Nyari duit mudah disini...

Saturday, January 8, 2011

Teaching English Methods

Alphabets 1 and 2 - Kindergarten and Elementary Levels

Features:  Double set of alphabet flashcards (green and blue letter versions) with matching "first sound" vocabulary illustrations.  All vowel vocabulary items in this set focus on short vowel sounds.

A - apple, ant   
B - banana, book   
C - cat, car   
D - dog, door   
E - egg, elephant   
F - fish, flower   
G - ghost, gift   
H - house, hat   
I - igloo, ink   
J - jam, jet   
K - kite, key   
L - lion, lamp   
M - monkey, moon   
N - notebook, needle   
O - octopus, orange   
P - pig, pencil   
Q - queen, question   
R - rabbit, ruler   
S - sun, socks   
T - turtle, table   
U - umbrella, under   
V - violin, vase   
W - watermelon, window  
X - x-ray, xylophone   
Y - yo-yo, yellow   
Z - zebra, zoo
Basic Alphabets 3 and 4 - Kindergarten and Elementary Levels

Features:  Double set of alphabet flashcards (pink and orange letter versions) with one set focusing on short vowel sounds and the other on long vowel sounds, in many cases creating minimal pairs - also some emphasis on different bilabial sounds (b, v, p, f).  This set combines vocabulary building with phonemic development. 

A - axe, ape   
B - bottle, boat   
C - cap, cape   
D - desk, dive   
E - error, ear   
F - fence, feet   
G - grab, grape   
H - hot, hose   
I - in, ice   
J - jump, juice   
K - kiss, kitchen   
L - lip, loaf   
M - man, men   
N - nap, nail   
O - on, over   
P - pan, pain   
Q - quack, quake   
R - red, read   
S - sob, soap   
T - tap, tape   
U - up, USA   
V - vest, vine   
W - well, wheel   
X - ox, six    
Y - yell, yard   
Z - zipper, zap!
AlphaChant 1 - Kindergarten and Elementary Levels

Features:  26 A4-sized flashcards employing the vocabulary and colors from the Basic Alphabets 1 and 2 set (above).  These cards are ideal for summarizing and presenting the vocabulary and actual phonemic values for the letters of the alphabet.

AlphaChant 2 - Kindergarten and Elementary Levels

Features:  26 A4-sized flashcards employing the vocabulary and colors from the Basic Alphabets 3 and 4 set (above).  These cards are ideal for summarizing and presenting the vocabulary and actual phonemic values for the letters of the alphabet.









The Grammar Translation Method

Overviewhttp://www.englishraven.com/tp.gif

·         Latin and Ancient Greek are known as "dead" languages, based on the fact that people no longer speak them for the purpose of interactive communication.  Yet they are still acknowledged as important languages to learn (especially Latin) for the purpose of gaining access to classical literature, and up until fairly recently, for the kinds of grammar training that led to the mental dexterity considered so important in any higher education study stream.
·          
·         Latin has been studied for centuries, with the prime objectives of learning how to read classical Latin texts, understanding the fundamentals of grammar and translation, and gaining insights into some important foreign influences Latin has had on the development of other European languages.  The method used to teach it overwhelmingly bore those objectives in mind, and came to be known (appropriately!) as the Classical Method.  It is now more commonly known in Foreign Language Teaching circles as the Grammar Translation Method.
·          
·         It is hard to decide which is more surprising - the fact that this method has survived right up until today (alongside a host of more modern and more "enlightened" methods), or the fact that what was essentially a method developed for the study of "dead" languages involving little or no spoken communication or listening comprehension is still used for the study of languages that are very much alive and require competence not only in terms of reading, writing and structure, but also speaking, listening and interactive communication.  How has such an archaic method, "remembered with distaste by thousands of school learners" (Richards and Rodgers, 1986:4) perservered?
·          
·         It is worth looking at the objectives, features and typical techniques commonly associated with the Grammar Translation Method, in order to both understand how it works and why it has shown such tenacity as an acceptable (even recommended or respected) language teaching philosophy in many countries and institutions around the world.


