A.
An Englightened, Eclectic Approach
It
should be clear from the foregoing that as an “enlightened, eclectic” teacher,
you think in terms of a number of possible methodological options at your
disposal for tailoring classes to particular contexts. Your approach, or
rationale for language learning and teaching, therefore takes on great
importance. Your approach includes a number of basic principles of learning and
teaching on which you can rely for designing and evaluating classroom lessons.
Your approach to language-teaching methodology is a theoretically well informed
global understanding of the process of learning and teaching. It is inspired by
the interconnection of all your reading and observing and discussing and
teaching, and that interconnection underlies everything that you do in the classroom.
On
the basis of what you know so far about second language acquisition and the
pedagogical process, think about (a) which side of a continuum of possibilities
you would generally lean toward, (b) why you would lean that way, and, most
important, (c) what contextual variables might influence a change away from
your general inclination. For example, the first item below asks you to choose
between “meaning” and “grammar” for a focus.
B.
Communicative Language Teaching
Is
there a currently recognized approach that is a generally accepted norm in the
field? The answer is a qualified ”yes.” That qualified “yes” can be captured in
the term communicative language teaching (CLT), and the qualifications to that
answer lie in the numerous possible ways of defining CLT and a plethora of
interpretations and classroom applications.
From
the earlier seminal works in CLT (Widdowson 1978, Breen & Candlin 1980,
Richard-Amato 1996, Lee & VanPatten 1995, Nunan1991a), we have definitions
enough to send us reeling. For the sake of simplicity and directness, I offer
the following six interconnected characteristics as a description of CLT:
1. Classroom
goals focused on all the components (grammatical, discourse, functional,
sociolinguistic, and strategic) of communicative competence. Goals therefore
principles must intertwine the organization aspects of language with the
pragmatic.
2. Language
techniques are designed to engage learners in the pragmatic, authentic,
functional use of language for meaningful purpose. Organizational language
forms are not the central focus, but rather aspect of language that enable the
learner to accomplish those purposes.
3. Fluency
and accuracy are seen as complementary underlying communicative techniques.
times fluency may have to take on more importance than accuracy in order to
keep learners meaningfully engaged in language use.
4. Students
in a communicative class ultimately have to use language, productively and
receptively, in unrehearsed context s outside the classroom. Classroom task
must therefore equip students with the skills necessary for communication in
those contexts.
5. Students
are given opportunities to focus on their own learning process through an
understanding of their own styles of learning and trough the development of
appropriate strategies for autonomous learning.
6. The
lore of the teacher is that of facilitator and guide, not an all knowing
bestower of knowledge. Students are therefore encouraged to construct meaning
trough genuine linguistic interaction with others.
These
six characteristics underscore some major departures from earlier approaches.
In some ways those departures were a gradual product of outgrowing the numerous
methods that characterized were long stretch of history in other ways these
departures were radical. Structurally (grammatically) sequenced curricula were
a mainstay of language teaching for centuries. CLT suggests that grammatical
structure might better be subsumed under various functional categories.
1. Learner-Centered Instruction
This
term applies to curricula as well as to specific techniques. It can be
contrasted with teacher-centered, and has received various recent
interpretations. Learner-centered instruction includes
Ø Techniques
that focus on or account for learners’ needs, styles, and goals.
Ø Techniques
that give some control to the student (group work or strategy training, for
example).
Ø Curricula
that include the consultation and input of students and that do not presuppose
objectives in advance.
Ø Techniques
that allow for student creativity and innovation.
Ø Techniques
that enhance a student’s sense of competence and self-worth.
2. Cooperative and Collaborative Learning
A
curriculum or classroom that is cooperative-and therefore not competitive-usually
involves the above learner-centered characteristics. As students work together
in pairs and groups, they share information and come to each others’ aid. They
are a “team” whose players must work together in order to achieve goals
successfully. Research has shown an advantage for cooperative learning (as
opposed to individual learning) on such factors as “promoting intrinsic
motivation, . . . heightening self-esteem, . . . creating caring and altruistic
relationships, and lowering anxiety and prejudice” (Oxford 1997: 445). Included
among some of the challenges of cooperative learning are accounting for varied
cultural exceptions, individual learning styles, personality differences, and
overreliance on the first language (Crandall 1999).
