translation or the use of the learner's native tongue (L1) if meaning was conveyed

directly through demonstration and action. According to the German scholar F. Franke, a language

could best be taught by encouraging direct, spontaneous and active use of the foreign language in

the classroom.

In his book How to Teach a Foreign Language Otto Jespersen, Professor of English at the University of

Copenhagen, advocated:

... natural, useful language material, careful listening, direct association of word or object and

idea, grammar derived from the language known, and the foreign language as the principal if

not only means of communication in the classroom. (in Rowlinson 1994:11).

2.6.2 Main features

The term "Direct Method" is more widely used than "Direct Approach"; however, the former is a

misnomer, since it is really an approach, not a method, if we follow Anthony's terminology. The Direct

Method became widely known in the United States through its use by Maximillian Berlitz in successful

commercial language schools. In these schools oral interaction was promoted and translation

exercises and the use of the native language (L1) were disclaimed.

The techniques used in these schools are known as the Direct Method, although Berlitz, for instance,

did not use the term; he referred to the method used in his schools as the Berlitz Method.

The main aim of this method is for students to learn the language of everyday life. Students learn

grammar inductively, since they learn grammar rules through practice, by means of using the

language at the functional level, and not through memorisation.

From a theoretical point of view this method was very much based on the linguistic theories of the

time, which considered the oral language and Phonetics as important components in the teaching

and learning process of a foreign language. The students learn to understand a language by

listening to a great deal of it, and they learn to speak it, by speaking it. Oral communication skills are

built up in a carefully graded progression organised around question-and-answer exchanges

between teachers and students in small, intensive classes.

Unlike the Grammar-Translation Method, the native language is totally avoided in the foreign

language classroom and the foreign language is the medium of instruction. The Direct Method

advocates learning by the direct association of foreign words and phrases with objects and actions

or, in other words, speech is associated to appropriate action. This means that students have to

understand meaning without translation and the teacher has to use a series of resources to make

meaning clear, using miming, sketches or explanations in order to clarify the meaning of abstract

vocabulary.

At the early stages, students are encouraged to handle complete meaningful sentences as part of

simple discourse. First of all, students learn words and phrases for objects and actions. Then, they learn

common situations and settings of everyday life through constructed pictures. The ultimate aim is to

develop the ability to think in the foreign language.

Because of the importance given to the oral language, Phonetics also played an important role,

correct intonation became a key focus of interest, and pronunciation models from native speakers

were promoted. The students are taught the new sound system right from the beginning and are

encouraged to do phonetic transcription. Both speech and listening comprehension are taught.

Reading is not given as much relevance as speaking, so reading activities always take place after

oral/aural activities and are about the topics previously discussed. Reading activities are then used to

reinforce new words and situations that are always first presented to the students orally. If there is a

word that students do not understand, this is never translated; on the contrary, students are

encouraged to infer meaning of unknown words from the context.

2.6.3 The decline of the Direct Method

By the 1920s the Direct Method was becoming less popular in the USA, and some survey studies

(Coleman Report, 1929) encouraged reading activities as being more effective techniques for

foreign-language teaching. In Britain only some of the precepts and techniques were adopted and

mixed with the traditional approach, so we could say that the Direct Method was never properly

implemented. The fact that schools and universities were moving towards traditional examinations

which were less focused on oral communication also contributed to the loss of popularity of the

Direct Method which was, however, very successful in Germany.

When evaluating this method, Richards & Rodgers (1986) refer to the Direct Method as the first

attempt to turn foreign language learning into a situation of language use. The fact that the native

language was avoided in the classroom in favour of the L2 made it possible to develop new

techniques that are still being used nowadays, such as dictation, imitation, and answer exercises.

In the 1920s and 1930s applied linguists systematised the principles proposed earlier by the Reform

Movement and so laid the foundations for what developed into the British approach to Teaching

English as a Foreign Language. Subsequent developments led to Audiolingualism in the United States

and the Oral Approach, or Situational Language Teaching, in Britain.

2.7 The Reading Method

Given the skills and limitations of most language teachers, the Reading Approach to language

teaching was seen as a better option. In the 1920s several studies were carried out by West (1926)

and Coleman (1929) and in their reports they stated that most American students learnt a foreign

language for two years only; during these two years the only attainable objective was the

development of the reading ability, as this was the skill that offered fewer difficulties in the context of

secondary school teaching.

The Reading Method focused on the systematic teaching of reading comprehension. The students

were trained to read the foreign language with direct apprehension of meaning, but without a

conscious effort to translate. It was expected that students would use the same techniques they had

used when learning to read in their native language. So, if there were any words the students did not

understand, they would infer meaning from the context.

Reading could either be intensive or extensive:

a) The intensive reading tasks were continuously supervised by the teacher, who would check the

degree of comprehension achieved. The intensive reading also provided source material for

grammatical study and for the acquisition of vocabulary.

b) Extensive reading activities were also part of the learning process. In this case the students would

read on their own texts graded to their language level; these materials contained controlled

vocabulary and syntax structures. The extensive reading led the way to undertaking class projects,

which were valuable from the pedagogical point of view.

Writing was limited to exercises where the students had the opportunity to use some of the

vocabulary and essential structures also necessary to understand the text.

The study of grammar was supposed to be directed to the needs of the reader, so there was no

need for active reproduction; the most important thing was the quick recognition of certain verb

forms, tenses, negations, and so on.

Some importance was also given to correct pronunciation, since there was oral practice related to a

text: students had to read the text aloud or to do exercises consisting of questions and answers.

As with the Grammar-Translation Method, the Reading Method had limited objectives and tended to

give a false impression of the level of language and reading skills acquired by the student. As oral

communication was secondary, students were usually unable to comprehend and speak the

language beyond the very simplest exchanges.

2.8 Oral Approach or Situational Approach

After fifteen years or so the Direct Method was not living up to expectations and, as a result of a

series of modifications introduced, a new variant of the Direct Method emerged. The Oral Approach

is focused on the theories developed in England between the 1930s and the 1960s. Two of the

leaders in this movement were Harold Palmer and A. S. Hornby, who were familiar with the work of

such linguists as Otto Jespersen and Daniel Jones, as well as with the Direct Method. What they

attempted was to develop a more scientific foundation for an oral approach to teaching English

than was evidenced in the Direct Method. The result was a systematic study of the principles and

procedures that could be applied to the selection and organisation of the content of a language

course (Palmer 1917, 1921).

Palmer saw the need to tailor the language course to the aims of the actual students rather than to

some abstract goal:

We cannot design a language course until we know something about the students for whom the

course is intended, for a programme of study depends on the aim or the aims of the students.

He realised that what coursebook and teacher intend is different from what each individual student

learns.

One of the most active proponents of the Oral Approach in the sixties was the Australian George

Pittman. Pittman and his colleagues developed an influential set of teaching materials based on the

situational approach, which were widely used in Australia, New Guinea, and the Pacific territories.

Pittman was also responsible for the situationally based materials developed by the Commonwealth

Office of Education in Sydney, Australia, used in the English programmes for immigrants in Australia. In

1965 these materials were published as the series Situational English.

Alexander and other leading British textbook writers also developed materials that reflected the

principles of Situational Language Teaching.

Our principal classroom activity in the teaching of English structure will be the oral practice of

structures. This oral practice of controlled sentence patterns should be given in situations designed

to give the greatest amount of practice in English speech to the pupil. (Pittman 1963: 179)

Although from the learning point of view the British linguists were closer to behaviourism, their theory

of language was similar to that proposed by American linguists. The British linguists, however, had their

own version of structuralism, based on the notion of "situation":

By situation Pittman means the use of concrete objects, pictures, and realia, which together

with actions and gestures can be used to demonstrate the meanings of new language items.

(in Richards & Rodgers 1986: 38)

2.8.1 Main features

The main characteristics of the approach were as follows:

1. The first step in the learning process was to become familiar with the new sound system and to

understand simple spoken language and the use of simple speech patterns; students carried out

listening and speaking activities containing simple phrases.

2. The target language (L2) was the language of instruction and the native language (L1) was to be

avoided. However, in order to correct some of the flaws they had observed in the language

teaching system of the Direct Method, they accepted the use of the native language when

explaining the meaning of some words or some grammar points of a strictly functional kind.

3. Palmer viewed grammar as the underlying sentence patterns of the spoken language. Palmer,

Hornby, and other British applied linguists analysed English and classified its major grammatical

structures into sentence patterns (later called "substitution tables"), which could be used to help

internalise the rules of English sentence structure.

They also considered that it was necessary to add more practice of grammatical structures, and

these were introduced gradually from simple forms to complex ones, offering opportunities for

practising them in situational contexts.

4. Likewise, vocabulary was graded to ensure that an essential general service vocabulary was

covered. The efforts to introduce a scientific and rational basis for choosing the vocabulary content

of a language course represented the first attempts to establish principles of syllabus design in

language teaching.

5. Reading and writing were introduced once a sufficient lexical and grammatical basis was

established. Occasional translation was allowed as a checking method on comprehension of precise

details in reading.

Unlike the Direct Method or the Reading Method, which gave much more importance to speaking

and reading respectively, the Oral Approach sought a balance between the development of the

four linguistic skills at all stages: oral comprehension, writing comprehension, oral production and

writing production, although the emphasis remained on oral presentations.

The impact of the Oral Approach has been long lasting, and it has shaped the design of many

widely used EFL/ESL textbooks and courses, including many still being used today, for example,

Streamline English (Harticy and Viney 1979), one of the most successful ESL courses of recent times.

2.9 The Audio-Lingual Method

2.9.1 Its origins: the "Army Method"

Until the Second World War the teaching method that dominated was the reading-based approach

with little place for oral communication. Sentence patterns and grammar were introduced at the

whim of the textbook writer. There was no standardisation of the vocabulary or grammar that was

included. Neither was there a consensus on what grammar, sentence patterns, and vocabulary were

most important for beginning, intermediate, or advanced learners.

But the war made it imperative for the US military to teach foreign language learners to speak and

understand a language quickly and efficiently. The existing methods at that time were not

considered suitable to promote the communicative needs which had arisen as a consequence of

war, so the "American Council of Learned Societies" created a linguistic programme called "ASTP"

("Army Specialised Training Programme") in 1941. This programme offered instruction for 50 different

languages to 100,000 members of the Army who were expected to acquire oral competence in

several languages by means of using a combination of techniques from the different existing

methods, such as the Direct Method, audio-visual media (films, radio, and so on), and recordings.

Following the training programmes developed by linguists, such as Leonard Bloomfield at Yale, and

designed to give linguists and anthropologists mastery of American Indian languages, the "ASTP" also

combined grammatical instruction carried out by specialist teachers, conversational practice and

'drills' carried out by native speakers of the language.

The "methodology" of the Army Method implied intensive contact with the target language (=ten

hours a day, six days a week) in small classes of mature and highly motivated students, which is why

such excellent results were often achieved and the programme was very successful. Its adaptation to

the secondary school environment, on the contrary, was problematic: first, the schools did not have

the technical equipment, language teaching only occupied a small percentage of the timetable,

and teachers were not native speakers of the foreign language; second, the number of students in

each class was higher than in the "ASTP", and the degree of students' motivation was lower than that

of the army members.

Despite the difficulties in adapting it as a method, the success of the "ASTP", together with the

linguistic needs of foreign students in the American universities led to the development of a new

method in foreign language teaching in the US in the 1950s: Audiolingualism.

2.9.2 What is the basis of Audiolingualism?

The history of the Audiolingual Method is linked to the Institute of English Language at the University of

Michigan, created in 1939. One of the linguists from this university, Charles Fries, was trained in

structural linguistics, and he applied the principles of structural linguistics to language teaching. The

new approach for language learning was first coined as the "Oral Approach", the "Aural-Oral

Method" or the "Structural Approach"; later on the combination of structural linguistic theory,

contrastive analysis, aural-oral procedures, and behaviourist psychology led to the "Audiolingual

Method", a term coined in 1964 by Professor Nelson Brooks. Although many of its aspects may seem

similar to those of the British Oral Approach, both traditions developed independently.

It was in the 1960s that the Audiolingual Method reached its greatest popularity.

2.9.2.1 The influence of Structuralism

Structuralists considered language as a system of interrelated elements (phonemes, morphemes,

words, structures and sentence types) that encode meaning. Fries, for instance, regarded grammar,

or "structure," as the starting point.

The term "structural" was used to refer to the following characteristics:

· Elements in a language were thought of as being linearly produced in a rule-governed (structured)

way.

· Language samples could be exhaustively described at any structural level of description (phonetic,

phonemic, morphological, etc.).

· Linguistic levels were thought of as systems within systems - that is, as being pyramidally structured;

phonemic systems led to morphemic systems, and these in turn led to the higher-level systems of

phrases, clauses, and sentences.

As a result, language learning for structuralists meant the command of the language components

and learning the rules by which these components are combined.

An important tenet of structural linguistics was that the primary medium of language is oral:

Language is Speech. In 1961 the American linguist William Moulton, in a report prepared for the 9th

International Congress of Linguists, proclaimed the linguistic principles on which language teaching

methodology should be based:

Language is speech, not writing.... A language is a set of habits.... Teach the language, not

about the language.... A language is what its native speakers say, not what someone thinks

they ought to say.... Languages are different. (quoted in Rivers 1964: 5).

For this reason, they gave systematic attention to pronunciation and intensive oral repetition or

drilling of basic sentence patterns.

2.9.2.2 The influence of Contrastive Analysis

Although many of the aspects of the Audiolingual Method might seem similar to those of the British

Oral Approach, both traditions developed independently; the Audiolingual Method is much more

related to the American Structuralist Linguistics and to some theories of Applied Linguistics such as the

Contrastive Analysis.

This theory has been decisive in the development of the Audiolingual method. In the subject Second

Language Acquisition you can find more detailed information, so in this unit we will only refer to it

briefly.

Contrastive Analysis consists of the comparison of structures from the student's native language (L1)

and those of the foreign language (L2) in order to find out which structures are similar in both

languages, so that they can be transferred, and to predict which could cause potential problems of

interference for being different. In order to avoid errors resulting from differences between the

grammatical and phonological patterns of the mother tongue and the target language, teaching

materials were carefully prepared and drills were created containing the structures regarded as

problematic in learning a foreign language.

2.9.2.3 The influence of Behaviourist Psychology

A method cannot be based simply on a theory of language; it also needs to refer to the psychology

of learning and to learning theory. From a psychological point of view, the Audiolingual method is

based on the theory of verbal knowledge that comes from behaviourist theories. Behaviourists

thought language was an activity learned in social life, consisting of a set of habits established by

stimulus, response, reinforcement and reward. As a result, great importance was given to the

practice of repetition and imitation, and reinforcement was an essential element in the learning

process, as it increased the likelihood that the behaviour would occur again and eventually become

a habit. A representation of this can be seen in the figure below.

.

Reinforcement (behavior likely to occur again and

become a habit)

stimulus organism response

behaviour

No reinforcement/negative reinforcement (behavior

not likely to occur again)

Figure 2.1: Representation of behaviourism applied to language learning (Richards & Rodgers 1986: 50)

To apply this theory to language learning Richards & Rodgers (1986) identify the stimulus as what is

taught or presented of the foreign language, the organism as the foreign language learner, the

behaviour as verbal behaviour, the response as the learner's reaction to the stimulus, and the

reinforcement as the approval and praise of the teacher or fellow students or the self-satisfaction of

target language use. Language mastery is represented then as acquiring a set of appropriate

language stimulus-response chains.

2.9.3 Objectives

Brooks distinguishes between short-range and long-range objectives in an audiolingual programme.

Short-range objectives include training in listening comprehension, accurate pronunciation,

recognition of speech symbols as graphic signs on the printed page, and ability to reproduce these

symbols in writing (Brooks 1964: 111). Long-range objectives:

must be language as the native speaker uses it.... There must be some knowledge of a

second language as it is possessed by a true bilingualist. (Brooks 1964: 107)

In practice this means that the focus in the early stages is on oral skills, with gradual links to other skills

as learning develops. The teaching of listening comprehension, pronunciation, grammar, and

vocabulary are all related to the development of oral fluency. Oral proficiency is equated with

accurate pronunciation and grammar and the ability to respond quickly and accurately in speech

situations.

2.9.4 Main features

2.9.4.1 Types of activities

Audiolingualists based their theories on the observation of a corpus of a particular language in order

to describe its sound patterns and the possibilities of word combination. This descriptive approach led

them to research what people really say in their mother tongue. The audiolingualists took as a model

the way a child acquires these habits. Children learn a language, and all the social rules which are

complementary to it, in spoken form. This idea led them to think that students acquire the foreign

language more easily if it is in the spoken form.

Teaching was therefore based on dialogues that contained commonly-used every-day expressions

and basic structures. These dialogues provided a means of contextualising key structures and

illustrating situations in which structures might be used as well as some cultural aspects of the target

language.

Dialogues and pattern drills were learned by a process of mimicry and memorisation: first as a group,

then in smaller groups and finally individually. The benefits of these procedures were the relatively

high motivation of students, as the drilling protects them from their initial embarrassment and

minimises mistakes.