Objectives

Most teachers who employ the Grammar Translation Method to teach English would probably tell you that (for their students at least) the most fundamental reason for learning the language is give learners access to English literature, develop their minds "mentally" through foreign language learning, and to build in them the kinds of grammar, reading, vocabulary and translation skills necessary to pass any one of a variety of mandatory written tests required at High School or Tertiary level.

Some teachers who use the method might also tell you that it is the most effective way to prepare students for "global communication" by beginning with the key skills of reading and grammar.  Others may even say it is the "least stressful" for students because almost all the teaching occurs in L1 and students are rarely called upon to speak the language in any communicative fashion.

More conservative teachers from more conservative countries are even likely to be put out by anyone merely questioning the method, and a typical response could be "because that's the way it's always been done - it's the way I learned and look, now I'm a professor".  The point being, the method is institutionalized and considered fundamental.  Such teachers are probably even unware that the method has a name and can be compared alongside other methods.

Objectives

Most teachers who employ the Grammar Translation Method to teach English would probably tell you that (for their students at least) the most fundamental reason for learning the language is give learners access to English literature, develop their minds "mentally" through foreign language learning, and to build in them the kinds of grammar, reading, vocabulary and translation skills necessary to pass any one of a variety of mandatory written tests required at High School or Tertiary level.

Some teachers who use the method might also tell you that it is the most effective way to prepare students for "global communication" by beginning with the key skills of reading and grammar.  Others may even say it is the "least stressful" for students because almost all the teaching occurs in L1 and students are rarely called upon to speak the language in any communicative fashion.

More conservative teachers from more conservative countries are even likely to be put out by anyone merely questioning the method, and a typical response could be "because that's the way it's always been done - it's the way I learned and look, now I'm a professor".  The point being, the method is institutionalized and considered fundamental.  Such teachers are probably even unware that the method has a name and can be compared alongside other methods.

Key Features

According to Prator and Celce-Murcia (1979:3), the key features of the Grammar Translation Method are as follows:

(1)  Classes are taught in the mother tongue, with little active use of the target language.

(2)  Much vocabulary is taught in the form of lists of isolated words.

(3)  Long elaborate explanations of the intricacies of grammar are given.

(4)  Grammar provides the rules for putting words together, and instruction often focuses on the form
      and inflection of words.

(5)  Reading of difficult classical texts is begun early.

(6)  Little attention is paid to the content of texts, which are treated as exercises in in grammatical 
      analysis.

(7)  Often the only drills are exercises in translating disconnected sentences from the target language
      into the mother tongue.

(8)  Little or no attention is given to pronunciation.

Typical Techniques

Diane Larsen-Freeman, in her book Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching (1986:13) provides expanded descriptions of some common/typical techniques closely associated with the Grammar Translation Method.  The listing here is in summary form only.

(1)  Translation of a Literary Passage 
      (Translating target language to native language)

(2)  Reading Comprehension Questions 
      (Finding information in a passage, making inferences and relating to personal experience)

(3)  Antonyms/Synonyms 
      (Finding antonyms and synonyms for words or sets of words).

(4) Cognates 
      (Learning spelling/sound patterns that correspond between L1 and the target language)

(5)  Deductive Application of Rule 
      (Understanding grammar rules and their exceptions, then applying them to new examples)

(6)  Fill-in-the-blanks 
      (Filling in gaps in sentences with new words or items of a particular grammar type).

(7)  Memorization 
      (Memorizing vocabulary lists, grammatical rules and grammatical paradigms)

(8)  Use Words in Sentences 
      (Students create sentences to illustrate they know the meaning and use of new words)

(9)  Composition
      (Students write about a topic using the target language)

Comments
Many people who have undertaken foreign language learning at high schools or universities even in the past 10 years or so may remember many of the teaching techniques listed above for the Grammar Translation Method.  They may also recall that the language learning experience was uninspiring, rather boring, or even left them with a sense of frustration when they traveled to countries where the language was used only to find they couldn't understand what people were saying and struggled mightily to express themselves at the most basic level.