Cooperative
learning does not merely imply collaboration. To be sure, in a cooperative
classroom the students and teachers work together to purpose goals and
objectives. But cooperative learning “is more structured, more prescriptive to
teachers in groups [than collaborative learning]” (Oxford 1997: 443). In
cooperative learning models, a group learning activity is dependent on the
socially structured exchange of information between learners. In collaborative
learning, the learner engages “with more capable others (teachers, advanced
peers, etc.), who provide assistance and guidance” (Oxford 1997: 444).
3. Interactive Learning
At
the heart of current theories of communicative competence is the essentially
interactive nature of communication. When you speak, for example, the extent to
which your intended message is received is a factor of both your production and
the listener’s reception. Most meaning, in a semantic sense, is a product of
negotiation, of give and take, as interlocutors attempt to communicate. Thus,
the communicative purpose of language compels us to create opportunities for
genuine interaction in the classroom. An interactive course or technique will
provide for such negotiation. Interactive classes will most likely be found.
1.
Doing
a significant amount of pair work and group work.
2.
Receiving
authentic language input in real-world contexts.
3.
Producing
language for genuine, meaningful communication.
4.
Performing
classroom tasks that prepare them for actual language use “out there.”
5. Practicing
oral communication through the give and take and spontaneity of actual
conversations.
6.
Writing
to and for real audiences, not contrived ones.
4. Whole Language Education
One
of the most popular terms currently sweeping through our profession, whole
language has been so widely and divergently interpreted that it unfortunately
is on the verge of losing the impact that it once had (see Rigg 1991 for an
excellent review of whole language education). Initially the term came from
reading research and was used to emphasize (a) the “wholeness” of language as
opposed to views that fragmented language into its bits and pieces of phonemes,
graphemes, morphemes, and words; (b) the interaction and interconnections
between oral language (listening and speaking) and written language (reading
and writing); and (c) the importance, in literate societies, of the written
code as natural and developmental, just as the oral code is.
Now
the term has come to encompass a great deal more. Whole language is a label that
has been used to describe.
Ø Cooperative
learning
Ø Participatory
learning
Ø Student-centered
learning
Ø Focus on the
community of learners
Ø Focus on the
social nature of language
Ø Use of
authentic, natural language
Ø Meaning-centered
language
Ø Holistic
assessment techniques in testing
Ø Integration
of the “four skills.”
It
is appropriate, then, that we use the term carefully so that it does not become
just another buzz word for teachers and materials developers. Two
interconnected concepts are brought together in whole language:
a) The
wholeness of language implies that language is not the sum of its many
dissectible and discrete parts.
b) Whole
language is a perspective “anchored in a vision of an equitable, democratic,
diverse society” (Edelsky 1993: 548).
5. Content-Based instruction
Content-based
instruction (CBI), according to Brinton, Snow, and Wesche (1989: vii), is “the
integration of content learning with language teaching aims. More specifically,
it refers to the concurrent study of language and subject matter, with the form
and sequence of language presentation dictated by content material.” Such an
approach contrasts sharply with many practices in which language skills are
taught virtually in isolation from substantive content. When language becomes
the medium to convey informational content of interest and relevance to the
learner, then learners are pointed toward matters of intrinsic concern.
Language takes on its appropriate role as a vehicle for accomplishing a set of
content goals.
6. Task-Based Instruction
While
there is a good deal of variation among experts on how to describe or defiance
task, Peter Skehan’s (1998a: 95) concept of task seems to capture the
essentials. He defines Task as an activity in which.
Ø Meaning
is primary;
Ø There
is some communication problem to solve;
Ø There
is some sort of relationship to comparable real-world activities;
Ø Task
completion has some priority; and
Ø The
assessment of the task is in terms of outcome
Reference
:
Brown,
H. Douglas. 2000. Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language
pedagogy (Second Edition)