Language in Theory

When it comes to language education there are several methods to do so. In this section we are going to look at five of these methodologies, but keep in mind that methodologies aren´t limited to the ones mentioned in this section.
               The first methodology is The Grammar-Translation approach. This method was widely used in the period between 1880 and 1920, when classical languages of Greek and Latin were taught. Though this period is long over, it still forms the basis of much English teaching in schools throughout the world. In this method all languages, including English, are viewed as being similar. Rules, conjugations and parts of speech are cornerstones and its primary form is written. Grammar rules and long vocabulary lists have to be memorized, and there is little room for oral work. The aim of studying a language is to understand the literature. Grammar rules is only taught deductively, giving a rule and an example, and vocabulary is introduced in long lists of word (A Short History of EFL, n.d.). Classes were taught in learners native language, with little or no active use of the target language therefore little or no attention was given to pronunciation. Most time was spend on reading difficult texts, without any attention to its content (Second and Foreign Language Teaching Methods, n.d.).
               A second methodology is The Direct Approach, which was developed as a reaction to The Grammar-Translation Approach attempting to integrate more use of the target language. Usually lessons started with a dialogue using the target language where also material is presented with actions or pictures. There is no use of the native language of learners and there is no translation. The culture associated with the target language is taught, which is considered an important aspect of language learning (Second and Foreign Language Teaching Methods, n.d.).
               A third methodology is The Silent Way, based on the idea that teachers should be as silent as possible during class. Though learners should be encouraged to speak as much as possible. This method is based on three principles; the learner needs to discover and create language, learning is made easier by using physical objects, and learning is made easier by problem-solving using the target language. An activity in class could be that the teacher shows two Cuisenaire rods to the class. He says ‘The orange one is smaller than the yellow one’, after which he shows a third rod which is smaller than the yellow one. The learners are now encouraged to create their own comparison (Silent way, 2008).
               A fourth and fifth methodology is Communicative Language Teaching Phase 1 (CLT1) and Communicative Language Teaching Phase 2 (CLT2). In CLT1 language is viewed as a communicative force. Functions and notions became important in teaching a second language; word lists were replaced by functional ones. Now it was not word lists that needed to be drilled and memorized, but these functions and notions, which is still a form of Behaviourist teaching. According to the founders, this language teaching should be more motivating, but no real theory of learning was involved. These developments took place during the 70’s. During the 1980’s CTL2 started to emerge. It promised to be a decade of innovation, imagination and improved practice. Due to Widdowson’s influence the focus of language teaching shifted towards a more interactive use of vocabulary. More use of language in natural settings and more focus on value instead of signification. Textbooks shifted their focus on student interaction, humanistic values, authentic materials, and individualisation. For the first time in the history of teaching students were viewed as individuals and learning theories reflected this. Individual learning strategies were looked at in depth and questions arose on themes as conscious and unconscious learning and language learning versus language acquisition (A Short History of EFL, n.d.).

Personal Experience

When I was in school I was taught English in a way that has a lot of resemblance with The Grammar-Translation Approach. Though I was taught English only 15 years ago, most of the aspects of this approach were visible in my class. The main focus of my teacher was on vocabulary and stones, which we had to drill and memorize and on which we were tested at the end of every chapter. Vocabulary was presented in word lists and stones is the term Stepping Stones uses for functions. During class and homework exercises we had to use the vocabulary in the word lists and the functions in the stones to translate sentences Dutch-English, English-Dutch, or to create sentences combining functions and vocabulary. But reading more and more on learning methodology makes me remember more about classes, like the fact that we were always encouraged to speak in the target language but responding in our native language or even a mixture of our native and the target language was also allowed. My teacher never corrected speech errors directly, only when she had to repeat answers form students louder so the class would hear what was said. Though learning and drilling vocabulary and functions is what I remember most, when I think about it harder I remember more and more about interactive class activities involving us speaking or acting out something in the target language. Taking this into account I believe I was taught more in a Communicative Approach than a Grammar-Translation Approach, which also fits better if you look at the time I was taught. No wonder I only remembered drilling and memorizing word lists and functions, because don’t you always remember things you didn’t like more vividly than things you did?