Very few modern language teaching experts would be quick to say that this is an effective language teaching method, and fewer would dare to try and assert that it results in any kind of communicative competence.  As Richards and Rodgers (1986:5) state, "It is a method for which there is no theory.  There is no literature that offers a rationale or justification for it that attempts to relate it to issues in linguistics, psychology, or educational theory."  

And yet the Grammar Translation Method is still common in many countries - even popular.  Brown attempts to explain why the method is still employed by pointing out

"It requires few specialized skills on the part of teachers.  Tests of grammar rules and of translations are easy to construct and can be objectively scored.  Many standardized tests of foreign languages still do not attempt to tap into communicative abilities, so students have little motivation to go beyond grammar analogies, translations, and rote exercises."  (1994:53)



The Audio-lingual Method

Overview
http://www.englishraven.com/tp.gif
The next revolution in terms of language teaching methodology coincided with World War II, when America became aware that it needed people to learn foreign languages very quickly as part of its overall military operations.  The "Army Method" was suddenly developed to build communicative competence in translators through very intensive language courses focusing on aural/oral skills.  This in combination with some new ideas about language learning coming from the disciplines of descriptive linguistics and behavioral psychology went on to become what is known as the Audiolingual Method (ALM).
Objectives

Just as with the Direct Method that preceded it, the overall goal of the Audiolingual Method was to createcommunicative competence in learners.  However, it was thought that the most effective way to do this was for students to "overlearn" the language being studied through extensive repetition and a variety of elaborate drills.  The idea was to project the linguistic patterns of the language (based on the studies of structural linguists) into the minds of the learners in a way that made responses automatic and "habitual".  To this end it was held that the language "habits" of the first language would constantly interfere, and the only way to overcome ths problem was to facilitate the learning of a new set of "habits" appropriate linguistically to the language being studied.

Key Features

Here is a summary of the key features of the Audiolingual Method, taken from Brown (1994:57) and adapted from Prator and Celce-Murcia (1979).

(1)  New material is presented in dialog form. 

(2)  There is dependence on mimicry, memorization of set phrases, and overlearning.

(3)  Structures are sequenced by means of contrastive analysis and taught one at a time.

(4)  Structural patterns are taught using repetitive drills.

(5)  There is little or no grammatical explanation.  Grammar is taught by inductive analogy rather than
      deductive explanation.

(6)  Vocabulary is strictly limited and learned in context.

(7)  There is much use of tapes, language labs, and visual aids.

(8)  Great importance is attached to pronunciation.

(9)  Very little use of the mother tongue by teachers is permitted.

(10)  Successful responses are immediately reinforced.

(11)  There is great effort to get students to produce error-free utterances.

(12) There is a tendency to manipulate language and disregard content.

Typical Techniques

Larsen-Freeman, in her book Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching (1986:45-47) provides expanded descriptions of some common/typical techniques closely associated with the Audiolingual Method.  The listing here is in summary form only.

(1)  Dialog Memorization
      (Students memorize an opening dialog using mimicry and applied role-playing)

(2)  Backward Build-up (Expansion Drill) 
      (Teacher breaks a line into several parts, students repeat each part starting at the end of the
       sentence and "expanding" backwards through the sentence, adding each part in sequence)

(3)  Repitition Drill
      (Students repeat teacher's model as quickly and accurately as possible)

(4) Chain Drill
      (Students ask and answer each other one-by-one in a circular chain around the classroom )

(5)  Single Slot Substitution Drill
      (Teacher states a line from the dialog, then uses a word or a phrase as a "cue" that students, when
       repeating the line, must substitute into the sentence in the correct place)