Students were more encouraged to focus on the mastery of the phonological and grammatical

structures than on vocabulary: correct pronunciation, stress, rhythm, and intonation were

emphasised, as opposed to grammatical explanations. In the end students gained exhaustive

training in auditory memory and in discriminating between sounds. And even if at the beginning

learners could not understand the meaning of what they were repeating, the teacher believed that

by listening, imitating accurately and responding they were also learning.

Reading and writing skills were dependent upon previous oral skills. The reading tasks were at first an

adaptation or recombination of what students had learned orally. Writing was imitative, consisting of

transcriptions of words and dialogue sentences. It was not until much later that students were

encouraged to express themselves in short compositions, although these were always strictly

controlled in terms of content.

The use of the L1 was avoided in the classroom as much as possible, although it was never forbidden,

as was the case of the Direct Method. The treatment of error was an important component of the

learning process and sometimes students were not encouraged to speak in order to avoid mistakes.

2.9.4.2 Learner and Teacher roles

According to behaviourist learning theory, learners were believed to be capable of producing

correct responses after a period of skilled training. Thus, what really mattered was the results of their

learning and not the internal process of learning in itself.

Learners played an active role in the classroom by responding to stimuli; however, it was the teacher

who decided the contents of a lesson and the pace of learning, and who monitored and corrected

the learners' performance.

The teacher's role was therefore a central one, and it required inventiveness and resourcefulness so

as to encourage the practice of structures by means of different drills and tasks, and by choosing

relevant situations.

2.9.5 The role of materials

Instructional materials were primarily teacher oriented. In the elementary phases of a course a

student textbook was often not used as students were primarily listening, repeating, and responding.

Tape recorders and audio-visual equipment were often used in an audiolingual course: they

provided accurate models for listening practice. A dialogue was presented and students were

engaged in drilling exercises, repeating the dialogue sentence by sentence, or in follow-up fluency

drills on grammar or pronunciation.

Some schools even had language laboratories that provided students with opportunities for further

drill work and practice of basic structures.

2.9.6 The Audio-visual Method

The Audio-visual Method was used in several schools among which were the CREDIF ("Centre

Recherché et d'Etude pour la Diffusion du Français") in France, and the University of Zagreb in the

former Yugoslavia, both of which laid special emphasis on this method.

This method, developed from the 1950s, was very similar to the audiolingual method. Both methods

were based on structuralist and behaviourist theories, on contrastive analysis and on the emphasis of

oral and communicative aspects. But the Audio-visual method included some novelties in foreign

language teaching, for instance, the use of support materials such as films, slides, recordings or music

records.

The original element in this method came from the fact that it assumed the social and situational

nature of language. The target language was introduced in the foreign language classroom by

means of dialogues directly related to real life through images on a screen or combined with

recordings.

The Audio-visual method was well thought of for placing the learning of the language in a simplified

social context and for teaching the language as meaningful communication. Nevertheless, the

method has also been criticised for the difficulties implied in transmitting meaning through images

and for the strict sequential organisation of the learning process.

2.9.7 The decline of Audiolingualism

Audiolingualism led to widely used courses such as English 900 and the Lado English Series, as well as

to texts for teaching the major European languages. As a method, it provided a clear set of

procedures, methods and principles for teachers with little experience.

The strongest attack against audiolingual beliefs resulted from changes in American linguistic theory

in the sixties. The linguist Noam Chomsky rejected the structuralist approach to language description

as well as the behaviourist theory of language learning. In his opinion,

language is not a habit structure. Ordinary linguistic behaviour characteristically involves

innovation, formation of new sentences and patterns in accordance with rules of great

abstractness and intricacy. (Chomsky 1966: 153)

He gave more importance to the creative aspects of a language as reflected in first language

acquisition, and through his theory of Transformational Grammar he proposed that the fundamental

properties of language derive from innate aspects of the mind and from how humans process

experience through language.

Chomsky argued that much of human language use is not imitated behaviour but is created anew

from underlying knowledge of abstract rules.

Sentences are not learned by imitation and repetition but "generated" from the learner's underlying

"competence".

La gramática generativa ponía de manifiesto la insuficiencia del estructuralismo para reflejar

las características fundamentales del lenguaje, así como la del conductismo para explicar su

adquisición. El concepto de lenguaje como un sistema `gobernado por reglas' y de

adquisición del lenguaje como la internalización de dichas reglas echaba por tierra la noción

conductista de formación de un conjunto de hábitos lingüísticos (Zanón 1988: 49).

2.10 Cognitive code learning or Cognitive Approach

As a result of the critiques of the audiolingual method, linguists such as J.B. Carroll, K. Chastain and K.

Diller proposed a set of guidelines for language teaching; this was never a method, but it was based

on theoretical principles about a particular view of language and of the nature of linguistic learning.

They looked for the support of current disciplines such as generative-transformational grammar and

cognitive psychology.

The changes affected the procedures of language learning more than the objectives. From the very

beginning the objective of language teaching was to give the same importance to the four skills,

and the contents were focused on the grammatical component, with special relevance granted to

morphology and syntax within the sentence. Some of the theoretical underpinnings of the Cognitive

Approach were:

1. Conscious learning of the language system is promoted: learners need to have control of the

language rules in order to be able to generate their own language in new situations (the principle of

creativity). In other words, learners need to understand the system of rules; thus grammar is explained

openly and is often contrasted with the first language. Making mistakes is viewed as part of the

process of achieving an understanding of rules.

2. Conscious focus on grammar acknowledges the role of abstract mental processes in learning

rather than defining learning simply in terms of habit formation.

3. Learning must go from the known to the unknown, so that the learners can familiarise themselves

with the rules first (knowledge) and apply them afterwards (performance). This means that learners

first deal with controlled comprehension and manipulation of linguistic forms for later use in real

communication situations. It is believed that if the students have a cognitive control over the

language structures, they will automatically develop the ability to use them in meaningful situations.

4. Learning must be meaningful (in contrast to the routine repetition of `drills'), it must be related to

the new materials and adapted to the learners needs. Thus learning is under the learner's control.

K. Chastain (1976), one of the authors who defined the principles of the cognitive approach in the

70s, summarises it as follows:

Proponents of a cognitive approach have as their first goal the development of `competence'

(as the term is used in T-G linguistics) in the second language learner. The means employed to

achieve this goal are based on mentalistic interpretations of learning. A cognitive teacher

accepts the fact that the native speaker does not have to think about language as such during

the communicative process, but she does not agree that the language was learned in the same

fashion. (...)

The second goal is to give students opportunities to develop functional, not necessarily perfect,

performance skills. The students need to be placed in situations in which they can activate their

interim learner language and compare the product with native language. They need to be given

many and continued opportunities to convert their thoughts into the second language, both in

writing and in speech, independently and in conversational interchanges.

Cognitive presentations of material and cognitive exercises are outgrowths of the belief that new

material must be presented in such a manner that the students are learning meaningfully.

Exercises are designed to give the students a chance to demonstrate comprehension as they

consciously select correct forms. The latter portion of any learning sequence contains materials

and activities in which the students are given the opportunity to communicate using what they

have learned. During the entire sequence, learning is viewed as primarily an internal process

assisted by the text and the teacher. (Chastain 1976: 159-160)

All these principles were strongly argued and this, once again, gave rise to new critiques and

research in an area of language teaching which is the most difficult to know about and in which

studies have been carried out during the last 20 years: the learning process. Many of the questions

debated by cognitive theory, such as the implicit/explicit teaching of grammar, or the control of rules

/ free acquisition, are still being debated today.

Although many have considered the changes implemented by the Cognitive Approach as

superficial, particularly those concerning techniques and classroom dynamics, it was widely

accepted in the United States, and many of the activities carried out in the classroom context

consisted of the combination of a structural `syllabus' with a cognitive approach and a variety of

communicative and personalised activities and strategies.

The term cognitive code is still sometimes invoked to refer to any conscious attempt to organise

materials around a grammatical syllabus while allowing for meaningful practice and use of

language.

2.11 Conclusion

The lack of an alternative to Audiolingualism in language teaching in the United States led to a

period of adaptation, innovation, experimentation, and some confusion. On the one hand, new

methods were developed under the influence of humanistic or holistic psychology, independently of

current linguistic and second language acquisition theory, (e.g., Total Physical Response, Silent Way,

Counselling-Learning); on the other, competing approaches were derived from contemporary

theories of language and second language acquisition (e.g., The Natural Approach, Communicative

Language Teaching). These developments will be considered in the remaining units.

UNIT 3 – MOST RECENT METHODS

3.1 Introduction

In the decade of the 70s we saw the boom of new approaches, new research looking for new

methodological principles and, as a result, new points of view among professionals in the field of

language teaching. During this period, the tendencies in the United States and in Europe followed

separate paths; the former were more under the influence of Psychology and Psycholinguistics (as

we shall see in this unit) and the latter were more concerned with a new vision of language. It will not

be until the decade of the 80s that the tendencies from the United States and from Europe meet

again in a general consensus under the communicative approach, as we shall see in Unit 4.

In the United States, there were several alternative methods that had a great impact (some of them

appeared in the 60s) and despite the differences between them, they all tried to offer new and

remarkably innovative solutions to the problem of how to learn a second language. Each of the

"innovative" approaches discussed below emerged as a reaction to conventional assumptions about

the structure of language, about how language is processed, about parameters such as memory,

emotion, motivation, etc., and also about teaching procedures.

Of the five approaches we will discuss, the first two have been pigeon-holed as Comprehension-

based Approaches, and the last three are considered Humanistic Approaches as they include the

affective component in language teaching.

· Total Physical Response (James Asher)

· Silent Way (Caleb Gateggno)

· Community Language Learning (Charles Curran)

· Suggestology or Suggestopedia (Georgi Lozanov)

· The Natural Approach (T. Terrel & S. Krashen)

There are, however, other interpretations and Nunan (1995), for instance, includes the Silent Way in

the humanistic tradition and the Natural Approach is identified under the second language

acquisition tradition.

The Comprehension-based approach is based on receptive skills (listening comprehension in

particular) and it does not attempt to train oral production specifically -oral fluency is expected to

emerge naturally and gradually. Learning to talk is not therefore the immediate and primary aim in

language learning, as it is expected that by improving receptive skills the learner will ultimately

acquire fluency and accuracy in talking.

The Humanistic approach is based on theories applied to `learner-centred teaching'.

Communication is seen as an element of motivation that fosters meaningful learning and as a factor

that determines personal growth. Humanistic techniques engage the whole person, including the

emotions and feelings (the affective realm) as well as linguistic knowledge and behavioural skills.

Moskowitz defines humanistic techniques as those that:

... blend what the student feels, thinks and knows with what he is learning in the target language.

Rather than self-denial being the acceptable way of life, self-actualisation and self-esteem are

the ideals the exercises pursue. [The techniques] help build rapport, cohesiveness, and caring that

far transcend what is already there... help students to be themselves, to accept themselves, and

be proud of themselves... help foster a climate of caring and sharing in the foreign language

class. (Moskowitz 1978: 2).

These methods meant a qualitative change in the field of language teaching: the learner became

the centre as an active person in the process of second language acquisition and as a determining

factor in teaching practice (individual differences, affective conditions, etc.).

In the United States the concern was particularly focused on the "learning" component and its

relations with "teaching". The influence of different psychological and psycholinguistic theories was

clear in the new methods; on the other hand, the linguistic component changed very little in relation

to what had been done in the 60s.

The idea of the learner as an individual (oriented towards Psycholinguistics) had more weight in the

American tendencies than the idea of the learner as a social being (oriented towards

Sociolinguistics) which was more popular in Europe.

3.2 Total Physical Response (TPR)

Since the turn of the 1960s many were the applied linguists who reacted against the formal and

highly artificial foreign language curricula and methods typical of that period.

Total Physical Response emerged in the 1960s and lasted until the late 80s; it was developed by

James J. Asher, a talented young research psychologist at San Jose State University, California, who

was particularly interested in comprehension and humanistic approaches.

3.2.2 Objectives

The general objectives of Total Physical Response are to teach oral proficiency at a beginning level.

Asher emphasised the development of comprehension skills in order to achieve a state of "inner

readiness" that fostered the natural acquisition of language and led to spontaneous development of

speech as soon as the learner felt ready for it. Ultimately, comprehension was a means to an end,

and the final aim was to teach basic speaking skills.

Specific instructional objectives were not elaborated, for these depended on the particular needs of

the learners.

3.2.3 Main features

3.2.3.1 Classroom activities

Initially, teaching activity was based on commands that the students heard first. Imperative drills such

as "Sit down" or "Stand up" were the major classroom activity in Total Physical Response. They were

typically used to elicit physical actions by the learners. The figure below will show you a sample

exercise that may be used in the TPR classroom.

Figure 3.1: Example of a Problem -Solving Task "Identify the box".

Conversational dialogues were delayed until after about 120 hours of instruction. Asher was of the

opinion that:

everyday conversations are highly abstract and disconnected; therefore to understand them

requires a rather advanced internalisation of the target language. (1977: 95)

Role plays and slide presentations were also introduced. The role plays provided a context for all sorts

of everyday situations that were familiar to the learners: the teacher acted as a narrator and the

students performed the actions. The slide presentations provided a visual support for teacher

narration, which was followed by commands, and for questions to students, such as "What is the dog

doing?" or "Where is the supermarket?".

Reading and writing activities were considered as complementary activities that helped consolidate

structures and vocabulary, and as follow-up activities to oral imperative drills.

3.2.3.2 The role of grammar and language

The exercises employed in TPR classes were hardly ever focused on specific grammatical or lexical

items. The emphasis was on meaning, and grammar, therefore, was learnt inductively. Grammatical

features and vocabulary items were selected not according to their frequency of need or use in

target language situations, but according to the situations in which they could be used in the

classroom and the ease with which they could be learned.

The criterion for including a vocabulary item or grammatical feature at a particular point in

training is a case of assimilation by students. If an item is not learned rapidly, this means that

the students are not ready for that item. Withdraw it and try again at a future time in the

training program. (Asher 1977: 42)

Occasionally, the instructor would draw attention to certain grammatical features and their

meaning. The central linguistic item was the verb, and particularly the imperative, as most of the drills

or repetition exercises used the imperative form.

Gradual learning came:

· through experiencing the language as an integral part of the action,

· through recognising the meaning of the command,

· by feeling ready to issue such a command,

· through noticing the separate words of which this and other commands were built up, as well

as their grammatical features; and then starting to use these in different combinations.

Mistake correction was not a primary concern. In the early stages teachers avoided too much

correction, since this would inhibit learners. However, as time went on, the learner would be

corrected more often, if he/ she failed to communicate, was not understood, or might be

misunderstood. One of the key principles was to provide immediate feedback on the choice made

by the student, but without letting affective (emotional) factors have a negative effect on the

language learning process. The absence of worry, anxiety and stress allowed for students'

confidence to develop, as they felt a high sense of achievement resulting from:

· successfully doing what they were told to do, time and time again;

· making very rapid progress in understanding the spoken language.

3.2.3.3 Learner and Teacher roles

TPR was a teacher-centred approach. Learners had little influence over the course or the lesson

contents, since these were determined by the teacher. However, learners could monitor and

evaluate their own progress and they were encouraged to speak when they felt ready to do so, that

is, when a sufficient basis in the language had been internalised.

The teacher played an active and direct role in TPR. He/She was encouraged to be well prepared

and well organised so that the lesson flew smoothly and predictably.

The instructor is the director of a stage play in which the students are the actors. (Asher 1977: 43)

Classroom interaction and turn taking was directed by the teacher. Asher stressed, however, that the

teacher's role was not so much to teach as to provide opportunities for learning. Thus the teacher

controlled the language input the learners received. The teacher also needed to allow speaking

abilities to develop in learners at the learners' own natural pace.

3.2.3.4 Materials

For absolute beginners, lessons did not require the use of materials, since the teacher's voice, actions,

and gestures were a sufficient basis for classroom activities. Later the teacher might use common

classroom objects, such as books, pens, cups, furniture. As the course developed, the teacher

needed to make or collect supporting materials to support teaching points. These included pictures,

realia, slides, and word charts. Asher developed TPR student kits that focused on specific situations,

such as the home, the supermarket, the beach, and students used the kits to construct scenes.

3.3 Silent Way Learning (SWL)

The Silent Way is a method that is not restricted to language teaching. It was developed by Caleb

Gattegno, an educational consultant who headed a commercial organisation called Educational

Solutions, Inc. in New York City. Caleb Gattegno's innovative method proposed some unusual

procedures in the teaching of a foreign language. From its name one might assume that a typical

class began with the students sitting silently while the teacher speaks. What really happened was that

the teacher stood silent or provided minimum input while eliciting or subtly reinforcing verbal output

from the learners.

Gattegno stated that the processes of learning a second language is "radically different" from those

involved in learning a first language. The second language learning process is unlike the first

language learning process and the learner "cannot learn another language in the same way

because of what he now knows" (Gattegno 1972: 11).

Gattegno emphasised the primacy of learning over teaching, meaning that the teaching activity

should be focused on the learners. The Silent Way is concerned with promoting language awareness

among the students and it tries to foster learners' self-monitoring and self-correction of their own

language learning process.

3.3.1 Objectives

The general objective of the Silent Way is to give beginning level students oral and aural facility in

basic elements of the target language. An immediate objective is to provide the learner with a basic

practical knowledge of the grammar of the language.

The principle underlying this method is "Subordinate teaching to learning". The teacher analyses what

kind of additional input the learners need and provides specific language input for each learner.

3.3.2 Main features

The innovations in Gattegno's method derive primarily from the manner in which classroom activities

are organised, the indirect role the teacher is required to assume in directing and monitoring learner

performance, the responsibility placed upon learners to figure out and test their hypotheses about

how the language works, and the materials used to elicit and practise language.

3.3.2.1 The role of grammar and language

Looking at the materials chosen and the sequence in which it is presented in a Silent Way classroom,

the Silent Way adopts a basically structural syllabus, with lessons planned around grammatical items

and related vocabulary. Language is seen as groups of sounds arbitrarily associated with specific

meanings and organised into sentences or strings of meaningful units by grammar rules. Language

items are introduced according to their grammatical complexity, their relationship to what has been

taught previously, and the ease with which items can be presented visually. Language is separated

from its social context and taught through artificial situations, usually represented by rods (see the

section The role of Materials below, for more information). Students are thus presented with the

structural patterns of the target language and learn the grammar rules of the language through

largely inductive processes.

Gattegno saw vocabulary as a central dimension of language learning. The most important

vocabulary for the learner deals with the most functional words. This "functional vocabulary" provides

a key, said Gattegno, to comprehending the "spirit" of the language.

3.3.2.2 Types of teaching and learning activities

Gattegno was against the TPR techniques of repetition and drilling and argued that language

learning depends on the learner's creativeness and his/her ability to discover the "spirit" of the

language. Silence, as avoidance of repetition, is thus an aid to attention, concentration, and mental

organisation. The Silent Way views learning as a problem-solving, creative, discovering activity, in

which the learner is a principal actor rather than a mere listener.

The teacher's strict avoidance of repetition forces alertness and concentration on the part

of the learners. (Gattegno 1972: 80)

Similarly, the learner's grappling with the problem of forming an appropriate and meaningful

utterance in a new language leads the learner to test their hypotheses of meaning, form and

function. The Silent Way student is expected to become "independent, autonomous and responsible"

(Gattegno 1976) - in other words, a good problem solver in language.

Basic to the method are simple linguistic tasks in which the teacher models a word, phrase, or

sentence and then elicits learner responses. Teacher modelling is minimal, although much of the

activity may be teacher directed. Learners then go on to create their own utterances by putting

together old and new information.

In this method the use of the native language is avoided as much as possible. Error correction and

accuracy, however, are not one of the main concerns, since that can have a negative effect on the

learning process of some students.

3.3.3 The role of materials

Charts, rods, and other aids may be used to elicit learner responses. Colour-coded charts are used to

teach, visually illustrate, and correct pronunciation. In order to introduce the syntactic and

phonological structure of the language within a restricted vocabulary. A set of wooden (or plastic)

sticks called "Cuisenaire rods" of varying length and colour is also used. The coloured Cuisenaire rods

are used to directly link words and structures with their meanings in the target language, thereby

avoiding translation into the native language. The use of the rods is intended to promote

inventiveness, creativity, and interest in forming communicative utterances on the part of the

students, as they move from simple to more complex structures.

The general content of the vocabulary charts (Gattegno 1972) is paraphrased below:

· Chart 1: the word "rod", colours of the rods, plural markers, simple imperative verbs, personal

pronouns, some adjectives and words.

· Charts 2, 3: remaining pronouns, words for "here" and "there," of, for, and name.

· Chart 4: numbers.

· Charts 5, 6: words illustrating size, space, and temporal relationships, as well as some concepts

difficult to illustrate with rods, such as order, causality, condition, similarity and difference.

· Chart 7: words that qualify, such as adverbs.

· Charts 8, 9: verbs, with cultural references where possible.

· Chart 10: family relationships.

· Charts 11, 12: words expressing time, calendar elements, seasons, days, week, month, year, etc.

(in Richards & Rodgers 1986: 109).

Much of the time the teacher merely points to the chart instead of speaking. Learning is also

facilitated by accompanying (mediating) physical objects that help students recall. Later many

different kinds of materials such as worksheets, readers and films are used to take students beyond

the elementary level.

3.3.3.1 Learner and Teacher roles

In the Silent Way Approach teaching is subordinated to learning, thus the teacher is responsible for

the creation of a classroom environment that facilitates learning. The teacher presents an item that

conveys some meaning in as silent a way as possible, using rods and charts, and tries to elicit

utterances from the students. Finally, the teacher silently monitors learners' interactions with each

other.

As the teacher hardly corrects students, the learners are required to make their own generalisations,

come to their own conclusions, and formulate whatever rules they themselves feel they need.

Learners are expected to develop independence, autonomy, and responsibility. Language learning,

therefore, becomes a process of personal growth resulting from growing student awareness and self-

challenge.

3.4 Community Language Learning

As was the case with the innovative approaches mentioned above, CLL was developed by

someone who had no training as a language teacher but chose language as a vehicle for

experimentation with learning and the promotion of learning. Charles A. Curran was a Jesuit priest

and a professor of clinical psychology at Loyola University (Chicago), where he wrote and

conducted research on the application of principles of clinical psychology to education. Community

Language Learning represents the use of his Counselling-Learning theory to teach languages. Curran

himself wrote little about his theory of language and much of the written account was carried out by

his student La Forge (1983).

Curran saw in traditional educational philosophy and practice the cause of many learner discomforts

and learning pathologies. He felt that teachers are unaware that depersonalised ways of teaching

may cause negative feelings and behaviours in resistant learners. He took as his main concern the

deep-level interpersonal dynamics of the teacher-learner relationship and the teaching-learning

process; he concluded that the kind of healthy growth which learning can represent must involve the

whole integrated person of the learner: intellect, emotions, values, and personality - all related to the

same integrated features in the teacher and in any other person integrated in the community of

learners.

Through his philosophy of holistic learning, he added a profound new dimension to the learning and

teaching process, a dimension that cannot be reduced to a set of classroom procedures or

techniques, but which requires a teacher to use effective ways of deeply understanding learners in

their struggle to learn. Curran (1976) considered that some psychological needs had to be met in

order to achieve successful learning. As genuine understanding and support is given, the learner finds

that he or she can talk honestly and openly within the group about the learning experience, feeling

confident of being understood, and through receiving and sensing this understanding, can dissipate

negative factors that block learning. On the whole, Curran's theories were not so much focused on

the psycholinguistic and cognitive processes involved in second language learning, but on the

personal commitments learners need to make before language acquisition can take place.

3.4.1 Objectives

Community Language Learning is most often used in introductory conversation courses in a foreign

language with the objective of achieving oral proficiency, focusing on fluency rather than on

accuracy; nevertheless, CLL could also be used in the teaching of writing. Although the objectives of

CLL have never been explicitly defined, the major goal is to achieve linguistic or communicative

competence in social situations. The assumption seems to be that through this method, the teacher

can successfully transfer his or her knowledge and proficiency in the target language to the learners.

The foreign language learners' tasks are:

to apprehend the sound system, assign fundamental meanings, and to construct a basic

grammar of the foreign language. (La Forge 1983: 4)

3.4.2 Main features

3.4.2.1 Types of materials and learning and teaching activities

CLL combines innovative learning tasks and activities with conventional ones. A class starts with the

students (or "clients" in Curran's terminology) sitting in a circle with the teacher (or "counsellor")

outside the circle. The clients-learners themselves initiate conversation (in the native or the target

language) and the teacher-counsellor translates these utterances into the target language. Thus the

clients themselves decide what they want to learn and, as a result, a massive amount of unrestricted,

self-motivated target-language data is generated. A post-session debriefing may involve instruction

dealing with the form and substance of the material generated in the session. These reflection

sessions are one of the vital functions of CLL.

Other complementary tasks or activities include:

· Group Work. Learners may engage in various group tasks, such as small group discussion of a topic,

preparing a conversation, preparing a summary of a topic for presentation to another group,

preparing a story that will be presented to the teacher and the rest of the class.

· Analysis. Students analyse and study transcriptions of target language sentences in order to focus

on particular lexical usage or on the application of grammar roles.

· Listening. Students listen to a monologue by the teacher involving elements they might have elicited

or overheard in class interactions.

· Free conversation. Students engage in free conversation with the teacher or with other learners.

There is no visible textbook, prepared lesson plan, or even defined objectives. The textbook restricts

language content and, therefore, impedes interaction in the community. Most of the materials used

by the teacher are notes on the blackboard or recordings of students' conversations. From the

material just recorded the teacher might choose sentences to write on the blackboard that highlight

elements of grammar, spelling, or whatever. Students are encouraged to ask about any of the

above and to copy sentences from the board with notes on meaning and usage. This becomes their

"textbook" for home study.

Errors are corrected by the teacher merely repeating without error any faulty utterance that a learner

has produced in the target language.

3.4.2.2 Learner and Teacher roles

As in Counselling-Learning theory, in the teaching-learning process students are viewed as "clients",

and teachers are considered as "counsellors" and "knowers". Therefore, human relationships are a

priority and there is not much concern for technique.

Language-learning is viewed as a maturation process consisting of five stages that go from the

dependent stage (equivalent to childhood) to the fully independent stage (equivalent to

adulthood). At each stage the learner is involved not just in the accomplishment of cognitive

(language learning) tasks but in the solution of affective conflicts (La Forge 1983: 55). After several

weeks the learners have acquired quickness, confidence, and communicative ability.

Learning is not viewed as an individual accomplishment but as something that is achieved

collaboratively. Consequently, the role of the learner also implies giving support to fellow learners and

acting as counsellors for the other learners.

According to the developmental stages referred to previously, the role of the teacher changes

gradually from being very supportive to intervening less and less. Thus the role of the teacher is very

important for classroom dynamics. His/hers is a very demanding job that requires previous

experience. The teacher must operate without conventional materials, depending on student topics

to shape and motivate the class.

3.5 Suggestology or Suggestopedia

Giorgi Lozanov encouraged an experimental approach which included the investigation of learning

resistance and the search for more effective means to increase learning. He began his research in

the 1960s, with music therapy, relaxation, and other suggestological means of enhancing learning

readiness. This is a method used to teach all academic subjects, not just languages. A Bulgarian

physician and psychotherapist, Lozanov first used the rapid memorisation of foreign vocabulary as

the test vehicle of his experimentation with Suggestology, concluding that the experimental

techniques used aimed at relaxing and fostering trust to make possible a phenomenal rate of

learning.

Lozanov believed that fear of incompetence or mistakes, and apprehension regarding the new and

unfamiliar, are the factors that constrain learning rather than one's native intelligence. Therefore,

Suggestopedia, as he called his pedagogical application of "the science of Suggestology" aims at

neutralising learning inhibitions and de-suggesting the false limitations that cultural norms impose on

learning. He would demonstrate that by artfully enhancing learner receptivity he would enable

learners to process massive input into intake with no forgetting.

3.5.1 Objectives

The aim of Suggestopedia is that students should reach an advanced level in oral skills quickly.

Learning is based on student mastery of long lists of vocabulary pairs. Lozanov stated categorically:

The main aim of teaching is not memorisation, but the understanding and creative solution

of problems (1978: 251).

Thus, as learner goals he cited increased access to understanding and creative solutions of problems.

3.5.2 Main features

3.5.2.1 The role of language

Lozanov was not very concerned with the elements of language and their organisation. Vocabulary

was a central issue and Suggestopedia stressed memorisation of vocabulary pairs and lexical

translation rather than contextualisation. However, Lozanov did occasionally refer to the importance

of experiencing language material in "whole meaningful texts" (Lozanov 1978: 268) and noted that

the suggestopedic course directs:

the student not to vocabulary memorisation and acquiring habits of speech, but to acts of

communication. (1978: 109)

3.5.2.2 Types of learning and teaching activities

A Suggestopedia course lasts thirty days and classes are four hours a day, six days a week. Each

course consists of ten units, each of them being focused on a lengthy dialogue with an

accompanying vocabulary list and grammatical comments, and graded by lexis and grammar.

These dialogues are read, translated, and reread by the teacher at different speeds and with

different intonation.

At the beginning of a course the students are given a new identity and a new name to encourage

loss of inhibitions. Each group consists of twelve students; ideally they should be socially

homogeneous, and divided equally between men and women. Learners sit in a circle, which

encourages face-to-face exchange and participation in the activities.

There is a pattern of work within each unit and a pattern of work for the whole course. Unit study is

organised around three days: on the first day the teacher discusses the general content (not

structure) of the unit dialogue. This would be a sample of a session as described by Lozanov (1978:

272):

At the beginning of the session, all conversation stops for a minute or two, and the teacher

listens to the music coming from a tape-recorder. He waits and listens to several passages in

order to enter into the mood of the music and then begins to read or recite the new text, his

voice modulated in harmony with the musical phrases. The students follow the text in their

textbooks where each lesson is translated into the mother tongue. Between the first and second

part of the concert, there are several minutes of solemn silence. In some cases, even longer

pauses can be given to permit the students to stir a little. Before the beginning of the second

part of the concert, there are again several minutes of silence and some phrases of the music

are heard again before the teacher begins to read the text. Now the students close their

textbooks and listen to the teacher's reading. At the end, the students silently leave the room.

They are not told to do any homework on the lesson they have just had except for reading it

cursorily once before going to bed and again before getting up in the morning.

This is the point at which Lozanov believed the unconscious learning system takes over.

Days 2 and 3 are spent in doing grammar and vocabulary exercises or questions and answers,

together with other activities such as role plays, games, and songs, designed to help learners regain

self-confidence, spontaneity, and receptivity. In the middle of the course students are encouraged

to practise the target language in a setting where it might be used, such as hotels or restaurants. The

last day of the course is devoted to a performance in which every student participates.

3.5.2.3 Learner and Teacher roles

Students volunteer for a suggestopedic course, but having volunteered, they are expected to be

committed to the class and its activities. The mental state of the learners is critical to success, which is

why learners must forgo mind-altering substances and other distractions and immerse themselves in

the procedures of the method.

In this method a child-like trust in the teacher (infantilisation) is fostered in each student. The teacher,

by contrast, should behave authoritatively as it is believed that people remember best and are most

influenced by information coming from an 'authoritative' source. Thus the teacher is seen as a source

of knowledge and understanding in his field of instruction.

The primary role of the teacher is to create situations in which the learner is most suggestible and then

to present linguistic material in a way most likely to encourage positive reception and retention by

the learner. Teachers are also expected to be skilled in acting, singing, and psychotherapeutic

techniques after several months of training.

3.5.2.4 The classroom: a learning environment

The learner learns not only from the effect of direct instruction but also from the environment in which

the instruction takes place. The setting must be comfortable and relaxing (soft carpets, easy chairs,

pleasant colours). The arts - music, painting, theatre - are aesthetic reinforcements of this physical

comfort and pleasure.

The musical background helps to induce a relaxed attitude, which Lozanov refers to as pseudo-

passiveness. This state is felt to be optimal for learning, in that anxieties and tension are relieved and

the power of concentration for new material is raised. According to East German researchers of

Suggestopedia, slow movements from string instruments playing Baroque instrumental music gave

the best results.

Lozanov's writings may lack clarity of exposition and they contain lots of jargon associated with

medical science and psychotherapy; nevertheless, in many countries of eastern and western Europe,

in South Africa and North America and elsewhere, some experimentalists began to seriously explore

ideas and techniques associated initially with Suggestopedia.

The most important product of Lozanov's research, though, was not a new model for language

teaching, but rather an increased realisation:

· that language instruction research must look beyond manipulating the external dimensions of the

learning environment,

· that extremely important psychological and cultural variables in the learning environment which

had not been understood or addressed previously are open to experimentation, and

· that Suggestology and perhaps other ways of dealing with the psyche of learners provide fresh

ideas and tools.

3.6 The Natural Approach

In the United States there was also an increasing interest towards a more communicative orientation

in the field of language teaching, under the influence of the humanist theories applied to `learner-

centred teaching'. The Natural Approach acted as a bridge between psycholinguistic theories and

the communicative approach, between North-American and European tendencies, that continually

try to balance the role of the learner-individual and the learner-social-being.

The Natural Approach, published in 1983 by Tracy Terrell and Stephen Krashen, gave a new direction

to foreign or second language teaching. Tracy Terrell was a teacher of Spanish in California and

Stephen Krashen was an applied linguist at the University of Southern California. In their book they

combined Terrell's classroom procedures and Krashen's influential theory of second language

acquisition.

You will remember from Unit 2 that the Direct Method had also been referred to as the Natural

Method. Although the idea that second language learning follows the principles of naturalistic

language learning in young children is a common one, there are important differences between the

Natural Approach and the older Natural or Direct Method.

The emphasis is not on teacher monologues, direct repetition, formal questions and answers, or the

focus on accurate production of target language sentences; by contrast, in the Natural Approach

the emphasis is on:

· input, rather than practice;

· optimising emotional preparedness for learning;

· a prolonged period of attention to what the language learners hear before they try to produce

language;

· a willingness to use written and other materials as a source of comprehensible input;

· the central role of comprehension in the Natural Approach.

3.6.1 Objectives

In general terms, the specific objectives of the Natural Approach depend upon learner needs and

the skill (reading, writing, listening, or speaking) and the level being taught. These goals are listed

under four areas:

· Basic personal communication skills: oral (e.g., listening to announcements in public places)

· Basic personal communication skills: written (e.g., reading and writing personal letters)

· Academic learning skills: oral (e.g., listening to a lecture)

· Academic learning skills: written (e.g., taking notes in class)

It is not expected that the students at the end of a particular course have acquired a certain group

of structures or forms; it is enough if they can deal with a particular set of topics in a given situation.

3.6.2 Main features

3.6.2.1 The role of language and grammar

Krashen and Terrell see communication as the primary function of language, and since their

approach focuses on teaching communicative abilities, they refer to the Natural Approach as an

example of a communicative approach. The Natural Approach "is similar to other communicative

approaches being developed today" (Krashen and Terrell 1983: 17).

Yet despite their avowed communicative approach to language, they view language learning, as

do audiolingualists, as consisting of the mastery of structures by stages.

The input hypothesis states that in order for acquirers to progress to the next stage in the

acquisition of the target language, they need to understand input language that includes a

structure that is part of the next stage. (Krashen & Terrell 1983: 32)

Krashen refers to this with the formula "i+1" (i.e., input that contains structures slightly above the

learner's present level).

The importance of vocabulary is stressed, for example, suggesting the view that a language is

essentially its lexicon, and that grammar is what determines how the lexicon is exploited to produce

messages and communicate meaning.

3.6.2.2 Psycholinguistic theory

The principal tenets on which the Natural Approach is based are the five famous hypotheses of

Krashen's Monitor Theory:

The Acquisition / Learning Hypothesis:

The distinction between acquisition and learning implies two different and independent ways of

developing proficiency in a second language. Whereas acquisition refers to the natural assimilation

of language rules through using language or communication and it is an unconscious process,

learning refers to the formal study of language rules and it is a conscious process. Formal teaching is

necessary for "learning" to occur, and correction of errors helps with the development of learned

rules. Learning, according to the theory, cannot lead to acquisition.

Language acquisition is very similar to the process children use in acquiring first and second

languages. It requires meaningful interaction in the target language -natural

communication- in which speakers are concerned not with the form of the utterances but

with the messages they are conveying and understanding... Conscious learning is available

to the performer only as a Monitor (Krashen 1981: 1)

The Monitor Hypothesis:

This formal knowledge is managed by the "Monitor" (one's ability to monitor his/her own output), who

is responsible for `editing' the output, checking and repairing the learner's production, and this is the

only link between acquired knowledge and the learned knowledge. The three necessary conditions

for assuring successful use of the monitor are:

· Time. There must be sufficient time for a learner to choose and apply a learned rule.

· Focus on form. The language user must be focused on correctness or on the form of the output.

· Knowledge of rules. The performer must know the rules. The monitor does best with rules that are

simple to describe.

In general, utterances are initiated by the acquired system - our fluency in production is based

on what we have 'picked up' through active communication. Our 'formal' knowledge of the

second language, our conscious learning, may be used to alter the output of the acquired

system, sometimes before and sometimes after the utterance is produced. we make these

changes to improve accuracy, and the use of the Monitor has this effect. (ibid)

The Natural Order Hypothesis:

The acquisition of grammatical structures follows a universal pattern, the `natural order', inherent in

every language and independent of the learner's native language. Research has shown that certain

grammatical structures or morphemes are acquired before others in first language acquisition of

English, and a similar natural order is found in second language acquisition. Likewise, during

acquisition (not during learning), similar developmental errors occur in learners.

The Input Hypothesis:

This hypothesis relates to acquisition, and not to learning. The acquisition process is activated and it

depends on `input' (i.e. language to which the learner is exposed in the form of listening and

reading). The learner should receive a sufficient quantity of `comprehensible input', i.e., input slightly

beyond their current level of competence or of a level `i+1', `i' being the real level of the learner. The

situation and context, and also the extralinguistic information will help the learner understand this

input.

The ability to speak fluently, however, cannot be taught directly; rather, it will "emerge" once the

learner has built up linguistic competence by understanding input.

The Affective Filter Hypothesis:

The acquisition process of the L2 is constrained by an `affective filter', a set of variables (see below)

that allow or block the acquisition process.

· Motivation. Learners with high motivation generally do better.

· Self-confidence. Learners with self-confidence and a good self-image tend to be more successful.

· Anxiety. Low personal anxiety and low classroom anxiety are more conducive to second language

acquisition.

3.6.2.3 Types of learning and teaching activities

What characterises the Natural Approach is the use of techniques in order to provide

comprehensible input and a classroom environment that fosters comprehension of input, minimises

learner anxiety, and maximises learner self-confidence.

Classroom activities are not based on a grammatical syllabus since they are determined by the

students according to their needs and interests.

Many of the techniques used are often borrowed from other methods and adapted to meet the

requirements of Natural Approach theory. For instance, they include command-based activities from

Total Physical Response; mime, gesture, and context are used to elicit questions and answers, similar

to the Direct Method; and even situation-based practice of structures and patterns are used.

Communicative Language Teaching activities, such as group-work activities are often used as well.

The difference lies in the emphasis given to comprehensible and meaningful communication, rather

than production of grammatically perfect utterances and sentences.

In the early stages charts, magazine pictures, advertisements, and other realia are used to elicit

simple responses from the learner (i.e., the student has to answer the name of the student that

matches the description the teacher gives). Obviously, at the earlier stages the students responses

are more simple and gradually they lead to more coherent discourse at intermediate levels.

Production is never forced, it must be spontaneous; after continuous exposure to authentic language

use (pre-production period), the Natural Approach expects the learners to produce some

meaningful output. Then the students are involved in a variety of activities that focus either on

meaningful communication (acquisition activities) or on grammar study (learning activities). There is a

difference then between acquisition and learning activities.

To minimise stress, learners are not required to say anything before they feel ready for it. The negative

affective factors are reduced to the minimum: grammatical appropriateness and error correction, for

instance, are not considered as important, and thus errors are never corrected directly.

3.6.2.4 Learner and Teacher roles

Both learners and teachers play an important role in the Natural Approach classroom, have their

own responsibilities and should be committed to these.

Learners should provide information about their specific goals so that acquisition activities can focus

on the topics and situations most relevant to their needs. They also decide (negotiate) with the

teacher the relative amount of time to be devoted to learning exercises (i.e., grammar study). It is up

to them as well to decide when they are ready to start producing speech and when to upgrade it.

The Natural Approach requires them to participate in communication activities with other learners.

The teacher is a key figure in the Natural Approach classroom: first, the teacher is the primary source

of comprehensible input in the target language; second, the Natural Approach teacher should

create a classroom atmosphere that is interesting, friendly, and in which there is a low affective filter

for learning; finally, the teacher must choose and combine a rich variety of classroom activities,

involving different group sizes, content, and contexts.

3.6.2.5 The role of materials

Most of the comprehensible input the student receives comes from materials. One of the roles of

materials is thus to make classroom activities as meaningful as possible by supplying "the extra-

linguistic context that helps the acquirer to understand and thereby to acquire" (Krashen and Terrell

1983: 55), by relating classroom activities to the real world, and by fostering real communication

among the learners.

A great variety of materials help learners discover how language really works without having it

broken down into chunks. Pictures and other visual aids supply the content for communication and

facilitate the acquisition of a large vocabulary within the classroom. Other recommended materials

include schedules, brochures, advertisements, maps, and books at levels appropriate to the students,

if a reading component is included in the course. Games, in general, are seen as useful classroom

materials, since:

games by their very nature, focus the student on what it is they are doing and use the

language as a tool for reaching the goal rather than as a goal in itself. (Terrell 1982: 121)

3.7 Conclusion

All five methods - to a degree - ignore the fact that there are individual differences among learners in

terms of cognitive style and social preferences. To varying degrees, these five methods are

commercial: books are sold, workshops are given for a fee, etc. Thus the originator and disciples alike

often have some financial stake in the success of the method.

There are people who have said they couldn't take the pressure or lack of teacher support in the

Silent Way and dropped out. Others decried the lack of "structure" in Community Language Learning

classes or were annoyed by the psycho-therapy group atmosphere. Others said that Suggestopedia

was not for them: they did not feel a change of identity would facilitate language learning and they

claimed that they would not submit to such subliminal techniques.

The appearance of new "methods" always gives rise to comments and criticism, but it is interesting to

see how through the years these new proposals have become compatible with new tendencies,

and how many of their techniques have been included in communicative approaches.

It cannot be denied, though, that the work of innovators constitutes a challenge to conventional

thinking about language teaching. As the process and the results of alternative models are

researched and compared to those of more conventional models, it will be interesting to see what

the data shows.

UNIT 4 – COMMUNICATIVE APPROACHES: A DOMINANT

PARADIGM IN ELT

4.1 Introduction

Communicative approaches in language teaching, also know as Communicative Language

Teaching (CLT), is undeniably the dominant model in English language teaching at present. Why is

this so? Where has it come from? What are the fundamental notions behind CLT? Are there any

drawbacks to this approach? What is the current state of affairs in CLT? These are some of the

questions that we will be addressing in this unit.

4.2 Where has CLT come from? Background

Communicative approaches in language teaching appeared in the 1970s, influenced by the

breakaway from the concept of method (see Unit 1), and the so-called "humanistic" new methods

(Silent Way, CLL, Suggestopedia - see Unit 3). Dissatisfaction with current models of language

teaching, such as Situational Language Teaching in Britain, and Audiolingualism in the United States,

meant that language teaching was ready for a paradigm shift.

4.2.1 The influence of the humanistic methods

The humanistic methods mentioned above had an effect on CLT in several areas. Firstly, all three

methods included a concern for what we could call "whole person" learning, whereby the learner is

recognised to be an individual who has not only a cognitive facet, but also a physical and affective

(emotional) facet. In CLT the learner becomes a responsible individual closely linked to the group

within which he or she works:

The role of learner as negotiator - between the self, the learning process, and the object of

learning - emerges from and interacts with the role of joint negotiator within the group and

within the classroom procedure and activities which the group undertakes. The implication for

the learner is that he should contribute as much as he gains, and thereby learn in an

independent way. (Breen and Candlin 1980: 110)

We see in CLT not only a concern for the learner as a participant in interactive communication, but

also a concern for the learner as an individual with different needs which the teacher needs to be

aware of. The learner is also seen to bring varying degrees of motivation to the classroom through, for

example, past learning experiences, which could colour his or her emotional attitude to the

language.

Secondly, the humanistic methods reflected a process view of learning as opposed to a product

view. In other words, the act of learning itself - the process - was where teachers needed to focus

attention, rather than exclusively on the learners producing perfectly formed utterances - the

product. In CLT we see a concern for the process of language acquisition. Another implication of a

process view of language is the acceptance of error as part of the learning process, as a necessary

stage on the road to linguistic competence.

The humanistic methods also defined a radically new role for the teacher: that of "facilitator". The

principal role of the teacher in earlier, more structure-based methodologies, had been that of

"transmitter of knowledge". This shift in role corresponds to what Gattegno called "the subordination

of teaching to learning", a key concept in humanistic methodology.

This change of focus from teacher teaching to learner learning gave prominence to the concept of

learner autonomy or independence (encouraging learners to take responsibility for their own

learning), a concept which is fundamental in communicative approaches to language teaching,

and is clearly reflected in the Breen and Candlin quote above.

The legacy of the humanistic methodologies for CLT will also be apparent later in the unit, when we

look at some of the key features of communicative approaches to language teaching.

4.2.2 The reaction to earlier methods

CLT also grew out of a dissatisfaction with earlier, more traditional methods that advocated an overt

focus on structure, but had tended to ignore or downplay language as a means of communication.

In the 1960s, the linguistic theory behind such methods as Situational Language Teaching in Britain,

and Audiolingualism in the United States was increasingly called into question:

By the end of the sixties it was clear that the situational approach...had run its course. There

was no future in continuing to pursue the chimera of predicting language on the basis of

situational events. What was required was a closer study of the language itself and a return to

the traditional concept that utterances carried meaning in themselves and expressed the

meanings and intentions of the speakers and writers who created them. (Howatt 1984: 280)

The historical path of CLT is clearly summarised in the figure below:

Figure 4.1: The rise of CLT (Stern 1992: 113).

Apart from its development as a reaction to some of the earlier methods and ideas in language

teaching, CLT developed a broad theoretical base of its own, reflected in the work of Allwright,

Wilkins, Widdowson, Candlin, Brumfit, Johnson, Littlewood, and Prabhu, among others. The

contributions made by some of these to CLT will be examined in detail later in this unit.

4.3 What is CLT?

Exactly what communicative approaches encompass has come in for a lot of debate. It is a set of

approaches, rather than a method, and as such there is no single text or authority on CLT. However,

there does seem to be a general consensus on the main issues:

· The communicative approach

concentrates on getting learners to do things with language, to express concepts and to carry

out communicative acts of various kinds... (Widdowson 1990)

· The communicative approach has influenced

a language pedagogy which (makes) some allowance at all levels of teaching for a non-

analytical (experimental or participatory), communicative component. (Stern 1983)

· One of the most characteristic features of communicative language teaching is that it pays

systematic attention to functional as well as structural aspects of language. (Littlewood 1981).

Some of the theoretical underpinnings of CLT can be summarised as follows:

· language is a system for the expression of meaning;

· the primary function of language is for interaction and communication;

· the structure of language reflects its functional and communicative uses;

· the primary units of language are not merely its grammatical and structural features, but categories

of functional and communicative meaning as exemplified in discourse.

Richards & Rodgers (1986: 71).

In other words, communicative approaches prioritise the communicative nature of language,

although the linguistic or structural aspect of language is still accepted as an integral part of it. The

main debate in CLT has tended to centre around the degree to which the structural element of

language is focused on in teaching.

4.4 Early CLT: The notional / functional syllabus

One of the most influential theorists in the early development of a communicative approach to

language teaching was D.A. Wilkins. This British linguist developed what he termed a "notional" (also

known as "functional") view of language, presented in a paper of 1972. He analysed the system of

meanings that a learner would need in order to communicate, and expressed them in terms of

"notions" (concepts such as location, frequency, time, sequence etc.) and "functions" (requests,

threats, complaints, offers etc.).

Wilkins' conceptualisation of language reflected the changing perspective of the time: linguists were

increasingly coming to see language as communication, as opposed to language as a static body

of grammatical structures.(We will be examining these two views of language in detail in the next

section.) In Wilkins' words:

The process of deciding what to teach is based on consideration of what the learner should most

usefully be able to communicate in the foreign language. (Wilkins 1976: 19)

Wilkins developed his ideas into a book called Notional Syllabuses in 1976, which had an important

impact on CLT. According to Wilkins:

The advantage of the notional syllabus is that it takes the communicative facts of language into

account from the beginning without losing sight of grammatical and situational factors. It is

potentially superior to the grammatical syllabus because it will produce a communicative

competence. (ibid:19)

Although Wilkins does not advocate that grammar should be completely abandoned in a

communicative approach to language teaching, some early proponents of CLT did seem to jettison

grammar almost completely. For example, in widely published textbooks such as "Notions in English"

and its companion "Functions in English" (Leo Jones 1979), there is practically no overt reference to

structural accuracy, or analysis of form, but rather a series of communicative activities to practice

implicit grammatical structures.

Wilkins' notional syllabus soon came under attack from British applied linguists for merely being an

extension of previous, structure-based syllabi. It replaced, it was argued, one kind of list (e.g. a list of

grammatical structures) with another type of list (that of notional / functional categories). Widdowson

(1979) argued that the notional / functional syllabus was an insufficient analysis of language as

communication, and that there were other considerations which needed to be taken into account,

namely discourse.

In Widdowson's words, categorising language into notions and functions provides:

only a very partial and imprecise description of certain semantic and pragmatic rules which are used

for reference when people interact. They tell us nothing about the procedures people employ in the

application of these rules when they are actually engaged in communicative activity. If we are to

adopt a communicative approach to teaching which takes as its primary purpose the development

of the ability to do things with language, then it is discourse which must be at the centre of our

attention. (1979: 254)

4.5 The Council of Europe Modern Languages Project: the spread of CLT

As European countries became increasingly interdependent, an organisation called the Council of

Europe was set up in 1949 by the governments of various European countries to promote

cooperation in areas such as culture and education. Their Modern Languages Project was started in

1971, when a group of experts started to develop a language curriculum for Europe.

The Council of Europe Modern Languages Project based their ideas on current theoretical thinking

on language and learning, which was becoming increasingly influenced by Sociolinguistics, and

particularly on Wilkin's idea of a notional/functional syllabus. The project culminated in the

publication of "The Threshold Level" in 1975 (Van Ek) which was a series of syllabus specifications

which identified the actual content of English needed for general communication. This in turn led to

the implementation of a communicative syllabus for language teaching in Western Europe (in

England, France, Spain and Germany) between 1975 and 1981. The Threshold Level documents were

concerned with the learner as potential communicator and set out in detail the knowledge, skills and

behaviour required of a language learner in order for him or her to be able to participate effectively

in interpersonal communication in the situations of everyday life. (Trim 1981: 28)

In subsequent years, as the Council of Europe developed its theoretical basis for the dissemination of

a communicative approach to teaching languages in Europe, more educational goals were added

to those implicit in the Threshold Level syllabus. One was the goal of conversational strategies: it was

seen that learners needed to develop strategies to enable them to deal with the cut and thrust of

real-time conversation, with both its predictability and its unpredictability. Thus learners needed to be

taught the skills of circumlocution, of asking for clarification, of how to redirect a conversation and so

on.

Another goal which was subsequently included by the Council of Europe was that of "the

development of the individual personality in both its cognitive and affective aspects" (Trim 1981). This

broad educational goal referred, among other things, to developing in the learner a tolerance of

other cultures, languages and beliefs.

It has been pointed out that the adoption of a communicative methodology by not only

educational agencies such as the Council of Europe, but by professional teaching organisations such

as the British Council, had an enormous impact on the spread of CLT:

The British Council has for many years served the interests of British methodologists by providing an

instant and international outlet for their ideas, as well as funds to present their latest speculations at

international forums and conferences. It is doubtful if communicative language teaching could have

been established so rapidly without the council's help. (Richards 1985: 40)

4.6 Theories of language and CLT

We will now turn to the linguistic theory which informed CLT. We will look at how some of the theorists

of the time viewed language, and the effect which this had on the development of communicative

approaches to language teaching.

4.6.1 Chomsky's linguistic competence and Hymes' communicative competence

One of the key terms in talking about communicative approaches to language teaching is that of

"communicative competence". This term, coined by Hymes in 1972, contrasts with Chomsky's term

"linguistic competence". Two different views in the theory of language are reflected by the two terms.

Linguistic competence, according to Chomsky, is knowledge and mastery of "the underlying system

of rules" (1965: 4) which make up language. For Chomsky, language is basically rule-based creativity:

Ordinary linguistic behavior characteristically involves innovation, formation of new sentences and

new patterns in accordance with rules of great abstractness and intricacy. (1966: 44)

In Chomsky's (1965) view, linguistic theory is concerned primarily with an ideal speaker-listener, in a

homogeneous speech-community, who knows its language perfectly.

In other words, in this view language is seen primarily as abstract grammatical knowledge, as

something outside a particular context of use.

The highly abstract, idealised view of language advocated by Chomsky came increasingly under

question as, in the 1960s, linguists opened up new fields of enquiry, such as Pragmatics,

Sociolinguistics, Ethnomethodology and the Ethnography of communication. Research into second

language acquisition showed that it was the active, creative use of language to achieve goals

which spurred on the learning process.

Hymes' "communicative competence" is an extension of Chomsky's "linguistic competence" rather

than as a contradiction of it, as it takes into account new developments in related fields.

The term "communicative competence", on the other hand, reflects the belief that language is

always used in a social context or situation: it is a competence "when to speak, when not, and as to

what to talk about with whom, when, where, in what manner" (Hymes 1972).

Swain's Comprehensible Output Hypothesis (1985) claimed that to acquire a language learners

needed not only comprehensible input (Krashen 1985), see Unit 3, but that they also needed to be

encouraged to produce language fairly accurately:

...producing the target language may be the trigger that forces the learner to pay attention to the

means of expression needed in order to successfully convey his or her own intended meaning.

(Swain 1985: 249)

So, in Swain's view, learners need not only input, but output: they need to use language in order to

learn it.

Allwright (1979) sees the two competences as overlapping (see figure 4.2 below): thus, in general,

linguistic competence is a part of communicative competence, although there are some areas of

linguistic competence that are irrelevant to communicative competence.

Figure 4.2: The relationship between linguistic and communicative competence

(Brumfit and Johnson 1979: 168).

4.6.2 Halliday's research

Another influential figure in the development of CLT was Halliday, who also proposed a functional

view of language:

Linguistics...is concerned...with the description of speech acts or texts, since only through the study of

language in use are all the functions of language, and therefore all components of meaning,

brought into focus. (1970: 145)

Halliday elaborated a theory of language which complements Hymes' view of communicative

competence. Research in the area of children learning their first language led Halliday to identify

seven basic functions that language performs:

· the instrumental function: using language to get things;

· the regulatory function: using language to control the behaviour of others;

· the interactional function: using language to create interaction with others;

· the personal function: using language to express personal feelings and meanings;

· the heuristic function: using language to learn and discover;

· the imaginative function: using language to create a world of the imagination;

· the representational function: using language to communicate information.

Halliday (1975: 11-17), in Richards & Rodgers (1986: 70-71).

The idea that learning a language means acquiring the means to perform different kinds of functions

is one of the basic tenets of CLT, and Halliday's work, elaborated in a number of books and papers,

was very influential in the rise of CLT.

4.6.3 Canale and Swain: the subskills in communicative competence

A more recent contribution to the theory behind CLT comes from Canale and Swain (1980).

In their analysis of communicative competence, Canale and Swain identify four subgroups of

competences, which together make up communicative competence:

· grammatical competence, which is the ability to use grammar and lexis accurately. It is what

Chomsky calls "linguistic competence".

· sociolinguistic competence, which is the ability to understand the social context in which

communication takes place: for example, role relationships, the shared knowledge of the speakers,

and the communicative purpose of the interaction.

· discourse competence, which is the ability to interpret individual elements in a message through

their coherence and cohesion.

· strategic competence, which is the ability to start, finish, maintain, repair or redirect communication.

4.6.4 The implications of a communicative view of language for the CLT classroom

As we have seen, the emergence of a communicative model of teaching is reflected in the work of

several applied linguists. As an example of theory relating more directly to methodology, we have

Widdowson's set of contrasting concepts (1978 - see figure below), which characterise classroom

practice. These concepts distinguish between the two different views of language discussed above:

that of language as a formal system (linguistic categories), and that of language use as a

communicative event (communicative categories), and make the case for a shift of emphasis in

teaching methodology from the former to the latter.

LINGUISTIC CATEGORIES COMMUNICATIVE CATEGORIES

Correctness Appropriacy

Usage Use

Signification Value

Sentence Utterance

Proposition Illocutionary Act

Cohesion Coherence

Linguistic skills

(for example, speaking and hearing)

Communicative abilities

(for example, saying, listening, talking)

Thus, to take the first of Widdowson's characteristics, instead of focusing on correctness and

demanding perfectly formed grammatically correct utterances from learners, teachers using a

communicative approach should instead focus on the appropriacy of the utterance, evaluating its

effectiveness in terms of whether it successfully communicates a message in an appropriate register

and style.

In the second set of concepts, those of usage and use, usage refers to knowledge of linguistic rules,

whereas use refers to the ability to use these rules for effective communication. It is not enough,

Widdowson is saying, to simply 'know' the rules of grammar. Learners need to be able to apply them

to their output in order to communicate.

The signification of a word or utterance is its semantic, literal meaning: thus "slim" or "skinny" are both

other words for "thin". However, communicative pedagogy would put emphasis not only on the

meaning of the word, but also on its value or contextual, pragmatic meaning: there are certain

connotations attached to these words that students would need to be aware of to be able to use it

appropriately. There is a great deal of difference between describing someone as "slim" and "skinny".

To take the following two sets of Widdowson's words: sentences express proposition by combining

words in accordance with grammatical rules. Thus the sentence "It's cold in here" is a propositional

statement: it clearly states a fact - the temperature is cold - and it follows the rules of grammar, with a

subject, a verb etc. However, "Cold, huh?", while expressing the same basic information, is an

utterance: it is spoken, and does not necessarily conform to the rules of a sentence as it does not

contain 'correct grammar'. The utterance "Cold, huh?" is also an illocutionary act - the speaker may

be obliquely asking for the window to be shut. In other words, an illocutionary act is defined in terms

of its function, in this case, a request (for the window to be shut), and it therefore has a pragmatic

meaning - we need to interpret the actual words to discover the underlying meaning.

The word cohesion is used to describe the formal features of language in a text (e.g. referring

pronouns, linkers, etc.) which bind a piece of discourse together at a linguistic level. Coherence is

more subjective, and is used to describe how a text hangs together conceptually, or, in other words,

how it makes sense in terms of ideas being clearly and logically linked throughout the text. Again,

Widdowson is advocating a shift from a purely linguistic view of language to one in which effective

communication (of ideas) is more important.

To sum up, Widdowson was making the point that language teaching theory needed to be aware of

the differences that are implicit in the two views of language discussed above, and that classroom

practice, if it was to reflect the communicative view of language, needed to include more

communicative pedagogy. This would not so much mean a complete change in methodology, but

rather a shift of emphasis and focus.

4.6.5 Pedagogic Approaches: medium and mediation

Widdowson also characterises the two approaches to the teaching of language described earlier as

the "medium" and the "mediation" view, and notes the increased emphasis on the latter over the

former in communicative approaches to language teaching:

An approach to Pedagogy informed by the medium view will focus attention on the syntactic and

semantic properties of the language itself and look for ways of manipulating them for the purposes of

transmission. Learner activity will be directed at increasing receptivity. They will be involved in

activities which are designed to facilitate the internalisation of units of meaning so that they are put

in store, so to speak, ready for use when required. Such activities will typically be exercises for the

provision of practice. An approach informed by the mediation view will focus attention on creating

conditions for negotiation. The learners will be engaged in activities designed to achieve purposeful

outcomes by means of language. The activities here will typically be tasks for problem solving.

(Widdowson 1990: 119)

Thus according to Widdowson, the communicative classroom, which is influenced by the mediation

view of language, will have quite different activity types to those of the more traditional, structure-

based classroom, influenced by the medium view of language.

In the next few sections we will take a look at two contemporary approaches to teaching within the

paradigm of CLT, each influenced by the mediation view of language: the lexical approach and

task-based learning.

4.7 Recent CLT approaches

Both the lexical approach and task-based learning reflect ways of teaching/learning which are more

in line with current views on language acquisition than some of the earlier methods discussed in the

previous unit. In the case of task-based learning, this approach has been taken on board wholesale

by entire schooling systems, as is the case with the Spanish Reforma or the British National Curriculum,

for example. The lexical approach, on the other hand, has been greeted with more caution, and has

in fact come in for a great deal of criticism, particularly from the linguistics establishment. Just why this

might be the case will become clearer after we have examined both approaches.

4.7.1 The Lexical Approach

There are two key figures in the popularisation of the lexical approach: Dave Willis, who wrote The

Lexical Syllabus in 1990, and Michael Lewis, whose two books The Lexical Approach (1993) and

Implementing the Lexical Approach (1997) can be considered the cornerstones of this view of

learning.

What exactly does a lexical view of language imply? Firstly, the lexical approach reflects the

movement away from a purely structural view of language, a movement which is evident in all CLT

approaches. Lexis, rather than grammar, plays a primary role in the acquisition of language,

according to Lewis.

Grammar is not the basis of language acquisition, and the balance of linguistic research clearly

invalidates any view to the contrary. (1993:133)

However, by `lexis' Lewis does not just mean any old vocabulary. Rather, Language consists not of

traditional grammar and vocabulary but often of multi-word prefabricated chunks.

(1997:3)

Individual language speakers have large stores of these prefabricated chunks of language in their

memories, which they draw on when creating output, either written or spoken:

The essential idea is that fluency is based on the acquisition of fixed and semi-fixed prefabricated

items, which are available as the foundation for any linguistic novelty or creativity. (1997:15)

It is important to note that these items or chunks are both fixed or semi-fixed. Fixed chunks might

correspond to set expressions such as How do you do? as a formal greeting: there is no variation in

structure or lexis possible in this phrase. Semi-fixed chunks will allow some variation within the phrase,

such as an expression like According to the authors/writers/publicists, the main advantage is that...

Lewis himself divides the main sorts of `multi-word items' (as he calls these chunks) into the following

four categories:

1. a) words e.g. push; fruit; exit. These are not particularly frequent in use, but they have a high

information content.

b) polywords e.g. by the way; on the other hand. Because these are used to generate patterns, they

are very frequent, but they have a low information content on their own.

2. collocations or word partenrships e.g. an initial reaction; to assess the situation; do a job. These

consist of two word combinations that can (and must) go together.

3. Fixed expressions or institutionalised utterances e.g. I'll see what I can do; It's not the sort of thing

you think will ever happen to you; Certainly not! These are expressions with a strong pragmatic

meaning (i.e. they have a clear function).

4. Sentence frames or heads e.g. Considerable research has been done in recent years on the

question of...; At present, however, expert opinion remains divided; some experts believe that...;

That's all very well but...

Note that Lewis points out that the categories overlap somewhat.

4.7.2 The theoretical basis for the lexical approach

Perhaps Lewis' most famous statement is that:

Language consists of grammaticalised lexis, not lexicalised grammar (1993:vi).

What does he mean by this? Basically that we create meaning and language by recombining lexical

chunks, which we bind together with grammar. We start with words, and then add grammar (or

grammaticalise, as Lewis would say).

The structural view of language is the opposite to this. In a structural view, grammar is seen as the

basic building blocks, or the underlying template onto which is grafted lexis ("lexicalised grammar").

Why all this concern with lexis? Why has grammar dropped so thoroughly out of favour in Lewis'

lexical approach? Lewis' ideas were particularly influenced by some well-known research carried out

by Pawley and Syder in 1983 in which they proposed that adult native speakers have access to

hundreds of thousands of "lexicalised sentence stems" in order to form utterances, and they rely on

these, not abstract grammatical rules, to produce language. For Pawley and Syder, a lexicalised

sentence stem is:

A unit of clause length or longer whose grammatical form and lexical content is wholly or largely

fixed (1983:191).

Lewis has taken this on board and called it a multi-word prefabricated chunk.

Added to Pawley and Syder's work was the influence of work by Ann Peters, also in 1983, who

showed how we store language in our minds in single chunks, or what she calls "holophrases" when

learning our first language as children. Only later do children start to analyse these single chunks into

their component parts, and from there form generalisable rules. Thus language learning consists of

both item learning (memorising semi-fixed chunks as holophrases) and system learning (discovering

underlying grammatical rules).

4.7.3 The lexical approach in the classroom

The research which we have reviewed above serves as the basis for Lewis' defence of the lexical

approach. But what does this mean for classroom practice? If language consists of multi-word

chunks, then, according to Lewis,

A central element of language teaching is raising students' awareness of, and developing their ability

to `chunk' language successfully. (1993: vi)

Just how this might be done in the classroom is suggested by the classroom tasks below.

4.7.4 Evaluation of the lexical approach

Although the lexical approach has come in for a great deal of criticism, as we mentioned in the

introduction to this section, it has also made some useful contributions to EFL methodology. For one

thing, it has put lexis firmly back into the syllabus, and an enriched view of lexis at that. No self-

respecting modern-day coursebook would ignore the importance of lexis in its syllabus.

However, one major criticism of Lewis' views has been that he offers no clear blueprint for organising

a syllabus exclusively on the lexical approach. Even if the learning of chunks is vital for successful

language learning, how are students to achieve this massive task? Learners simply cannot memorise

hundreds of thousands of multi-word items, not least because of time constraints. In any case, is the

mere exposure of learners to chunks enough to make this task of memorisation possible? Most

theorists rather doubt it. Lewis' dogged insistence on only item learning, and focus on input but not on

output has also received criticism as an unsustainable theory of language learning.

Nevertheless, as we have signalled above, the lexical approach deserves to be taken seriously, and

several of its insights, such as providing a place for memorisation in the classroom, or providing a

more holistic view of language than a traditional grammar view does, need to be taken seriously.

We have spent some time examining the lexical approach, as it is still very much alive, and its effect

on current practices can be felt. However, a far more influential paradigm in CLT has emerged in the

past few years (although certain aspects of it have been influenced by the lexical approach): that of

task-based learning, and it is to this that we will now turn.

4.8 Where are we now? Current views on task-based learning

The task-based learning of the late 1990s has taken on board the belief that some kind of focus on

form is necessary for effective language learning. Skehan (1996), for example, has pointed out that

without some focus on form, learners simply get better at performing tasks badly. In her recent book

A Framework for Task-Based Learning, Jane Willis offers a clear language focus stage in her

procedure for a task-based lesson:

Students prepare for the task, report back after the task and then study the language that arises

naturally out of the task cycle and its accompanying materials. (1996: 1)

Task-based learning is considered by many to be 'state of the art' language teaching. As Willis puts it,

Task-based learning combines the best insights from communicative language teaching with an

organised focus on language form. (ibid: 1)

4.9 CLT materials and activity types

The fundamental concept in CLT -that language has a socio-cultural or communicative dimension-

which has gained currency, and informed thought and approaches in Language Pedagogy since

the 70s, has obviously had a major impact on curriculum design and materials development.

We can identify three main trends in CLT activity types, which are concomitant with the learning

theory behind the communicative approach which we examined above:

· Communicativeness. Activities that promote real communication of meaning between participants

will promote learning

· Tasks. Activities that create the need for meaningful language use, by carrying out tasks, will

promote learning

· Meaningfulness. If the language used in an activity is meaningful to the learner, the learning process

will be more effective

In terms of text book materials, the kinds of activities which became common practice in early

coursebooks with a communicative focus often identify the learner in a specific role of language use

(for example as tourists, students, customer - waiter, doctor- patient and so on). Detailed scenarios

are established for situations of language use (for example, arriving at a hotel, enrolling on a

language course, ordering a meal, visiting the doctor etc.). Learners then embark on tasks which

may include simulation or role playing, or problem solving.

Littlewood (1981) makes a distinction between "functional communication activities" and "social

interaction activities". The former would include activities in which learners, for example, compare

pictures for similarities and differences, or work out the likely sequence of events in a set of pictures, or

give instructions to each other for the completion of a drawing, or solve a problem from shared clues,

etc. "Social interaction activities" would include conversation, discussion, dialogues, role plays,

simulations and so on.

Littlewood (1981) also put forward a methodological procedure for taking learners through a series of

pre-communicative, followed by communicative, activities:

Figure 4.3: A methodological procedure for CLT [Littlewood 1981].

Littlewood's model for the sequencing of communicative activities reflects a step by step approach

in which learners are to gain control over individual skills (such as grammar, pronunciation,

vocabulary) before applying them in communicative tasks. According to Littlewood, this skill-

learning model of language learning involves both a cognitive and a behavioural aspect:

The cognitive aspect involves the internalisation of plans for creating appropriate behaviour. For

language use, these plans derive mainly from the language system - they include grammatical rules,

procedures for selecting vocabulary, and social conventions governing speech. The behavioural

aspect involves the automation of these plans so that they can be converted into fluent

performance in real time. This occurs mainly through practice in converting plans into performance.

(1984: 74)

Thus the practice of individual skills is seen as a way of developing communicative skills. Rivers (1978)

has called this the "skill-getting" and "skill-using" approach to communicative activities: learners first

"get" subskills, one by one through practice, and then they are encouraged to "use" them

simultaneously in fluency activities.

Others, notably Savignon (1972,1983) and Prabhu (1983), reject the idea that this step by step

approach leads to language learning, and they propose a model in which learners start with

communicative tasks from the beginning of instruction, and in Prabhu's case, receive no focus on

form at all (we will be looking in more detail at Prabhu's task-based learning model later in the unit).

A middle view is proposed by Brumfit (1979), and in the diagram below he shows the approach

traditionally followed by language courses (figure i) which he contrasts with a communicative

classroom procedure (figure ii):

Figure 4.4: from Brumfit & Johnson (1979: 183).

In terms of actual language content to be taught, CLT places emphasis on the needs of the learners,

which will vary from one learning context to another. Thus, in order to decide what language

functions to include in a syllabus, the language needs of the learner must be used as a starting point.

As we saw above, one of the first syllabus models to be proposed in CLT was that of Wilkins' notional

syllabus, although this was soon criticised as insufficient. There has been extensive debate in CLT on

syllabus types, and we will be looking at other syllabi in the following sections of this unit.

4.10 Some key features of CLT

4.10.1 The roles of teacher and learner

With the advent of CLT, the role of the teacher became more multi-dimensional: facilitator, manager,

advisor, co-communicator (while working alongside students in a communicative activity, for

example), monitor... (Larsen-Freeman 1986). Candlin and Breen (1980) identify possible roles as

"organiser of resources,... guide... researcher and learner..." Richards and Rodgers (1986) add those of

"needs analyst, counsellor, and group process manager".

Learners, too, have new experiences in the communicative classroom: they will be more motivated

because they are "learning to do something useful with the language they study". Also, they are

"encouraged to express their individuality" by sharing ideas and opinions, and last but not least

"student security is enhanced" because of cooperative communication with the teacher and other

students (Larsen-Freeman 1986).

This change in roles of both teacher and learner obviously relates to the fact that CLT proposed a

different view of the nature of language to previous methodologies, as discussed above. In terms of

the "mediation" view of language (as defined by Widdowson - see above):

learning is not now seen as conformity to the conditions of transmission controlled by the teacher but

as a self-generating process by the learners themselves.

As such, Widdowson (1990) claims, "the learner assumes a more positive role".

Widdowson also draws a parallel between the political implications of a "medium" versus a

"mediation" view of language which have particular resonance when applied to the role of the

teacher/learner:

The medium view is associated with authority. With its emphasis on transmission and conformity, it

promotes the conservation of established social values and is consistent with a concept of education

as the means of maintaining conventions and persuading people into their acceptance. Such an

ideology is not well suited to the spirit of the age, at least as this is perceived in some parts of the

world. It has been called into question on the grounds that it perpetuates the rule of privilege and

denies the right of self-determination and dissent. The mediation view is obviously more attune to

more liberal ideas, allowing as it does for discovery and self-expression. It emphasises initiative rather

than initiation, the autonomy of learning rather than the authority of teaching. Its consistency with

what would seem to be a more enlightened social and educational ideology might seem reason

enough to accept it as self-evidently preferable without further question. And some people, it would

appear, have accepted it on these grounds, inspired by the humanistic fervour of the times.

(1990: 122-123)

Widdowson feels that there needs to be a balance between these two views of language, and

correspondingly within the teacher and learners' roles.

4.10.2 Learner autonomy

An element which has been consistently present in CLT has been the concept that learners should

have control over their own learning: this is the concept of "learner autonomy" (Holec 1980). The idea

of self-directed learning has in fact a long history in western educational thinking, and can be dated

back, in various guises, to Rousseau (1762), or even to Plato.

The idea of self-directed learning is central in the shift from a teacher-centred classroom to a more

learner-centred classroom which is advocated by CLT. This shift was endorsed by the Council of

Europe Modern Languages Project: "We must... aim to produce a learner who is increasingly aware,

self-reliant, better able to learn directly from experience, gradually outgrowing the need for a

teacher" wrote Trim for the Council of Europe in 1981. The Council, which was set up in post-war

Europe, had the concept of learner autonomy firmly on its political agenda:

One of the (Council's) principle objectives was and is to strengthen pluralist democratic institutions

and practices with respect for human rights. The guarantee of democracy lies not so much in

constitutions and structures as in the quality of the citizenry. It will be clear that the concept of learner

autonomy is not at all that of a potentially solipsistic, socially isolated self-study methodology, but

rather that of socially responsible independence of thought and action. (Trim 1997)

However, as Widdowson (1990) has pointed out, "the learner is never really independent, it is the kind

of dependency which changes".

4.10.3 Learner training

The idea of learner autonomy has introduced yet another role for the teacher into the

communicative classroom: that of trainer. If students are to be encouraged to take greater

responsibility for their own learning, it is the teacher's job to help them realise that autonomy, through

making them aware of various learning strategies and their individual learning styles, so as to be able

to make informed choices as regards their own learning. The assumption is that:

the more informed learners are about language and learning the more effective they will be at

managing their own learning. (Ellis & Sinclair 1989: 2)

This is 'learner training' or 'learning to learn', and it is based on:

the belief that everybody has the right to develop the capacity for taking charge of his or her own

affairs and that this development is a basic function of education. (ibid:3)

Coursebooks now regularly include learner training activities or components, in which learners reflect

on and discuss language, learning strategies and their own learner styles, and are encouraged to

become aware of alternatives in order to enrich their own approach to learning.

The idea of the learner taking charge of his or her own learning has been extended to the

negotiation of both course content and methodology.

4.10.4 Learner Generated Syllabi

The influence of learner autonomy is apparent in recent trends in syllabus design. Syllabus design in

the 1950s and 1960s tended to be centralised: a government department would produce a syllabus

which was then disseminated to all institutions regardless of local conditions. The changes in

educational thinking, which started to prioritise the learner, and a dissatisfaction with the inflexibility of

a centralised syllabus, lead to a movement for school-based, locally determined curricula (syllabi).

Candlin (1976) was one of the first to propose a learner generated or negotiated syllabus in CLT,

whereby the content of a syllabus would be based on the learners' perceived needs, rather than on

a view of language content as an objective, universally relevant monolith. The learner generated

syllabus is concurrent with a view of language learning as a process of acquiring skills, as opposed to

the view of learning as gaining mastery over a body of knowledge:

Proponents of learner-centred curricula are less interested in learners acquiring the totality of the

language than in assisting them gain the communicative and linguistic skills they need to carry out

real-world tasks. Implicit in this learner-centred view is a recognition that no one person ever masters

every aspect of every skill in a given language... (Nunan 1988: 22)

Another proponent of the learner-centred syllabus is Breen, who puts the case for a process syllabus:

he argues that traditional, centralised syllabi have always been interpreted differently by teacher

and students, and that there is a need for a framework:

within which either a predesigned syllabus would be publicly analysed and evaluated by the

classroom group, or an emerging content syllabus would be designed (and similarly evaluated) in an

on-going way. (Breen 1984: 55)

Thus teacher and students would discuss an imposed syllabus in relation to their own perceived

needs, and make any changes deemed necessary, or they would simply produce their own

negotiated syllabus.

4.10.5 Self-access

Breen's process syllabus (1984) also made provision for learners having access to banks of alternative

activities, the idea being that learners would select and work on activities that they perceived to be

most useful to themselves. More recently, the self-access centre has come to be seen as the epitome

of learner autonomy, as it provides a space for learners to determine the direction of their own

learning, with minimal 'interference' from the teacher.

However, it has been pointed out (Littlewood 1997) that the self-access centre can impose limitations

in the area of productive skills, particularly speaking. On the other hand, defenders of the self-access

centre claim that this 'limitation' is a misconception, and is due to the way in which learners are

perceived to work in self-access centres: that is, individually. Benson (1997) suggests that

collaborative learning is fundamental to the development of true autonomy, thus we need to find

ways of promoting group learning in self-access centres.

4.10.6 Learner error and evaluation

Error in CLT is seen as a natural part of the learning process, and as such, is tolerated in the

communicative classroom. There is acceptance of the fact that despite having a limited linguistic

knowledge, students can still be successful communicators. As Widdowson (1990) puts it, errors can

be seen:

as positive signs of successful learning since they show the learner employing procedures for using

whatever linguistic resources they have to hand to mediate meaning.

In CLT a learner is evaluated not only on accuracy but also on fluency, either informally by the

teacher during normal classroom communicative activities, or through means of a communicative

test. The new revised Cambridge University First Certificate Examination, for example, has tried to take

communicative testing on board.

4.10.7 Small Group and Pair Work

Another innovation for which the Communicative Approach is responsible is that of encouraging

students to work in small groups or pairs.

Collaborative learning is seen as fundamental in the development of competence in a language

(Nunan 1992). Thus, although learners may create meanings individually - in their heads, if you like -

these meanings only take on a communicative significance when they are presented in social

interaction - that is, when they are said (or written) to other people. In this view, language learning is

seen as a social process of meaning construction, a view which is obviously at the root of

communicative approaches to language teaching. Put simply, pair and group work is intended to

maximise the time allotted to each student for communicating, and therefore for learning through

the negotiation of meaning by using language.

4.10.8 The use of authentic materials

The Communicative Approach has become synonymous with the use of authentic materials in the

classroom, in the form of authentic spoken or written language (e.g. newspaper articles, extracts

from books, native speaker dialogues or monologues, etc.). The rationale behind this is that students

should be exposed to language that is actually used by native speakers, and should be encouraged

to develop strategies for understanding this language.

However, the notion of authenticity has recently been problematised by, among others, Prodromou:

Because English is a first language not only in Britain or America but for many people in countries of

Asia and Africa the question then arises of whose authenticity is to be taught and what relationship

will this authentic variety of English have to English as an International language in its numerous

contexts? (1997:14)

What is more, the implications of this insistence on authenticity are far-reaching for the teacher:

The native speaker, by dint of birth, continues to be the expert in ELT and the ultimate authority in

matters of use and usage......The non-native speaker is at a constant disadvantage, linguistically and

culturally, feeling unable to live up to native-speaker models of language. (ibid)

In many respects CLT appears to be an approach developed by and for native speaker teachers.

4.11 The role of grammar in CLT

4.11.1 "Strong" versus "Weak" versions of CLT

Howatt distinguishes between what he calls a "strong" and a "weak" version of CLT:

The "weak" version which has become more or less standard practice in the last ten years, stresses the

importance of providing learners with opportunities to use their English for communicative purposes

and, characteristically, attempts to integrate such activities into a wider program of language

teaching...The "strong" version of communicative teaching, on the other hand, advances the claim

that language is acquired through communication, so that it is not merely a question of activating an

existing and inert knowledge of the language, but of stimulating the development of the language

system itself. If the former could be described as "learning to use" English, the latter entails "using

English to learn it". (1984: 279)

In other words, typically the "weak" version allows for a focus on structure, while the "strong" version

underplays this aspect.

Some earlier forms of CLT tended to swing away from any overt inclusion of structure in the syllabus, a

reaction to some of the more structure-focused earlier methodologies (see Unit 2, and Appendices

4.1 & 4.4). There was a theoretical foundation for this in the work of Prabhu (1987), who argued that

the knowledge needed by a speaker in order to use a language is far too complex to be dealt with

by teaching grammar, and Krashen (1988), whose argument was that language can only be

acquired subconsciously, not learned in the form of statable rules (see Unit 3).

The rationale behind the 'strong' form of CLT can clearly be seen in Allwright's (1979) statement that:

if the language teacher's management activities are directed exclusively at involving the learners in

solving communication problems in the target language, then language learning will take care of

itself, and the teacher can be fairly sure of not being guilty of unwarranted interference in the

process.

4.11.2 The return to a focus on form

However, Krashen is today alone in flying the flag for his Comprehensible Input Theory. The pendulum

has swung back in favour of grammar. Richards, writing in 1984, pointed out that:

Despite the intuitive appeal of claims for the value of natural communication in the classroom and

the anecdotes used to support them, there is equally convincing anecdotal evidence to the

contrary that suggests that such (communicative) activities promote fossilisation and pidginisation by

placing learners in situations where the demands of their performance soon outpace their

grammatical competence. (1984: 43)

Thus a major criticism of CLT has been the view, supported by Second Language Acquisition

research, that doing (that is, taking part in communicative tasks) does not automatically lead to

knowing (that is, linguistic competence).

Critiques of CLT have from the beginning identified its lack of overt focus on grammar as a major

weakness. Swan, in his attack on CLT in 1985 (see below) commented that in CLT "it is perverse not to

focus on questions of form when this is desirable".

Many researchers now see a need for a focus on structure as well as communication in language

teaching. Proponents of the need for a focus on form in instruction have included Bialystok (1978),

Schmidt and Frota (1990), Sharwood Smith (1991) and Batstone (1995). This is an area which will be

explored in greater depth in the subject Tasks and Projects.

Nevertheless, the idea that grammar is too complex to be taught in an over-simplified way has had

some influence. A general theme in the communicative approach is that new language is focused

on in a comprehensible context, and attention is first paid to meaning and function, before turning to

an analysis of grammatical form. The learner is encouraged to work out and discuss the structures,

with the teacher as guide rather than transmitter of knowledge. See Reading 4.1 for a recent article

by Celce-Murcia et al., published in the Spring 1997 edition of the TESOL Quarterly, appraising the

current return to a focus on form in CLT.

By postponing the focus on grammar, and then allowing learners to explicitly discuss and think about

it, the process of acquiring new knowledge is one which is initiated by the learner him/herself, and as

such is more relevant, memorable and meaningful. The learner also has some control over the

learning process. It has been argued (e.g. by Ellis 1992) that while examining grammar may not lead

to immediate internalisation of forms, it can facilitate learning at a later stage, when the learner's

own interlanguage has developed to the point where that specific piece of language can be

internalised.

Thus, current theory states, the way in which structure is focused on in CLT needs to encourage

learners to form their own hypotheses about language so as to be able to develop their

interlanguage.

4.11.3 Was mainstream CLT ever communicative?

Some (e.g. Thornbury 1998) have argued that CLT never really lost a focus on grammar, and that in

fact, CLT (as reflected in coursebooks and practised in the classroom) was never really

communicative:

Not only have teachers never abandoned a grammar-driven approach, but there seems to be little

evidence that the alternatives, such as a task-based pedagogy, have made any lasting impression

on the current practice of ELT....The current approach is virtually indistinguishable from its

predecessors, such as weak audiolingualism and Situational Language Teaching. (ibid: 109)

Thornbury points to three main reasons for this:

· the constraints imposed by grammatical syllabi (usually reflected in a coursebook);

· the need, by novice teachers, for low-risk teaching strategies ("Grammar offers teachers a life-raft.

By its very nature, grammar imposes order on chaos". ibid:111);

· the expectations of the learners.

4.12 CLT: rhetoric and reality

CLT, despite being the accepted dominant paradigm in current English language teaching, has

come in for its fair share of criticism. This is a predictable state of affairs, because, as Celce-Murcia

(1997: 142) puts it:

L2 teaching methods and approaches tend to undergo a natural process of cyclical development:

A method or approach is first proposed (often as a counterreaction to an earlier method or

approach), then accepted, applied, and eventually criticised. The criticism may involve either the

reform and revision or the complete rejection of the method or approach and perhaps its

replacement with another. CLT is no exception to this cyclical process: After its appearance in the

1970s and spread in the 1980s, the early 1990s witnessed a growing dissatisfaction with several

aspects of CLT, with some language professionals calling for certain reforms and suggesting changes.

In fact, one of the first critiques of CLT dates back to 1985, when Michael Swan, in a paper entitled "A

critical look at the communicative approach" in the ELT Journal, accused CLT of:

over-generalis(ing) valid but limited insights until they become virtually meaningless; it makes

exaggerated claims for the power and novelty of its doctrines; it misrepresents the currents of

thought it has replaced; it is often characterised by serious intellectual confusion; it is choked with

jargon. (Swan 1985: 74)

Despite the virulence of his attack, Swan did accept that CLT had made some very "valuable"

contributions to language teaching. However, as Widdowson pointed out in his reply to this paper

("Against dogma: a reply to Michael Swan"), Swan was in fact making a case for the implementation

of a structural/lexical syllabus - that is, accusing CLT of dogma in order to propose his own - a syllabus

with a different focus.

Nowadays critiques of CLT tend to centre around notions of 'appropriate methodology' and culture

(see Unit 5), or the failure of CLT to in fact offer a communicative approach to learning at all, or

exactly how CLT should provide a focus on form, which we have discussed above. The basic tenets

of a) the communicative nature of language, and b) the need for students to in some way

communicate in order to learn, have been more or less widely accepted.

In Unit 5 will deal in detail with the implications of assuming a communicative methodology in many

cultural contexts. We also examined the implications for the role of both teacher and learner, and

the problems inherent in the notion of learner autonomy for many educational contexts. We will now

consider some of the shortcomings of the communicative approach.

4.13 The implications of "setting" and "scene" in CLT

Hymes (1972) identifies the importance of both the physical context ("setting") and socio-

psychological context ("scene") in speech acts. Widdowson (1990) carries this distinction over into a

consideration of the classroom itself: "setting" represents the physical features of a classroom, while

"scene" characterises the roles played by teacher and learner in the communicative classroom.

Setting can easily prevent some of the most basic activities of CLT from being carried out in the

classroom. What happens if you have fixed seating in your classroom? How can you do small group

work if students cannot move their chairs to form groups? And what about if there is no space for a

class of 30 to do a walking round mingling activity?

What if the walls of your classroom are so thin that the teacher next door complains if you try to do

an activity which results in a certain amount of noise?

Scene too can drastically reduce the implementation of a communicative approach to teaching.

CLT may come into conflict with the culturally determined roles of teacher and student in non-

Western cultures. However, problems can arise in Western classrooms too. Widdowson makes a point

about group work in this context:

The teacher may arrange for the class to work, let us say, on problem-solving tasks in groups. .....This

has the advantage of increasing participation in the use and practice of language. But if the groups

are to operate by exercising interactional autonomy in an independent and unconstrained way then

they will quite naturally develop their own norms and expectations and these will apply not to the

role of pupil at all but to the role of peer group member.....(This group) has its own standards of

appropriate behaviour and these are not likely to match up with what the teacher expects from

group activity. Thus the group may see it as appropriate in reference to their norms of behaviour to

withdraw commitment, to sabotage the activity, to ridicule attempts to use the foreign language

and to give high prestige to comic incorrectness and impropriety. (1990: 190-191)

Widdowson adds that he is not making a case for the withdrawal of learner freedom in groups, but

that the implications should be carefully considered in each case, "lest an ideological zeal for

democratic gesture should undermine the whole pedagogic enterprise" (ibid: 191).

4.14 Conclusion

Although CLT is the dominant paradigm in language teaching today, it is by no means the end of the

road. The idea of developing theory and continual growth in CLT is one accepted by most theorists.

But whatever innovations may emerge in the future, and whatever researchers in fields related to

linguistics may discover, any new developments in language teaching will take place against the

background of the changes brought about by CLT. The concern with the learner as an individual, the

view of language as including a communicative and social facet as well as a purely linguistic one,

the concern with language as related to real life... all these developments will have to profoundly

influence whatever is to come in language teaching.

4.15 Suggestions for further reading

Brumfit, C & Johnson, K. (1979): The Communicative Approach to Language Teaching. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Lewis, M. (1993): The Lexical Approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.

Lewis, M. (1996). "Implications of a lexical view of language". In Willis, J., & Willis, D. (eds.)

Challenge and Change in Language Teaching. Oxford: Heinemann.

Thornbury, S. (1998): "The Lexical Approach: a journey without maps?". In Modern English

Teacher 7/4: pp.7-13.

Widdowson, H.G. (1990): Aspects of Language Teaching, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

UNIT 5 – THE END OF METHOD

5.1 Introduction

Although it is clear that language teaching has undergone many transformations over the centuries,

a thorough examination of the past suggests that these changes have represented different

configurations of the same basic options rather than some linear, additive progress toward the

present day. Nevertheless, authors such as Clarke, Larsen-Freeman, Richards and Rodgers and many

others are of the opinion that there have been a series of language teaching methods over the

years, each being succeeded by a better one until the present day.

However, many teachers in an EFL context question the usefulness of supposed methods to their own

teaching contexts and resent their imposition by "experts" from abroad. Within the realm of EFL

literature, there also seems to be a general attitude of rejection towards the concept of `method'.

5.2 The end of method

In spite of all the approaches and methods `invented' to date (which we have examined in the

previous units), and all the books and articles that have been written about them, we are no nearer

to a universally appropriate and effective language teaching method; in fact there is a growing

realisation that this is one `Holy Grail' which may not exist.

The search for the method has ended, not because we have found it, nor because we are a

profession exhausted from an unproductive search, but because we have decided or discovered

that we are searching for a myth. (Jarvis 1972: 202)

If we examine some of the works that refer to the different tendencies in the field of language

teaching, we will observe that all of them consider that the 1970s represented an important change

in orientation: the main concern in the field of language teaching, the points of reference and the

fundaments of this discipline changed. Some have defined it as the breakdown or the failure of the

concept of "method". (Stern:1993 / Yalden: 1987a)

With regard to language teaching, Stern (1983) has suggested that there is a "fundamental

weakness" in the concept of Method. He noted later that this concept was far from dead:

One of the most extraordinary and in some ways totally unexpected phenomena in the recent

history of language teaching has been the `method boom' of the seventies. (1985: 249)

He goes on to argue that:

the prolonged preoccupation with the new methods, useful as it has been to widen our horizon, is

becoming increasingly unproductive and misguided. (ibid: 251)

Similarly, Clarke states that "the term `method' is a label without substance" (1983: 109).

This change in orientation was due to two decisive factors:

a) The situation of confusion, uncertainty and disenchantment among professionals that followed the

enthusiasm for methods developed until 1970.

b) The changes in linguistics and the study of language as communication through a series of new

disciplines (as we pointed out in Unit 1). In the traditional schema:

Linguistics was centred on the message as the representation of linguistic code. The new trends of

study pointed out that all the implied elements (subject - message - context) are relevant to

understanding language. Similarly, language teaching is also understood as a communicative event.

Stern (1983), for instance, defends a multifactorial view of language teaching. All of these trends

represent the end of method as the central core of language teaching and as the only thing

"responsible" for possible success or failure in attaining ELT objectives.

Thus developments in methodology have moved from the idea of `method' to the idea of

`approach', due to the impossibility of offering solutions to the problems that language teaching

represents.

The concept of "method" has failed and, above all, the search for "The Method" has disappeared.

This had already been announced in a study carried out by the Unesco in 1975 which pointed out:

... the need to create a new frame of reference for language teaching by drawing on linguistic

studies, developmental psychology, a study of the socio-cultural context, and so on. Thus, the failure

of the method concept, an increase on the number of variables to be considered, the need for cost-

effectiveness and for diversified objectives all herald the urgency of finding a different approach to

constructing language-teaching programs. (Yalden 1987b: 5)

The concept of method, rather than analysing what is happening in language classrooms, is

regarded as a prescription for classroom behaviour. Recent EFL literature has been claiming that the

predominance of a certain method at a certain time never reflected what was actually happening

in the classroom. It has also been claimed that there are other extrinsic factors, these being the

social, cultural, political and philosophical climate, that condition language teaching too (as we shall

later see in this unit).

A. Pennycook (1989) goes further with his criticism and suggests that the Method concept has played

a mayor role in maintaining the gendered division of the workforce, a hierarchically organised

division between male conceptualisers and female practitioners.

The power of the Western male academy in defining and prescribing concepts - whether it be SLA

theory, methods, or any other area of the canon of TESOL - articulates a positivist, progressivist and

patriarchal understanding of teaching and plays an important role in maintaining inequities

between, on the one hand, predominantly male academics and, on the other, female teachers and

language classrooms on the international language periphery. (Pennycook 1989: 612)

Peter Strevens agrees with need to develop a healthy scepticism when considering methods. In a

recent publication he states that:

... the complex circumstances of teaching and learning languages - with different kinds of pupils,

teachers, aims and objectives, approaches, methods and materials, classroom techniques and

standards of achievement - make it inconceivable that any single method could achieve optimum

success in all circumstances.

One of the reasons why methods have never succeeded is because so-called `ideal' teaching

conditions have never existed. However, we can extract some useful ideas and techniques to adapt

for our own purposes from all the methods or approaches discussed in this subject. In fact, even

today it is not too difficult to recognise the ghost of previous methods or approaches in present

classrooms, where audiolingual or grammar-translation techniques are bundled into an eclectic

cocktail with teachers' beliefs, teachers' experience and the influence of their teaching context.

5.3 New trends in ELT literature

Recently Richards (1990) has declared that:

Methodology can be characterised as the activities, tasks, and learning experiences selected by the

teacher in order to achieve learning, and how these are used within the teaching/learning process.

(1990: 11)

Key words in this definition are `process' and `task', signalling a movement from teaching method as

model, a set of prescriptions, to teaching method as exploration of real time activity in the classroom.

This shift has been consolidated in the 90s by the growth of classroom-based research (often carried

out by teachers themselves) with the aim of innovation and improvement.

Investigation into and preoccupation with the practice rather than the subject matter of our branch

of the teaching profession continue nonetheless. A recently fashionable ELT notion is that what is

important in education (and in personal and professional development) is not so much the product

as the process involved in searching for a method.

Thus, it could be said that although we now realise that there is no one correct method, we have

learnt a great deal in the process of searching for one.

According to Fanselowe (1987: 484) method is:

...a word used with labels such as Audiolingual, Silent Way, or Grammar-Translation that is meant to

distinguish different groups of teaching practices. The term can lead to discussions of teaching that

lack specificity, and the words attached to method such as Audiolingual, have connotations that

often stimulate arguments about the advantages of one method over another: in fact the term

method is too global to permit many useful comparisons. (Fanselow 1987: 484)

It seems that the important message in this quotation is that what teachers need is knowledge which

will help them to be effective in their own contexts; specific, relevant and `local', as opposed to

global methodology. After all, in its broadest sense every teacher has his/her own methodology,

whichever official version they may claim to follow. Looking at methodology in this way might help to

solve a riddle posed by Stevick, and familiar to us all:

In the field of language teaching, Method A is the logical contradiction of Method B; and if the

assumptions from which A claims to be derived are correct, then B cannot work, and vice-versa. Yet

one colleague is getting excellent results with A and another is getting comparable results with B.

How is this possible? (Stevick 1976: 104)

5.4 Factors affecting the success of a language programme

It becomes evident that the goals and therefore the procedures of language teaching closely reflect

the social, political, cultural and intellectual climate of the times. We are aware that our knowledge

of these factors is limited; we know, however, that we have to keep them in mind when considering

methodology.

Language teaching is a complex issue and planning a successful language programme thus involves

considering factors that go beyond the mere content and presentation of teaching materials. Stern

(1983: 338), for instance, mentions five types of variables that condition a model for language

learning:

· Social context. This refers to the perception the learner has of such context, how he/she

experiences and interprets it, how it affects his/her attitudes and motivation, and how it affects

language learning and learning conditions.

· Learner differences. These refer to the many individual factors that can affect learning and its

results: age, sex, linguistic aptitude and cognitive aspects, personality, etc.

· Learning conditions. These are related to whether contact with the L2 is in an environment where

this is originally used or in a language class. This aspect is directly related to the difference between

controlled learning and natural learning.

· The learning process itself. This refers to the gradual process as well as to the mechanisms and

strategies involved in learning a language.

· The result of learning. This shows the effects of the factors that condition the learning process.

Adrian Holliday (1994), for example, has drawn considerable attention to contextual features,

especially the institutional and cultural circumstances surrounding English language teaching and

learning. From his language projects carried out in the Middle East and in China he has evolved the

expression "appropriate methodology" which he uses to explore and analyse the context where

English language is taught.

He suggests that there are three methodologies in any language project:

· the methodology of the project: the strategies for action and management of this action.

· the methodology of the curriculum: the way in which the educational process is perceived and

implemented.

· the research methodology: the process of learning about the institution in order to find out how the

other two methodologies can be appropriate in that institutional context.

We will be examining the concept of 'appropriate methodology' in detail later in this unit.

5.4.1 Individual factors

The aim of this section is to present you with a general overview of some of the factors that may have

a direct influence on general language teaching and learning.

A large number of individual factors contribute to the dynamics of the teaching and learning process

and provide reference points in discussions of language-teaching theory and practice.

There are factors which a trained teacher needs to consider and which can help or hinder the

language learning environment within the class and directly affect the language learning process,

particularly the methods used and their application within the realm of the classroom.

5.4.1.1 The learner

A teacher must consider the cultural, sociological and psychological factors of themselves and their

students. For our purposes here our focus will be more on the variety of students in a homogenous

class and on noting other potential aspects of diversity between students.

Every student has a particular profile, interests, learning habits and reasons for learning that obviously

affect how well they do in a language course. They may differ with respect to personal goals and

motivation. Some may be studying the language because it is relevant for their professional or

educational future, while others may be studying to satisfy a curiosity and fascination with a foreign

culture. All these differences will determine the criteria learners use to evaluate the relevance of the

course, and consequently the amount of effort they are prepared to put into language learning.

Students also differ with respect to their abilities when carrying out the same task. For instance, some

students have a good ear and pick up languages quickly, whereas others require a greater effort to

achieve the same results.

Learners also differ in their learning style; there are learners who are more print-oriented and prefer to

write down new words; others worry if there is something they do not understand and will always look

for explanations, whereas other learners are more ready to tolerate ambiguity. Some learners will

seek opportunities to use the language, while others may be shy about making errors and avoid such

opportunities. Adults entering a language course after twenty years may be surprised at the idea of

moving furniture and being directly approached by the teacher and other students. There are still

many students who associate a Grammar Translation methodology with language learning and may

need time and encouragement to adjust to a Communicative Approach classroom.

Regardless of impetus, the students are equal participants in the class and equally responsible for

their own language acquisition from what is presented to them. But research has demonstrated that

the differences mentioned above do contribute to the success or failure in second and foreign

language learning. Mixed ability classes are common in schools since students are unlikely to have

the same language level; this causes a serious problem for the teacher as well as for the students

who are looking to acquire a strong base for achieving a proficient level of language. Equally

regrettable is the lack of time a teacher can devote to students who require a slower pace and

further explanation or practice.

5.4.1.2 The teacher

The teacher represents an important aspect in language teaching. Wilga Rivers (1981) states that:

second language teachers should be thoughtful professionals, not mere day labourers. The

teacher needs to empathise with the students in order to be fully effective as a teacher. This

is just one aspect which is addressed in teacher training programmes.

It is important that teachers understand their students well: they will have students of all ages, with a

variety of cultural and educational backgrounds, with varied reasons for wanting to learn a foreign

language (some frankly pragmatic and utilitarian, others cultural or personal) and their individual

needs will have to be addressed as thoroughly as possible, taking into consideration the above

factors as well as more external factors such as whether their students are learning the language on

short courses, intensive courses, or in long sequences.

The successful implementation of a language programme may depend on how well it matches the

expectations, learning styles, and values of the learners.

A teacher must take into account considerations that make it challenging to maintain professional

standards and derive the satisfaction and personal growth associated with personal work. It is often

the case that teachers are dissatisfied with their job for a variety of reasons:

· In many schools the curriculum is not designed by teachers themselves but ordained by a higher

authority. This renders it impossible to include a more learner-centred focus if that is a preferred

direction of particular teaching groups or individuals, but not the preferred direction in national or

school curricula.

· Teachers are isolated within schools: with interaction between teachers limited by physical

arrangements and tight timetabling, professional development is often not recognised as valuable;

lesson preparation is often not included as part of paid, professional work (in particular in the case of

teachers employed on a casual or hourly basis); teachers often compete with each other for access

to spare resources.

5.4.2 Sociocultural factors

The role English plays in a particular society has an important influence both on how language is

viewed by the members of a society and on language policies towards the teaching of English.

In some societies, knowledge of English is regarded as a sign of elitism. In others, such as the

Scandinavian countries, successful acquisition of English is something normal as English is studied as

an obligatory subject within the regular school timetable. In some countries, English has a largely

pragmatic status, symbolising internationalism, and therefore it has a utilitarian appeal to learners. In

other countries, particularly third world countries, it may represent modernism and technological

sophistication, wealth and Western prosperity, all of which might create a special motivation for

learning.

5.4.3 Culture and methodology

5.4.3.1 The cultural component in language teaching: teaching culture

Since the 1960s, the cultural component has become a key topic of discussion and concern in

language teaching, as a result of the development of sciences such as Sociology and Anthropology,

and the prominent position acquired by the Communicative Approach.

Many theories have been posed during the last two decades in relation to the concept of culture

and to the role it plays in the classroom.

Until the Second World War, the cultural component was an integrated component of a language

course, and it consisted of general knowledge about the country and the people who spoke that

language. It was a merely descriptive knowledge of relevant information about the country

(Geography, Institutions, History, etc.) very often referred to as "civilisation" (Stern: 1992).

From the 1950s onwards, the development of social sciences implied a new conception of "culture":

this was understood as the lifestyle of a community and the focus was on everyday situations,

personal relationships, values, etc. of the people who spoke the language.

During the 1960s the differences between `formal culture' (music, literature, art) versus `deep culture'

(beliefs, behaviour, values) or, in other words, the differences between "culture" versus "Culture", were

stated.

The functional and communicative approaches brought with them a renewed focus on the role of

the cultural component in language teaching. Culture was now seen as social behaviour: the

relationship between language and culture was also reinforced by the understanding that language

makes sense in its (cultural) context and that communication refers to the negotiation of meaning.

Culture, therefore, is seen as an integral part of the communicative process rather than as

information.

However, exactly how to go about teaching this cultural component of communication remains

problematic. It is true that the enthusiasm for teaching "culture" created many difficulties such as the

use of stereotypes and ethnocentrism. Omaggio (1986: 361-362) tries to explain why some courses in

the USA do not include the study of culture:

· it requires time and thus teaching culture is regarded by teachers as a waste of time. It is decided

then that once learners have acquired the basic grammatical and lexical features of the second or

foreign language, they will study the culture.

· many teachers are scared of teaching culture because they do not know enough about it.

· some teachers do not have a clear idea of what cultural aspects to teach; even textbooks are not

a great help for them in this sense.

Byram (1991) advocates a cultural studies approach to language learning, in which the study of

`ways of life' is treated as seriously, and in tandem with, the study of language. However, it is difficult

to clarify how this relationship is developed in the second or foreign language classroom.

Nevertheless, awareness is increasing nowadays with some positive effects:

· one is that materials writers are taking more conscious decisions about cultural content;

· another is the growing understanding that the cultural needs of learners have to be assessed rather

than assumed;

· the cultural content may significantly contribute to the learners' linguistic, cognitive and social

development;

· an integral approach to the teaching of language and culture enables learners to become

communicatively competent.

Culture teaching is to a large extent behavioural and should lead to cultural proficiency; that is, the

learner is acquiring the skills to conduct himself in socioculturally appropriate ways. (Stern 1992: 218)

What is needed now is critical appraisal on the part of teachers to assess the feasibility of integrating

language and culture in the design of courses, materials and activities.

5.4.3.2 Appropriate methodology: culture and methodology

There is another aspect of culture which has recently become the focus of much debate in ELT: that

of the cultural values inherent in methodology itself.

All of the approaches and methods that we have discussed so far in this subject (see Units 2, 3 & 4),

including the current approach of CLT, incorporate "a methodology often associated with an Anglo-

Saxon view of communication" (Kramsch & Sullivan, 1996). Holliday, too, criticises the fact that

Western methodology comes from an instrumental, business-oriented world of largely private

teaching in Britain, Australasia and North America (BANA), which is very different from state tertiary,

secondary and primary education in the rest of the world (TESEP) where most English language is

taught (Holliday 1995).

It is hardly surprising, therefore, that in recent years, teachers have started to question the

appropriacy of using a primarily Western methodological approach in other cultures. The idea that

the communicative approach is based on universal generalisations about educational practices that

are in no way culture specific, has come increasingly under fire. As Widdowson (1990) has pointed

out, even the Council of Europe's implementation of notional / functional syllabuses throughout

Europe (see Unit 4) was carried out "without a consideration of the local validity of the rationale from

which they derive".

The situation is even more complex when cultures with significantly different educational practices

are concerned. Research indicates that different meaning systems, which exist across cultures, make

the transference of particular pedagogical practices from one culture to another problematic.

One of the fundamental aspects of learning concerns "the need to make new knowledge sensitive

to existing beliefs and values" (Ellis 1996), or, in the words of Damen (1987):

learning involves the incorporating of new information into old sets of beliefs and knowledge

for the purpose of maintaining a consistent world view.

Thus the communicative English teacher, fresh off a teacher training course in Britain (for example),

will find that his/her methodological approach may have to be significantly altered if he/she ends up

teaching in China, rather than expecting his/her Chinese learners to "have to make radical changes

to some of their basic beliefs, values and consequent ways of acting" (Ellis 1996).

To sum up, nowadays there is a growing conviction that much English language teaching

methodology is inappropriate to many socio-cultural contexts throughout the world. It tends to

prescribe classroom practice in such a way that it restricts the teacher's ability to use their own local

knowledge in developing a methodology which suits their classrooms, students, communities and

educational philosophies.

5.4.3.3 Adapting methodology and materials in different contexts

Education in different countries reflects culturally specific traditions of teaching and learning that

may condition the form and content of language teaching and learning. This can influence the role

and status of the teacher, and consequently, it can also influence the dynamics of classroom.

In most western cultures students are encouraged to express opinion and disagreement, to display

knowledge and verbal skills. Teaching activities and procedures in such contemporary methods as

Community Language Learning (Counselling Learning), Communicative Language Teaching and

the Silent Way derive from specific Western styles of classroom dynamics and may not be well

accepted in other cultural settings. In some societies, teachers are expected to be distant from

students. Similarly, the use of mime and other activities may involve both teachers and learners in

non-traditional roles. In different cultures a certain style of learning might be fostered, like

memorisation in some Asian cultures. In cultures such as the Arab or the Japanese, a passive non

verbal mode is considered more normal.

While researching how CLT methodology was modified by teachers to suit local conditions in

Vietnam, Kramsch & Sullivan (1996) found that:

Rather than the traditional concept of communicative learning associated with pair and

group work, or teacher as facilitator and communicator in real-life situations, we were

confronted with aspects of a different classroom culture: the notion of classroom-as-family,

teacher-as-mentor, and language learning-as-play.

Kramsch and Sullivan found that Vietnamese teachers and learners adapted materials to fit in to

traditional Vietnamese roles of teachers and learners, modifying the way in which tasks were handled

in the classroom, for example.

Such issues as task type also need to be carefully considered in different cultures:

Complexity (of task) may be culturally variable. What is familiar mode of reasoning in one

culture may not be familiar at all in another. (Widdowson 1990)

5.4.3.4 Adapting teacher / learner roles

Obviously, in the light of the above, the role of the teacher / learner needs to be sensitive to cultural

expectations and norms. A 'standard' CLT teacher-as-facilitator role cannot be blithely assumed

everywhere.

A humanistic, group therapy approach to pedagogy may be highly effective...in places

which favour person-oriented education, but impossible to implement in places where

different educational ideology calls for a very different kind of interactional engagement in

class, one based on clear positional definition established by tradition. Again, it is tempting to

believe that if a particular concept of interaction has an especially appealing ideological

ring to it, then it must needs be transactionally effective; that setting pupils free of their

traditionally ascribed roles, for example, will as a corollary make them better learners.

(Widdowson 1990: 187)

The concept of learner autonomy is equally problematic. As Pennycook states:

To encourage "learner autonomy" universally, without first becoming acutely aware of the

social, cultural and political context in which one is working, may lead at best to

inappropriate pedagogies and at worst to cultural impositions. (1997: 44)

5.5 Final summing up

Although CLT is the dominant paradigm in language teaching today, it is by no means the end of the

road.

The idea of developing theory and continual growth in CLT is one accepted by most theorists. But

whatever innovations may emerge in the future, and whatever researchers in fields related to

Linguistics may discover, any new developments in language teaching will take place against the

background of the changes brought about by CLT.

The concern with the learner as an individual, the view of language as including a communicative

and social facet as well as purely linguistic one, the concern with language as related to real life... all

these developments will have to profoundly influence whatever is to come in language teaching.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anthony, E. (1963): "Approach, method, and technique". English Language Teaching 17.

Asher, J. (1977): Learning Another Language through Actions: The Complete Teacher's Guide Book. Los

Gatos, California: Sky Oaks Productions. (2nd ed. 1982.)

Arzamendi, J. (1997): "The context of language teaching". Unpublished.

Austin, J.L. (1962): How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Batstone, R. (1994): Grammar, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Benson, P. (1997): "Self-Access and Collaborative Learning" in SIG Selections 1997, IATEFL.

Breen, M. & Candlin, C.N. (1980): "The essentials of a communicative curriculum in language teaching" in

Applied Linguistics 1/2: 89-112.

Breen, M. (1984): "Process Syllabuses in Language Teaching" in C.J.Brumfit (ed.) General English Syllabus

Design pp47-60. Pergamon / Modern English Publications.

Brooks, N. (1964): Language and Language Learning: Theory and Practice. 2nd ed. New York: Harcourt

Brace.

Brumfit, C & Johnson, K. (1979): The Communicative Approach to Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Candlin, C.N. (1976): "Communicative language teaching and the debt to pragmatics". In C. Rameh (ed.),

Georgetown University Roundtable 1976. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.

Canale, M. & Swain, M. (1980): "Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language

teaching and testing". Applied Linguistics 1 (1), pp. 1-47.

Celce-Murcia, M. (1980): "New methods in perspective" in MEXTESOL Journal IV/4.

Celce-Murcia, M. et al. (1997): "Direct approaches in L2 instruction: A turning point in CLT" in TESOL Quarterly

Vol 31/1.

Chastain, K. (1976): Developing Second Language Skills. Chicago: Rand McNally.

Chomsky, N. (1965): Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Boston: MIT Press

Chomsky, N. (1966): "The Utility of Linguistic Theory to the Language Teacher" in J.P.B. Allen & S. Pit Corder

(eds) (1973) Readings in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Clarke, M. (1983): "The scope of approach, the importance of method, and the nature of techniques". In

J.E. Alatis, H. Stern & P. Strevens (eds) Georgetown University round table on language and linguistics (pp.

106-115). Washington, DC: Georgetown University.

Coleman, A. (1929): The Teaching of Modern Foreign Languages in the United States. New York: Macmillan.

Cook, V. (1991): Second Language Learning and Language Teaching. London: Edward Arnold.

Curran, C. (1976): Counseling-Learning in Second Languages. Apple River, III.: Apple River Press.

Ellis, G. & Sinclair, B. (1989): Learning to Learn English: Teacher's Book, Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Ellis, G. (1996): "How culturally appropriate is the communicative approach?" in ELT Journal Vol50/3.

Fanselow, J. (1987): Breaking Rules: Generating and Exploring Alternatives in Language Teaching. New

York: Longman.

Gattegno, C. (1972): Teaching Foreign Languages in Schools: The Silent Way. 2nd. ed. New York:

Educational Solutions.

Gattegno, C. (1976): The Common Sense of Teaching Foreign Languages. New York: Educational Solutions.

Halliday, M. (1970): "Language structure and language function" in J.Lyons (ed.) New Horizons in Linguistics,

pp140-165. Oxford: Penguin.

Halliday, M., McIntosh, A. & Strevens, P. (1964): The Linguistic Sciences and Language Teaching. London:

Longman.

Hartley, B. & Viney, P. (1979): Streamline English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Holec, H. (1980): Autonomy and Foreign Language Learning. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

Holliday, A. (1994): Appropriate Methodology and Social Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Holliday, A. (1995): "A post-communicative era?: method versus social context." in The Journal: Appropriate

Methodology, from classroom methods to classroom processes. TESOL France and The British Council, Paris.

Howatt, A. (1984): A History of English Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hymes, D. (1972): "On communicative competence". In J.B. Pride & J. Holmes (eds.), Sociolinguistics, pp.

269-93. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Hymes, D. (1974): Foundations in Sociolinguistics. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Jarvis, G. (1972): "Teacher education goals: they're tearing up the street where I was born" in Foreign

Language Annals 6.

Jelinek, V. (ed. 1953): The Analytic Didactic of Comenius. Chicago.

Jones, L. (1979): Notions in English, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kramsch, C. & Sullivan, P. (1996): "Appropriate pedagogy" in ELT Journal Vol 50/3.

Krashen, S. (1981): Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Oxford: Pergamon.

Krashen, S. & Terrell, T. (1983): The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in the Classroom. Oxford:

Pergamon.

La Forge, P. (1983): Counseling and Culture in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.

Lado (1977): Lado English Teaching Series. New York: Regents

Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986): Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching, Oxford. Oxford University

Press.

Lewis, M. (1993). The Lexical Approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.

Lewis, M. (1996): "Implications of a lexical view of language". In Willis, J., and Willis, D. (eds.) Challenge and

Change in Language Teaching. Oxford: Heinemann.

Lewis, M. (1997): Implementing the Lexical Approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.

Littlewood, W. (1981): Communicative Language Teaching, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Littlewood, W. (1984): Foreign and Second Language Learning: Language Acquisition Research and Its

Implications for the Classroom, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lozanov, G. (1978): Suggestology and Outlines of Suggestopedia. New York: Gordon and Breach.

Mackey, W. (1965): Language Teaching Analysis. London: Longman.

Moskowitz, G. (1978): Caring and sharing in the Foreign Language Class: A source-Book on Humanistic

Techniques. New York: Newbury House.

Nunan, D. (1988): The Learner-Centred Curriculum, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nunan, D. (1992): Collaborative Language Learning and Teaching, Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Nunan, D. (1995): Language Teaching Methodology. London: Prentice Hall

Palmer, H. (1917): The Scientific Study and Teaching of Languages (Reprinted in 1968). London: Oxford

University Press.

Palmer, H. (1921): Principles of Language Study. New York: World Book Co.

Pawley, A. & Syder, F. (1983): "Two puzzles for linguistic theory: nativelike selection and nativelike fluency". In

Richards, J., and Schmidt, R. (eds.) Language and Communication. Harlow: Longman.

Pennycook, A. (1987): "Cultural Alternatives and Autonomy" in P. Benson & P. Voller (eds.), Autonomy and

Independence in Language Learning (pp35-53), Longman.

Pennycook, A. (1989): "The concept of method, interested knowledge, and the politics of language

teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 23/4, pp. 589-618.

Peters, A. (1983): The Units of Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pittman, G. (1963): Teaching Structural English. Brisbane: Jacaranda.

Prabhu, N.S. (1983): "Procedural Syllabuses". Paper presented at the RELC Seminar, Singapore.

Prabhu, N.S. (1987): Second Language Pedagogy, London: Oxford University Press.

Prodromou, L. (1997) "Global English and the Octopus" in IATEFL Newsletter, Issue no. 135 Feb-March 1997.

Richards, J. & Rodgers, T. (1986): Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. (1985): The Context of Language Teaching, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. (1990): The Language Teaching Matrix. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rivers, W. (1964): The Psychologist and the foreign Language Teacher. Chicago: University of Chicago

Press.

Rivers, W. (1981): Teaching Foreign Language Skills. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.

Rivers, W & Temperley, M. (1978): A Practical Guide to the Teaching of English as a Second or Foreign

Language, London: Oxford University Press.

Rowlinson, W. (1994): "The historical ball and chain" in A. Swarbrick (ed.) (1994) Teaching Modern

Languages, The Open University-Routledge.

Searle, J.R. (1969): Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Stern, H.H. (1983): Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Stern, H.H. (1985): "Review of Methods that work: A smorgasbord of ideas for language teachers" in Studies

in Second Language Acquisition, 7/2, pp 249-51.

Stern, H.H. (1992): Issues and Options in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Stevick, E. (1976): Memory, Meaning and Method. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.

Stevick, E. (1980): A Way and Ways. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.

Strevens, P. (1977): New Orientations in the Teaching of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Swain, M. (1985): "Communicative Competence: some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible

output in its development" in S. Gass & C. Madden (eds.) Input in Second Language Acquisition, Mass.:

Newbury House.

Swan, M. (1985): "A critical look at the communicative approach" in ELT Journal

Vol 39.

Tamburo, C. (1986): Learner-Centered Strategies and Activities for Elementary, Intermediate and

Advanced-Intermediate Spanish Language Classes. UCLA, PhD. Teaching, CUP.

Terrell, T. (1982): "The natural approach to language teaching: an update". Modern Language Journal 66:

121-32.

Thompson, G. (1996): "Some misconceptions about communicative language teaching" in ELT Journal Vol

50/1.

Thornbury, S. (1988): "A reader reacts....to Celce-Murcia et al" in TESOL Quarterly 32/1, Spring 1998 pp109-

116.

Trim, J. (1981): "Resumé" in Council of Europe 1981:ix-xxvi. [513(n15)].

Trim, J. (1997): "Learner Autonomy and the Council of Europe" in IATEFL Newsletter Issue no. 139, Oct-Nov

1997.

Van Ek, J.A. (1975): The Threshold Level in a European Unit/Credit System for Modern Language Teaching

by Adults. Systems Development in Adult Language Learning. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

Viëtor, W. (1886): "Der Sprachunterricht muss umkehren" (in English) in A.P. Howatt (1984) A History of English

Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Widdowson, H.G. (1979): Teching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Widdowson, H.G. (1979): Explorations in Applied Linguistics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Widdowson, H.G. (1985): "Against dogma: a reply to Michael Swan" in ELT Journal Vol 39/3.

Widdowson, H.G. (1990): Aspects of Language Teaching, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wilkins, D. (1976): Notional Syllabuses, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Willis, J. & Willis, D. (1988): Collins COBUILD English Course. Book 1. London: Collins.

Willis, D. (1990): The Lexical Syllabus. London: Collins.

Willis, J. & Willis, D. (1996): Challenge and Change in Language Teaching, Oxford: Heinemann.

Willis, J. (1996): A Framework for Task-Based Learning, Harlow: Longman.

Yalden, J. (1987a): Principles of Course Design for Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press.

Yalden, J. (1987b): The Communicative Syllabus. London: Prentice-Hall.

Yule, G. (1997): Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Zanón, J. (1988): "Psicolingüística y didáctica de las lenguas" (II). Cable, n 3, Abril 1989, pp. 22-32.