Teaching methodology Essays

Teaching methodology Essays Teaching methodology Essay Teaching methodology Essay In analyzing second language teaching methodology, there are three important underlying interrelated terms that must be considered: approach, design, and technique. Long Richards (1987, p.146) mention in their article on the subject that Anthony (1963) originally made the distinction and clarified language-teaching methodology into these three central terms. Long Richards (1987, p.146) also point out that Anthonys (1963) distinction has been since tailored and therefore methodology is generally referred to by speaking of approach, design, and procedure. These three terms will be defined and then used to describe and critically analyze two popular second language-teaching methods: The Natural Approach and Community Language Learning. Approach:  A SLT methods approach in language teaching is based both on theory of language and theory of language learning. Teachers of second languages all naturally or academically attain or accept some theory of how learners learn language and how language is constructed in terms of the various components that comprise it (affixes, words, conjuncts, verbs, sentences, etc, etc.). A methods approach is therefore the basis on what the teacher believes are the means by which learners acquire language and, subsequently, how they go about teaching the L2 in the classroom via their chosen materials and teaching techniques. In further discussing approach and theory of language, it will be helpful to mention three prominent theories relating to second language teaching methodology which have bearing on approach, design, and procedure: the structural view, the functional view, and the interactional view. In a more concerted sense with respect to design, for example, these theories will have varying effects on the roles of the teachers and students within the classroom. The structural view sees language as a system of structurally related elements for the coding of meaning. (Long Richards, 1987, p.147). Teachers employing this theory in their teaching method, for example, will likely focus their syllabus design and choice of materials on the structural elements of language such as grammar and its functions.  The functional view sees language as a vehicle for the expression of meaning. (Long Richards, 1987, p.147). Teachers employing this view in their teaching method will likely focus their syllabus design and choice of materials less on language form and more on performing language actions from a semantic, rather than grammatical, point of view. The interactional view sees language as a vehicle for the realization of interpersonal relations and for the performance of social transactions between individuals. (Long Richards, 1987, p.147). Teachers employing this view in their teaching method, for example, may focus their syllabus design and choice of materials less on grammatical structure or functionality and more on the discovery of language content through interpersonal communication. (Some examples of common approaches had been provided in Appendix A) Design concerns the instructional materials and the corresponding activities teachers utilize in the classroom. In designing a curriculum or syllabus for SL courses, there are two factors that teachers consider: what to talk about (subject matter) and how to talk about it (linguistic matter) (Long Richards, 1987: p.148).  According to Long Richards (1987: p.148), there are four conditions in terms of design: The content of instruction (i.e. syllabus), learner roles in the system, teacher roles in the system, and instructional material types and functions. Richards Rodgers (1986) further add to these considerations: (These conditions will be discussed and used later to analyze the two methods in question). Design is the level of method analysis in which we consider: (a) the objectives; (b) the syllabus; (c) learning tasks and teaching activities (d) learner roles; (e) teacher roles; and (f) the role of instructional materials. (Richards Rodgers, 1986: p.24)  Procedure comprises the classroom practices which are consequences of particular approaches and designs. (Long, M. Richards, J., 1987, p. 146). In other words, the technical or procedural constituent (how the teacher goes about teaching) in SLT methodology is directly related and affected by a methods approach and course design. Depending on how the teacher views SLA and, for example, what materials he or she chooses for course work, a SL teachers classroom procedures will vary considerably. Other factors such as class length, environment, or class size will have relevance on the techniques or procedures used by teachers as well. A teacher employing the Grammar Translation Approach, for example, may design his or her curriculum around slightly difficult texts and little else. The teachers techniques may therefore include presenting the language content in the form of unrelated sentences that the students would then translate into the L1. The teachers instruction of the grammatical points would most likely be in the L1 and other language variables, such as listening comprehension or pronunciation, would have little importance in the drills conducted in class. Grammar instruction provides the rules for putting words together; instruction often focuses on the form and inflection of words. Reading of difficult texts is begun early in the course of study. Little attention is paid to the content of texts, which are treated as exercises in grammatical analysis. Often the only drills are exercises in translating disconnected sentences from the target language into the mother tongue, and vice versa. Little or no attention is given to pronunciation. (Mora, J.K., 1999) Contrarily, those employing the Direct Approach would most likely use no L1 in the classroom and would not include the translation of grammar. The teaching procedure for classroom exercises and drills would most likely be the elicitation of a story or dialogue from the student through student directed questions followed by a series of teacher questions (for example yes/no, or, or 5W questions) to be answered in the L2 by the students. Teachers may reverse this role and consequently have the students ask the questions to each other or to the teacher. Grammar is therefore not presented textually and is taught inductively through the controlled use of the L2 based on target language or topics contained within the classroom materials.  The mother tongue is NEVER, NEVER used. There is no translation. The preferred type of exercise is a series of questions in the target language based on the dialogue or an anecdotal narrative. Questions are answered in the target language. Grammar is taught inductivelyrules are generalized from the practice and experience with the target language. (Mora, J.K., 1999) With these definitions and examples in mind, we can now utilize them in describing and analyzing two prominent methods of second language teaching: The Natural Approach and Community Language Learning (CLL).  METHOD DESCRIPTION AND CRITICAL ANALYSIS #1:  THE NATURAL APPROACH  The Natural Approach (Terrell, 1977; 1982) is the term coined for the approach proposed by Tracy Terrell (1977) based on his methodological deductions in teaching Spanish to second language learners in California. In order to situate a theoretical foundation for his proposed approach to second language teaching, Terrell collaborated with Stephen Krashen, an applied linguist at the University of California (Richards Rodgers, 1986: 178), whose naturalistic theories on second language acquisition (Language Acquisition Theory: Krashen, 1981; 1982) have had significant influence on applied linguistics in recent years. Terrell and Krashens basis for their collaborated Natural Approach (the NA) (Krashen Terrell, 1983) shares common convention with the Natural Method (Saveur, L. 1826-1907) and the Direct Method. However, as the foundations of these methods are commonly based on the natural components of first language acquisition, the basis of the Natural Approach (Krashen Terrell, 1983) stems from Krashen Terrells naturalistic views on second language acquisition.  In the Natural Approach there is emphasis on exposure, or input, rather than practice; optimizing emotional preparedness for learning; a prolonged period of attention to what the language learners hear before they try to produce language; and a willingness to use written and other materials as a source of comprehensible input. (Richards Rodgers, 1986: p.178)