(6)  Multiple-slot Substitution Drill 
      (Same as the Single Slot drill, except that there are multiple cues to be substituted into the line)

(7)  Transformation Drill 
      (Teacher provides a sentence that must be turned into something else, for example a question to be
       turned into a statement, an active sentence to be turned into a negative statement, etc)

(8) Question-and-answer Drill 
      (Students should answer or ask questions very quickly)

(9) Use of Minimal Pairs
      (Using contrastive analysis, teacher selects a pair of words that sound identical except for a single
       sound that typically poses difficulty for the learners - students are to pronounce and differentiate the
       two words)

(10) Complete the Dialog 
      (Selected words are erased from a line in the dialog - students must find and insert)

(11) Grammar Games 
      (Various games designed to practice a grammar point in context, using lots of repetition)

Comments

Just as with the Direct Method, the Audiolingual Method represents a major step in language teaching methodology that was still aimed squarely at communicative competence.  A teacher that can use the method well will generally be able to create what appear to be very "productive" students.  The extensive and elaborate drills deisgned to facilitate overlearning and good "language habit forming" were an innovative addition to the techniques used to practice language, and many of them are featured as essential parts of "communicative" methods that followed the Audiolingual Method.

The method's original appearance under the name "The Army Method" is apt, and from it one ought not to be surprised that the method is all about highly controlled practice involving extensive repetition aimed at "habit forming".  If you can imagine a squad of new military recruits doing marching drills in the exercise yard, listening to the terse commands and repeating the movements in various combinations until they become second nature and do not need to be "thought about", then you have yourself an effective picture of how the Audiolingual Method essentially works and creates the desired result.  The experts representing descriptive linguistics at that time can be seen as disseminating the patterns required to perform the various marching drills piece by piece, and the behavioral psychologists dictated the various ways for the drills to be repeated in order to create an effective habit-forming process.

The (however slightly simplified) picture presented above ought to also indicate to the modern, enlightened and eclectic language teacher the obvious ways in which the Audiolingual Method falls far short of the overall goal of creating sustainable long-term communicative competence in language learners.   The linguistic principles upon which the theory was based emphasized surface forms of language and not the "deep structure".  Cognitive principles aimed at explaining how learners learn and develop independent concepts were to change considerably in the period following the Audiolingual Method.

Still, there are reasons why the method is still popular, and perhaps even appropriate in certain educational contexts.  In countries where one of the prime objectives of learning English is to take and achieve successful results in a variety of tests, and where many learners are not intrinsically motivated to learn English but do so because they feel they have to, the method is not without merits.  The term "practice makes perfect" was coined at a time when the concept of practice was synonomous with repetition, and if English is seen as just "another subject to be learned", then the philosophy of repeating the required patterns until you get them right without needing to think about them does have a lot of supporters.

In my personal opinion, however, one of the key responsibilities of the modern day teacher of any discipline is to actively create and build intrinsic motivation in their learners, to empower them with the ability and confidence to "learn how to learn", to develop a sense of responsibility for their own development, and to regard peers as possible sources of learning as well.  They should also be encouraged to experiment with and formulate their own ongoing set of language rules, and to deduct through active independent application where and how the rules need to be adapted.  The idea that errors are a natural and even necessary part of the learning process needs to be encouraged and supported.  The Audiolingual Method does nothing to address those issues, and as a whole is little more than a very effective way of running highly teacher-orientated classrooms designed to produce language users whose proficiency stems from some kind of "auto pilot" mentality.

There are ways in which the practice involved in the Audiolingual Method can be applied to approaches that have a bigger picture in mind.  Audiolingual-based drills can be adapted and used in combination with effective error correction techniques to create an approach that is sensitive to affective factors, and can be followed up with techniques designed to create more independent experimentation and application.  I do not in any way recommend it as a holistic approach to language teaching, but there are certainly aspects and techniques from the method that are effective if used properly and in combination with an appropriate range of other activities.

  This new method incorporated many of the features typical of the earlier Direct Method, but the disciplines mentioned above added the concepts of teaching linguistic patterns in combination with something generally referred to as "habit-forming".  This method was one of the first to have its roots "firmly grounded in linguistic and psychological theory" (Brown 1994:57), which apparently added to its credibility and probably had some influence in the popularity it enjoyed over a long period of time.  It also had a major influence on the language teaching methods that were to follow, and can still be seen in major or minor manifestations of language teaching methodology even to this day.

Another factor that accounted for the method's popularity was the quick success it achieved in leading learners towards communicative competence.  Through extensive mimicry, memorization and over-learning of language patterns and forms, students and teachers were often 
able to see immediate results.  This was both its strength and its failure in the long run, as critics began to point out that the method did not deliver in terms of producing long-term communicative ability.

The study of linguistics itself was to change, and the area of second language learning became a discipline in its own right.  Cognitive psychologists developed new views on learning in general, arguing that mimicry and rote learning could not account for the fact that language learning involved affective and interpersonal factors, that learners were able to produce language forms and patterns that they had never heard before.  The idea that thinking processes themselves led to the discovery of independent language rule formation (rather than "habit formation"), and a belief that affective factors influenced their application, paved the way toward the new methods that were to follow the Audiolingual Method.


The Communicative Language Teaching Approach

All the methods described so far are symbolic of the progress foreign language teaching ideology underwent in the last century.  These were methods that came and went, influenced or gave birth to new methods - in a cycle that could only be described as competition between rival methods or even passing fads in the methodological theory underlying foreign language teaching.  Finally, by the mid-eighties or so, the industry was maturing in its growth and moving towards the concept of a broad "approach" to language teaching that encompassed various methods, motivations for learning English, types of teachers and the needs of individual classrooms and students themselves.  It would be fair to say that if there is any one umbrella approach to language teaching that has become the accepted "norm" in this field, it would have to be theCommunicative Language Teaching Approach.  This is also known as CLT.

The Communicative approach does a lot to expand on the goal of creating communicative competence compared to earlier methods that professed the same objective.  Teaching students how to use the language is considered to be at least as important as learning the language itself.  Brown (1994:77) aptly describes the "march" towards CLT: 

"Beyond grammatical discourse elements in communication, we are probing the nature of social, cultural, and pragmatic features of language.  We are exploring pedagogical means for 'real-life' communication in the classroom.  We are trying to get our learners to develop linguistic fluency, not just the accuracy that has so consumed our historical journey.  We are equipping our students with tools for generating unrehearsed language performance 'out there' when they leave the womb of our classrooms.  We are concerned with how to facilitate lifelong language learning among our students, not just with the immediate classroom task.  We are looking at learners as partners in a cooperative venture.  And our classroom practices seek to draw on whatever intrinsically sparks learners to reach their fullest potential." 
CLT is a generic approach, and can seem non-specific at times in terms of how to actually go about using practices in the classroom in any sort of systematic way.  There are many interpretations of what CLT actually means and involves.  See Types of Learning and The PPP Approach to see how CLT can be applied in a variety of 'more specific' methods.

Basic Features of CLT

David Nunan (1991:279) lists five basic characteristics of Communicative Language Teaching:

(1)  An emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target language.

(2)  The introduction of authentic texts into the learning situation.

(3)  The provision of opportunities for learners to focus, not only on the language but also on
      the learning process itself.

(4)  An enhancement of the learner's own personal experiences as important contributing
      elements to classroom learning.

(5)  An attempt to link classroom language learning with language activation outside the
      classroom.



Finnochiaro and Brumfit (1983:91-93) compiled this list of CLT features way back in 1983 as a means of comparing it to the Audiolingual Method.  Below each feature in blue italics is the feature of ALM to which it was being compared.

(1)  CLT:  Meaning is paramount.
      ALM:  Attends to structure and form more than meaning.

(2)  CLT:  Dialogs, if used, center around communicative functions and are not normally memorized.
      ALM:  Demands more memorization of structure-based dialogs.

(3)  CLT:  Contextualization is a basic premise.
      ALM:  Language items are not necessarily contextualized.

(4)  CLT:  Language learning is learning to communicate.
      ALM:  Language Learning is learning structures, sounds or words.

(5) CLT:  Effective communication is sought.
      ALM:  Mastery or "overlearning" is sought.

(6)  CLT:  Drilling may occur, but peripherially.
      ALM:  Drilling is a central technique.

(7)  CLT:  Comprehensible pronunciation is sought.
      ALM:  Native-speaker-like pronunciation is sought.

(8)  CLT:  Any device which helps the learners is accepted - varying according to their age, 
               interest, etc.
      ALM:  Grammatical explanation is avoided.

(9) CLT:  Attempts to communicate may be encouraged from the very beginning.
      ALM:  Communicative activities only come after a long process of rigid drills and exrecises.

(10)  CLT:  Judicious use of native language is accepted where feasible.
        ALM:  The use of the students' native language is forbidden.

(11)  CLT:  Translation may be used where students need or benefit from it.
        ALM:  Translation is forbidden at early levels.

(12) CLT:  Reading and writing can start from the first day, if desired.
        ALM:  Reading and writing are deferred until speech is mastered.

(13)  CLT:  The target linguistic system will be learned best through the process of struggling to 
                 communicate.
        ALM:  The target linguistic system will be learned through the overt teaching of the patterns of
                  the system.

(14)  CLT:  Communicative competence is the desired goal.
        ALM:  Linguistic competence is the desired goal.

(15)  CLT:  Linguistic variation is a central concept in materials and methods.
        ALM:  Varieties of language are recognized but not emphasized.

(16)  CLT:  Sequencing is determined by any consideration of content function, or meaning which
                 maintains interest.
        ALM:  The sequence of units is determined solely on principles of linguistic complexity.

(17)  CLT:  Teachers help learners in any way that motivates them to work with the language.
        ALM:  The teacher controls the learners and prevents them from doing anything that conflicts with
                  the theory.

(18)  CLT:  Language is created by the individual often through trial and error.
        ALM:  "Language is habit" so error must be prevented at all costs.

(19) CLT:  Fluency and acceptable language is the primary goal: accuracy is judged not in the
                abstract but in context.
        ALM:  Accuracy, in terms of formal correctness, is a primary goal.

(20)  CLT:  Students are expected to interact with other people, either in the flesh, through pair and
                 group work, or in their writings.
        ALM:  Students are expected to interact with the language system, embodied in machines or
                  controlled materials.

(21)  CLT:  The teacher cannot know exactly what language the students will use.
        ALM:  The teacher is expected to specify the language that students are to use.

(22)  CLT:  Intrinsic motivation will spring from an interest in what is being communicated by the
                 language.
        ALM:  Intrinsic motivation will spring from an interest in the structure of the language.

Caveats

Brown (1994:78-80) warns that there are certain caveats in the field of language teaching when it comes to discussing CLT and one's support of the approach, saying that that support or belief needs to be "qualified".  He warns against:

(1)  Giving "lip service" to the principles of CLT (because "no one these days would admit to 
      a disbelief in principles of CLT; they would be marked as a heretic") without actually
      grounding one's teaching techniques in those principles, or making sure one indeed 
      understands and practices according to the characteristics that make CLT what it is.

(2)  Overdoing certain CLT features, for example engaging in real-life authentic language to
      the exclusion of helpful devices such as controlled practice, or vice versa.  Moderation
      is needed in combination with common sense and a balanced approach.

(3)  The numerous interpretations of what CLT actually "is".  CLT is often a catchcall term, 
      and does not reflect the fact that not everyone agrees on its interpretation or application.
      Teachers need to be aware that there are many possible versions, and it is intended as
      an "umbrella" term covering a variety of methods.




1 comment: