Theory of Language

What is a language? What does it mean to learn a language? What does one learn when s/he learns a
language? Questions such as these led to different views and theories of language. In the past
century, language teaching and learning practices have been influenced by three different views of
language, namely, the structural view, the functional view and the interactional view. Different views
on language generate different teaching methodologies.

Structural View:  This view sees language as a linguistic system made up of various subsystems,
such as phonological units (e.g., phonemes), grammatical units (e.g., phrases, clauses, sentences),
grammatical operations (e.g., joining or transforming elements), and lexical items (e.g., function
words and content words). Each language has a finite number of such structural items. To learn a
language means to learn these structural items so as to be able to understand and produce language.
The Audiolingual Method and Total Physical Response embody this particular view of language
(Richards and Rodgers, 2001).

Functional View: This view sees language not only as a linguistic system but also as a means for
doing things. That is, according to this view, “language is a vehicle for the expression of functional
meaning” (ibid, p. 21). Most of our day-to-day language use involves functional activities: inviting,
making an appointment, asking for directions, suggesting, disagreeing, advising, apologizing, etc.
Therefore, learners learn a language in order to do things with it. To perform functions, learners need
to know how to combine the grammatical rules and the vocabulary to express notions that perform
the functions. The communicative movement in language teaching as well as the movement for
English for Specific Purposes (ESP) has its genesis in the functional view of language.

Interactional view: This view considers language as a communicative tool, whose main use is to
build up and maintain social relations and the performance of social transactions between people.
Therefore, learners not only need to know the grammar and vocabulary of the language, but also
need to know the rules for using them in a whole range of communicative contexts. Interactional
theories of language focus on “patterns of moves, acts, negotiation and interaction found in
conversational exchanges” (ibid, p. 21). Task-based Language Teaching (TBLT) and Content
Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) draw on this view of language as a basis of their approach.
The understanding of the nature of language is closely related to the understanding of language
learning and may provide the basis for a particular teaching method. If language is considered to
have a finite number of structural items, learning the language means learning these items. If
language is seen as a tool, then to learn the language means to use it to perform functions.

Bibliography and further reading

Richards, J.C., and Rogers, T.S. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching. Cambridge
University Press.

Study questions
1. What is language?
2. Define the structural view of language.
3. Define the functional view of language.
4. Define the interactional view of language.
5. Discuss the structural, functional and interactional views of language.

Theories of Language Learning

Theories of first language acquisition and second language development have been discussed
separately in the section below but we must remember that some of theories address both first and
second language development.

Theories of First Language Acquisition

Some see language learning as the acquisition of habits, some liken it to concept formation, others
compare it to the acquisition of a motor skill, yet others see in it the manifestation of an inherited
structuring device. Various theories have been proposed by different psychologists regarding
language acquisition. ‘Acquisition’ refers to an unconscious process of picking up a language
through exposure to a naturalistic setting. It is a natural and intuitive process of attaining mastery
over a language and is concerned with one’s intuition. ‘Learning’, on the other hand, implies a
deliberate attempt at gaining proficiency in a foreign language. Learning requires one’s explicit and
conscious effort. We shall provide an overview of four theories on first language acquisition. These
are:
i) Behaviourism
ii) Mentalism or Innatist theory
iii) Cognitive
iv) Maturation or CPH

Behaviourism
(Empirical Approach or Habit-formation Theory)
The question of how language develops in children has given rise to many controversial and
contradictory theories. Behaviourists were the first group to try to hypothesise this question.
‘Behaviourism’ was introduced in 1913 by the American psychologist John B. Watson. Although he
is considered to be the originator of this theory, two other researchers contributed greatly to it by
their research and theories. The two basic theories of ‘Behaviourism’ are the theory of ‘classical
conditioning’ by Pavlov (1927) and ‘Operant Conditioning’ by Skinner (1938).

Research
Watson’s approach to ‘Behaviourism’ was strongly influenced by the research of the Russian
psychologist Ivan Pavlov. According to Pavlov, all behaviour could be accounted for in terms of
stimuli and response. Pavlov’s experiments with animals proved that certain reflex actions can
become conditioned responses to entirely new stimuli. For example, a dog’s mouth begins to water
as a reflex when the animal smells meat. Pavlov rang a bell each time he was about to give meat to a
dog. Eventually, the dog’s mouth began to water when Pavlov merely rang the bell. The flow of
saliva had become a conditioned response to the ringing of the bell.

Another concept is that of reinforcement. Pavlov found in his experiment that the conditioned reflex
would eventually be extinguished if it was not rewarded. So, give rewards to encourage behaviour
which will become entrenched and withhold rewards to weaken and disappear it.

In this way classical conditioning can be made to account for some comprehension of language in
humans. When a child does something wrong, he is punished and at the same time mother says
‘naughty’. An association is built up between punishment and the word ‘naughty’ and the meaning of
the word is learnt.

Skinner developed a new concept of ‘operant conditioning’. In this type of situation the original
behaviour occurs by chance but, because of the effect it has when it does occur, is likely to be
repeated. Thus Skinner had rats in a cage which happened to press a bar by chance, which had the
effect of giving the rats a food pellet. Rats soon learnt to deliberately press the bar. Operant
conditioning can be made to account for production of human language. A child says [dada] in his
babbling, daddy smiles and shows his approval and the child will say [dada] again. Thus the child
may learn to say [dada] when daddy is around. In this way, positive reinforcements cause behaviour
to be repeated. The child may start to use [dada] to other people but when he will not get any
‘positive reinforcement’ he will learn to limit the expression simply to his own daddy. In this way
correct pieces of language are acquired, but incorrect utterances are not.

The main principles of behaviourism

Habit formation: The basic notion of behaviourism is that all kinds of behaviour can be made or
formed through habit formation. They (behaviourists) consider language as a linguistic behaviour
and think that this behaviour can also be learnt through habit formation. They are opposed to the
belief that a child possesses innate abilities to learn a language.

Environment, not innate ability: According to the behaviourists, there is no difference between the
why one learns a Language and the why one learns to do anything else. The behaviourists are
committed to admitting as evidence only that which can be observed. There is no need to postulate
any complex internal endowments that allow us to learn and use language. Language is only a verbal
behaviour. Language learning is, therefore, controlled by the conditions under which it takes place.
As long as individuals are subjected to the same conditions, they will learn in the same way. What
appears to be variation in learning ability is really no more than different learning experience.

Stimulus-response: Every utterance and every part of an utterance is a kind of response to the
presence of some kind of stimulus. The stimulus may be physically present in the situation; it may be
verbal; or it may be internal.

Reinforcement & repetition: When a child learns to make a response it will have to be ‘reinforced’. If
reinforcement does not take place, the piece of language, the response is not learnt. The notion of
repetition is also extremely important because a word that has been uttered thirty times is better
learned than one which has been said twenty times.

Meaning: Another important point to be mentioned regarding behaviourist views concerns meaning.
In learning a language one has to acquire both a formal and a ‘thematic’ repertoire of responses.
Most behaviourists eschew use of the word ‘meaning’ altogether. To think of the meaning of a word
as something build up and stored inside the individual is to imply a mental structure of some kind
which the behaviourist finds objectionable and unnecessary.

Analogy: Whether in classroom or laboratory, behaviourist teaching relies more on analogy than on
rules for teaching the structure of a language. By arranging each drill repetition the pupil is made to
construct his new response along exactly the same line as his previous response. All the responses in
any one drill will have exactly the same grammatical structure. With enough properly reinforced
repetition of the structure, the ‘rule’ will be acquired in a way that is not only unconscious but also
more conducive to spontaneous language use thereafter.

To conclude, ‘Behaviourism’ views learning as the formation of habits. And these habits are shaped
and formed by some factors which are repetition, reinforcement, imitation, environment and drill.
Language learning – first or second – is an external not an internal phenomenon.

Criticism of Behaviourism
1. The behaviourists consider language a very simple phenomenon. They make no distinction
between linguistic behaviour and other aspects of behaviour. They explain the development of
linguistic behaviour with a very simple process of stimulus – response – reinforcement and
reorganisation. But language is a very complex phenomenon and this phenomenon is unique to man
and linguistic development cannot be compared to the learning by rats how to find their food.

2. The behaviourists’ notion of children to be something passive and to be shaped by the

environment is also not very convincing. The reason is that children are very active and creative
beings. Sometimes they produce so complex and correct sentences that cannot be considered
imitation. And their brilliant responses prove that they have a very strong perception and can
understand many complex expressions.
3. There is a clear contradiction in this theory. Behaviourists deny any internal device in human
brain in the construction of sentences. But they admit the possibility that a child is so endowed with
an analogy forming mechanism.

4. The behaviourists’ notion of reinforcement and repetition is also doubtful. It is observed that
sometimes children learn pieces of language simply by hearing. A word may be heard once or more
than once but not produced by the child at the time it is heard. There is no reinforcement or
repetition. In spite of this, they may suddenly produce the word quite correctly in a totally new
context.

Nevertheless, behaviourist ideas about language and language acquisition cannot be simply ignored.
They have had such an impact on language teaching over many years. The Audiolingual method, for
example, is based on the principle of ‘habit formation’ through repetition. This theory has also paved
the way for the linguists for further experimentation on the subject.

Mentalism or Innatism
The mentalist or innatist view of language learning evolved as an alternative to the behaviourists’
inadequate language learning explanation. Chomsky was the key personality behind this mentalist
theory. It is known as mentalist theory because it sees/views language not as conditioned, stimulus-
bound verbal behaviour but as a property of mind.

According to this theory, everybody learns a language, not because they are subjected to a similar
conditioning process, but because they possess an inborn capacity. This capacity is by definition
universal. Noam Chomsky attacks with particular vehemence the notion that language responses are
under the control of external stimuli. For him the most important thing of all is that human beings
use language whereas other animals do not. Since all normal human beings learn their language
successfully they must possess some internal capacity for language that other animals do not have.
Chomsky describes this ‘internal faculty’ as a ‘Language acquisition device’ (LAD) that contains a
knowledge of linguistic universals.

LAD is said to operate in the following way. A child, from birth, is exposed to language which acts
as a trigger for the learning device. The device has the capacity to formulate hypothesis about the
structure of the language to which it is exposed. The child is, of course, quite unconscious of this
process. The child tries out these hypotheses in his own language production. Then he checks them
out against the further data that his exposure to the language provides. As he finds that his
hypotheses cannot account for all the data, he modifies the hypotheses and checks them again. In this
way he brings his speech closer and closer to the adult model to which he is for the most part
exposed. What the child is doing is constructing an internal grammar of the language. This grammar
passes through successive modifications until it becomes the complete grammar of the adult
language which is identical with the descriptive grammar that the linguist attempts to write.

Chomsky argues his innateness hypothesis on basically three counts: firstly, the existence of
language universals. It is argued that the similarity in languages cannot possibly be due to anything
other than a specific cognitive capacity in man. Secondly, the adult speech which a child hears
around him is so poorly structured and impaired in performance that he could not possibly learn
language unless he brought to the task a very specific capacity. The third and last count on which the
innateness hypothesis is argued concerns the speed of acquisition of language. Language could not
be learnt with such speed unless the child were pre-programmed to do so (Cruttenden, 1979).

Mentalist theory attaches little or no importance to the role of social factors. For Chomsky they have
virtually no role at all. If children learnt only from the environment, they would not have been able to
construct new sentences which they have not heard before. Sometimes children are seen to produce
words in completely new contexts. All these facts establish the existence of an innate faculty which
the mentalists say ‘language acquisition device’.

There is another way in which the behaviourists and mentalists may differ. Whereas the
behaviourists will talk of the child using ‘analogy’ in the construction of sentences, the mentalists
prefer to think in terms of the production and application of ‘rules’. Chomsky says that the
behaviourists break their own principles in admitting that there is an analogy forming mechanism in
children.

To conclude, Chomsky’s mentalist view of language learning emphasised ‘LAD’ and played down
the role of the linguistic environment. For him, input served merely as a trigger to activate the
device.

Criticism
1. In spite of the richness and subtlety of Chomsky’s theory of language acquisition, it also shows the
difficulty of thinking LAD purely in abstract terms. In order to discover the manner in which LAD
might operate we would need to look at concrete instances of Language and try to explain them in
terms of Chomsky’s theory.

2. One function attributed to the LAD is that it gives the child prior knowledge about the categories
according to which experience is organized by Language. But must this knowledge be innate? Could
the child not learn the basic categories of which language makes use from his experience of the
world during infancy?

3. A further problematic feature of Chomsky’s theory is his view of the role of situation in the
Language learning process. Chomsky’s view is that exposure to Language in situation is a mere
precondition for the activation of LAD. But it is very difficult to see how the child can come to
identify the means without considerable experience of knowledge in situations.

4. Structurally, all Languages have striking similarities and all children exhibit identical steps in
learning them.

All over the world children have been seen to show similar stages in their language acquisition
process: crying, cooing, babbling, 1-word stage, 2-word stage. These stages do not much differ
irrespective of race, country, or language. The assumption that the child’s linguistic development is
predetermined from birth to follow certain patterns would provide an attractive account of the clearly
parallel linguistic development shown by all normal children. LAD is the innate mechanism which
shows the “capacity to formulate hypothesis about the structure of the Language to which it is
exposed.”

Cognitive Theory

Cognitive theory suggests that language development and general cognitive growth proceed in
parallel in normal children. In the early 1970’s, partly as a reaction against the dominant innatist
theories of the 1960’s, a group of psychologists claimed that cognitive growth was the major guiding
force behind Language acquisition. The research had several strands, though the over-all aim was to
link linguistic stages to prior states of cognitive development. The over-all notion came to be known
as the ‘cognitive hypothesis’.

Piaget in his books published in 1920s discusses various aspects of this theory. He argues that the
developmental stages of cognitive growth are related to Language development. As a child grows,
his intelligence and cognitive ability develop. The child constructs an understanding of the why the
world works. His intelligence is the product of his environment and his mental structure. Piaget
rejects the behaviourists’ view that a newborn child is totally moulded by his environment. He also
rejects the mentalists’ notion that a child carries a complex device within himself which is like a
blueprint.

Language is dependent on cognition but the reverse is not true. Furth (1966) found that deaf children
develop cognitively as hearing children do. So Language does not seem absolutely essential for
cognitive growth. On the other hand, Mongoloid children whose mental ability is low rarely acquire
a full use of language. Thus a minimum level of intelligence seems necessary for Language to
develop.

Piaget believes that as a child grows up he passes through a number of stages. Each of these stages is
characterized by certain properties of the child’s thought. Each child has to pass through the stages in
a fixed order but the rate at which he does so may vary from one child to another. Through these
stages the child develops his cognitive ability which plays an important role in Language acquisition.
The stages are:

 The sensorimotor stage (from birth to 18 months)

 The preoperational stage (18 months to 7 years)
 The stage of concrete operation (7 – 11 years)
 The stage of formal operation (11 years to over)

A child in the first eighteen months takes the first steps in the construction of a model of reality and
his own interaction with it. Towards the end of this period he begins to be able to represent his
actions to himself before they occur. This is recognized by the appearance of the ‘semiotic function’.
The ‘semiotic function’ occurs in several forms:
 i) Behavioural imitation, e.g. a child imitates someone stamping her foot in rage.
ii) Symbolic play, e.g. a child, seeing a pillow on the floor, pretends to lie down and sleep.
iii) Drawing.
iv) Language, which is thus seen as just one means by which a child begins to represent reality to
himself.

Language, then, according to Piaget, is part of the means whereby the child is able to think about
reality. Many notions which seem important in early Linguistic development are dependent on
cognitive developments in the sensori-motor period, in particular those of agent, action, affected,
location, which are obviously related to the perception of space and causality. Children’s first words
appear towards the end of the first year, and their one-word utterances show awareness of concepts
like agent and location early in the second year.

Bruner (1975) has also formulated a theory concerning the emergence of Language at this early
period. Bruner’s position is that grammar is acquired because of the isomorphism between syntactic
categories and psychological events and processes.

In the preoperational period the child’s construction of reality and his construction of Language to
represent that reality continue to develop. The order of spatial notions in children parallels the order
of understanding the spatial terms. First to occur are simple factors like ‘in’ and ‘on’, followed by
relational terms like ‘in front of’ and ‘below’ and lastly complex rational movement terms like
‘along’ and ‘through’.

At the third stage children begin to develop ‘operational thought’ i.e., begin to develop a certain
capacity for logical thought. They can now see that if ball ‘A’ is bigger than ball ‘B’ and ball ‘B’ is
bigger than ball ‘C’, then ‘A’ must be bigger than ‘C’. They begin to develop the ability to use
necessary terminology to handle concepts like volume, number, weight and quantity independently
from other concepts. At the last stage he makes further improvements.

According to Piaget, the child is born with a very limited set of behaviour patterns or schemata,
which he seeks to assert on any object he encounters. For instance, he will try to suck blankets and
fingers as well as the nipples or the teats. This process whereby the child seeks to encompass an
available object into a schema, is called assimilation. While trying to assimilate these objects to his
schema, the infant discovers that he has to open his mouth in a different way to suck different
objects, so his schema becomes differentiated as a result of interaction with his environment. This
process is called accommodation. According to Piaget, whatever we learn we have to assimilate and
accommodate.

This theory can be said to be a balanced one. It takes from the mentalist and the behaviourist
theories. Piaget’s idea of ‘schemata’ is similar to Chomsky’s idea of LAD. Piaget adds the
behaviourists’ idea of the influence of environment to Chomsky’s idea of LAD and then makes it
more acceptable and logical. For Piaget, as the child grows up his intelligence develops and he learns
from his environment. And assimilation and accommodation help the child for phonological,
syntactic and semantic development.
Cognitive theory rejects the view that Language is an autonomous system whose acquisition depends
on innate Linguistic endowments. Although this theory cannot be supported in its extreme form,
most researchers have come to realize that linguistic development cannot be studied detached from
cognition since they are likely to influence one another in normal children. In fact, the interaction of
cognitive and linguistic development remains to be studied in any detail.

Criticism
1. If a correlation between the stages of Language development and the stages of cognitive
development is established it does not entail a causal connexion. As Curtiss (1981, cited in
Cruttenden, 1979, p. ) noted, “hair growth might be positively correlated with language development,
but this is not an interesting link between the two.”

2. It has been observed that a number of children have been able to speak firmly but their general
intelligence is so low that they perform at below the two-year-old level on a number of tasks (Curtiss
1981, 1988). This evidence challenges the Cognitive hypothesis.

Maturation Theory or Critical Period Hypothesis

Maturation theory claims that there is a critical period for language acquisition, namely, between 18
months and early puberty in most people. Within this period, language acquisition is expected to
proceed normally, but outside it, language acquisition is difficult, if not impossible.
The evidence for a biological basis for a specifically linguistic ability was most enthusiastically
presented by Lenneberg (1967). According to him, there are two hemispheres to the brain, connected
to each other by a structure known as the corpus callosum. At birth, the hemispheres were
functionally identical and were each capable in the beginning of supporting language development.
Around 18 months he assumed that the hemispheres began to become functionally specialised in that
each hemisphere began to control different areas of human activity. In particular, in the normal
person, the left hemisphere began to control functions characteristic of language. By puberty,
Lenneberg assumed that the functional specialisation had become fixed, so that if a person had not
developed language, his left hemisphere would have taken over control of other functions, and
language acquisition would be difficult, if not impossible.
Consistent with this account were the following claims: Brain damage to the left hemisphere in
adults led to aphasia in 70 percent of cases surveyed by Lenneberg, while brain damage to children
below 18 months had the same effect on their language development, whether damage was to the
right or left hemisphere. For children between 2 and 4 years, recovery of the language function was
generally possible after a variable period of disruption, during which the child appeared to run
swiftly through the stages of development he had passed before the injury. It was claimed that people
who have not learned to speak by puberty were unlikely to do so, and learning a foreign language is
both harder and follows a different learning pattern after puberty than before.
There is now evidence that a certain degree of functional specialisation of the hemispheres can be
detected long before the child is 18 months old. Molfese (1977) measured the auditory evoked
potential form both hemispheres of groups of infants, children and adults, to speech stimuli and non-
speech stimuli which came from a loudspeaker placed above the subject. He found that all groups
showed differential hemispherical responses to these materials and that, in fact, both speech and non-
speech were lateralised more strongly in his infants than in his adults.
It seems, then, that cerebral specialisation of function may begin long before the onset of language
acquisition. There is probably still a complex development of cerebral specialisation awaiting the
infant, but it seems that the strong view, that before 18 months both hemispheres are equally capable
of supporting language development, has to be modified. At the other end of the critical period,
likewise, the picture is more complicated than Lenneberg would lead us to suppose. Curtiss (1977)
reports a recent case where a girl, Genie, who began to learn her first language after puberty made
some progress. In this case, however, the girl appeared to use her right hemisphere for language and
the course of development was different in many ways from that of children acquiring language
under normal conditions. Curtiss interprets these results as indicating that there are constraints on the
nature of language acquisition beyond the critical period.
In this way the traditional view that language is unique to human beings may have a sound biological
basis. Just as other biological characteristics can be unique to a certain species, so too the capacity
for language and other properties of human mental functioning may well be as unique part of the
genetic endowment of human being.

Criticism
Snow and Hoefnagle-Hohle (1978) have challenged the view that acquisition of a second language is
more efficient during the critical period than after it. Thus Lenneberg’s proposal of a clear critical
period for language acquisition has to be considerably modified. A certain degree of functional
specialisation of the brain does take place before the onset of language, and so specific brain damage
during this period can have effects on later language development. Acquisition of a second language
after the critical period may be quite efficient and acquisition of first language may still be possible.

Bibliography and further reading

Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press.

Cruttenden, A. 1979. Language in Infancy and Childhood: Linguistic Introduction to Language

Acquisition. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Elliot, A. 1981. Child Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lenneberg, E. H. 1967. Biological Foundations of Language. Wiley.

Piaget, J. 1972. The Psychology of the Child. New York: Basic Books.

Study questions:

1. What is meant by “language learning is habit formation”?

2. What is “classical conditioning”?
3. What is “operant conditioning”?
4. What are the main principles of “behaviourism”?
5. Evaluate the behaviourist theory of language acquisition or learning.
6. What is mentalism / innatism?
7. What is LAD?
8. How does LAD work?
9. Compare behaviourism and innatist views of language acquisition.
 10. “Language development and general cognitive growth proceed in parallel in normal
children.” Explain.
11. Discuss the stages of cognitive development that children pass through as they acquire their
mother tongue.
12. “Language, according to Piaget, is part of the means whereby the child is able to think about
reality.” Explain.
13. Compare and contrast Piaget’s notion of ‘schema’ and Chomsky’s concept of “LAD”.
14. What is corpus callosum?
15. What is “critical period”?
16. Define “brain lateralization” or “functional specialization”.
17. Write a note on “Language and the brain”.

Theories of second language development

Some of the theories discussed above under theories of first language acquisition also address issues
in second language development but in this section, we will only specifically look at the major
theories of second language development.

The Monitor Model

Krashen’s Monitor Model (1981; 1982) is the most comprehensive of existing SLA theories. Hence
it has enjoyed considerable prominence in SLA research. However, the theory is also flawed in a
number of respects.

The Monitor Model consists of five central hypotheses. In addition, it makes reference to a number
of other factors which influence SLA and which relate to the central hypotheses. Each hypothesis is
briefly summarized below. Krashen’s views on different causative variables of SLA are also
considered.

1) The acquisition learning hypothesis

This hypothesis claims that there are two distinctive ways of developing competence in a second or
foreign language. Acquisition is the ‘natural’ way – it occurs subconsciously as a result of
participating in natural communication where the focus is on meaning. Learning occurs as a result of
conscious study or classroom teaching of the formal properties (grammar) of the language. In
storage, ‘acquired’ knowledge is located in the language areas of the left hemisphere; it is available
for automatic processing. ‘learnt’ knowledge is metalinguistic in nature. It is also stored in the left
hemisphere, but not necessarily in the language areas; it is available only for controlled processing.
Thus, ‘acquired’ knowledge and ‘learnt’ knowledge are stored separately. In performance, ‘acquired’
knowledge initiates both the comprehension and production of utterances.‘ Learnt’ knowledge is
available for use only by the Monitor. Learning, according to the theory, cannot lead to acquisition.

2) The natural order hypothesis

According to this hypothesis, the acquisition of grammatical structures proceeds in a predictable
order. Research shows 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. That is, when the learner is engaged in natural communication tasks, he will manifest the
standard order. But when he is engaged in tasks where the learner can use metalinguistic knowledge
(e.g. grammatical knowledge), a different order will emerge.

3) The Monitor hypothesis

The Monitor is the device that learners use to edit their language performance. The acquired
linguistic system initiates utterances when we communicate in a second or foreign language.
Conscious learning or learnt knowledge can function only as a monitor or editor that checks and
repairs the output. This editing can occur either before the utterance is uttered or after. In either case
its use is optional. Krashen gives three conditions for its use: 1) there must be sufficient time; 2) the
focus is on form and not on meaning; and 3) the user must know the rule. Krashen recognizes that
editing can also take place using ‘acquired’ competence. He refers to this as editing by ‘feel’.

4) The input hypothesis

This hypothesis claims that people acquire language best when the input is slightly beyond their
current level of competence (i.e. the i+ 1 level). Thus comprehensible input refers to utterances that
the learner understands based on the context in which they are used as well as the language in which
they are phrased.

5) The affective filter hypothesis

Krashen incorporates the notion of the Affective Filter as proposed by Dulay and Burt (1977). The
filter controls how much input the learner comes into contact with, and how much input is converted
into intake. It is ‘affective’ because the factors that determine its strengths have to do with the
learner’s motivation, self – confidence or, anxiety state. Learners with high motivation and self –
confidence and with low anxiety have low filters. They obtain and let in plenty of input. Learners
with low motivation, little self – confidence, and high anxiety have high filters and so receive little
input and allow even less in. The affective filter influences the rate of development, but it does not
affect the route.

Evaluation

The Monitor Model has also attracted a lot of criticism. Here we will consider a few of them:

1) The ‘acquisition – learning’ distinction has been called ‘theological’, in that it has been formulated
in order to confirm a specific goal, namely that successful SLA is the result of ‘acquisition’ (James
1980, cited in Ellis, 1985). McLaughlin (1978) argues that the Monitor Model is unreliable, because
the ‘acquisition-learning’ distinction is defined in terms of ‘subconscious’ and ‘conscious’ processes
which are not open to inspection. The first criticism, then, is a methodological one. The ‘acquisition-
learning’ hypothesis is not acceptable; because it cannot be tested in empirical investigation.

2) A further objection concerns Krashen’s claims that ‘acquisition’ and ‘learning’ are entirely
separate, and that ‘acquired’ knowledge cannot turn into ‘learnt’ knowledge. Krashen refers to this as
the ‘non-interface’ position. McLaughlin (1978) along with many other researchers has challenged
this position on the basis that when ‘learnt’ knowledge is automatized through practice it becomes
‘acquired’ i.e. available for use in spontaneous conversation.

3) Krashen does not really explicate the cognitive processes that are responsible either for
‘acquisition’ or ‘learning. Krashen does not explain what the learner does with input. If the
‘acquisition-learning’ distinction is to have any power, it is surely necessary to specify in what way
the process responsible for each knowledge type are different from each other which Krashen does
not do. Thus, despite its comprehensiveness, the Monitor Model is still a ‘black box’ theory.

4) McLaughlin (1978) points to the difficulty of distinguishing introspectively ‘rule’ application (as
in Monitoring) and ‘feel’.
5) The monitor Model is a ‘dual competence’ theory of SLA. That is, it proposes that the learner’s
knowledge of the L2, which is reflected in variable performance, is best characterized in terms of
two separate competences, which Krashen labels ‘acquisition’ and ‘learning’. The available
evidence, however, indicates that learners produce utterances which are formally (structurally)
different even when it is evident that they are focused on meaning. That is, what Krashen calls
‘acquired’ knowledge is not homogeneous and therefore it makes little sense to maintain a dual
competence explanation (Ellis, 1985). The kinds of performance that result from focusing on
meaning and on form are best treated as aspects of a single but variable competence which contains
alternative rules for realizing the same meanings, in much the same way as does the native speaker’s
competence.

In summary, despite the comprehensiveness of the Monitor Model, there are question marks over the
validity of some of its claims. Also, the input hypothesis does not account for the fact that acquisition
can take place without two-way negotiation of meaning. Again, it does not recognize that output also
plays an important role in second language development.

The Output Hypothesis

The “input hypothesis” of Krashen (1981) does not consider the role of production or output in
second language development. For him, comprehensible input will automatically ensure acquisition
of a second language. However, Merrill Swain (1993) argues that constant practice facilitates the
learner to be conscious of her/his production. Output helps to move the learner from the semantic
processing to the complete grammatical processing for accurate production.

The comprehensible output (CO) hypothesis states that learning takes place when a learner
encounters a gap in his or her linguistic knowledge of the second language (L2). By noticing this
gap, the learner becomes aware of it and may be able to modify his output so that he learns
something new about the language. According to her, the act of producing language (speaking or
writing) constitutes part of the process of second language learning due to the mental processes
connected with the production of language.

According to Swain and Lapkin (1995), there are three specific functions of output which are as
follows:

1. The noticing/triggering function: It refers to the awareness or “noticing” students find when they
cannot say or write exactly what they need for conveying meaning. With the use of this function,
learners realize there are some linguistics problems they need to manage, so that, it pushes the
student to look for the adequate knowledge they require for completing the new discovered gap.

2. The hypothesis-testing function: This function suggests learners may use the method of “trial and
error” for testing her /his production expecting to receive a feedback. This feedback can be applied in
two ways: recasts and elicitations or clarifications requests. 

3. The metalinguistic (reflective) function: Language is seen as a tool conducive to reflection on the
language used by the teacher, their partners and the student himself/herself. Output production can
serve this function.

To conclude, comprehensible input and comprehensible output are both required for successful
second language acquisition to take place.
 The Acculturation Model
Acculturation can be defined as the process of becoming adapted to a new culture. John Schumann
(1978) explains how acculturation affects SLA. Andersen (1980) provides an elaborated version of
Schumann’s model called “the Nativization Model”. The central premise of the Acculturation Model,
as Ellis (1985) explains, is that second language acquisition is just one aspect of acculturation and
the degree to which a learner acculturates to the target language community will determine the
degree to which he acquires the second language.

Acculturation, and hence SLA, is determined by the degree of social and psychological distance
between the learner and the target language culture. Social distance is the result of a number of
factors which affect the learner as a member of a social group. Psychological distance is the result of
various affective factors which concern the learner as an individual. The social factors are primary.
They determine the amount of contact with the target language community (input). The
psychological factors, on the other hand, determine how much input will be converted into intake.

Schumann (1978) lists the various factors which determine social and psychological distance. The
social variables govern whether the overall learning situation is ‘good’ or ‘bad’. An example of a
‘good’ learning situation is when 1) the TLC and L2C view each other as socially equal; 2) the TLC
and the L2C are both desirous that the L2C will assimilate; 3) both the TLC and L2C expect the L2
group to share social facilities with the TL group; 4) the L2C is small and not very cohesive; 5) the
L2C’s culture is congruent with that of the TLC; 6) both groups have positive attitude towards each
other; and 7) the L2C envisages staying in the TL area for an extended period. An example of a ‘bad’
learning situation is when the conditions are opposite to the one’s described above. Thus in a ‘bad’
learning situation the learner will receive very little input. But it should also be remembered that
there can be varying degrees of social distance.

The psychological factors are affective in nature. They include 1) language shock – when the learner
experiences doubt and possible confusion when using the L2; 2) culture shock – when the learner
experiences disorientation, stress, fear, etc. as a result of differences between his/her own culture and
that of the TLC; 3) motivation; and 4) ego boundaries. When the psychological distance is great, the
learner will fail to convert available input into intake.

The Pidginization Hypothesis: Schumann suggests that the early stages of SLA are characterized
by the same processes that are responsible for the formation of pidgin languages. When social and/or
psychological distances are great, the learner fails to progress beyond the early stages and his
language will be pidginized. Schumann mentions a Spanish speaker’s acquisition of L2 English in
the United States. The learner, Alberto, was subject to a high degree of social distance and so, failed
to progress very far in learning English. His English was characterized by many of the forms
observed in pidgins. For example:

Negatives: ‘no’ + Verb …. No touch my book

Questions : uninverted ……you go where?
Absence of possessive and plural inflections: Peter book or, three book
Restricted verb morphology

Schumann suggests ‘pidginization may characterize all early SLA and … under conditions of social
and psychological distance it persists’. When pidginization persists the learner fossilizes. That is, he
no longer revises his interlanguage system in the direction of the TL. Thus early fossilization and
pidginization are identical( similar) processes.
The functions of language: Following Smith (1972), Schumann distinguishes three broad functions
of language: (1) the communicative function – the transmission of purely referential, denotative
information; (2) the integrative function – the use of language to mark the speaker as a member of a
particular social group; and (3) the expressive function – the use of language to display linguistic
virtuosity (e.g. in literary uses).

Initially L2 learners will seek to use the L2 for the communicative function. Pidgins and
interlanguages which fossilize in the early stages of development remain restricted to the
communicative function. Native speakers use it for both the communicative and integrative
functions. L2 learners who do not fossilize early on also use it for the first two functions. But many
native speakers and L2 learners will never aspire to master the expressive uses of language.

The Nativization Model

Andersen provides a cognitive dimension to Schumann’s Acculturation Model and makes it more
comprehensive. He tries to explain the learner’s internal processing mechanisms.

According to Andersen, SLA is the result of two general forces – nativization and denativization.
Nativization consists of assimilation. The learner simplifies the learning task by building hypothesis
based on the knowledge he already possesses. In this sense, he attends to an ‘internal norm’.
Nativization is apparent in pidginization and the early stages of both first and second language
acquisition. Denativization involves accommodation; the learner adjusts his internalized system to
make it fit the input. The learner makes use of inferencing strategies which enable him to remodel his
interlanguage system in accordance with the ‘external norm’. Denativization is apparent in
depidginization and also in later first and second language acquisition.

Evaluation
Strengths: 1) The Acculturation and Nativist models focus on power mechanisms of SLA. They
provide explanations of why L2 learners, unlike first language learners, often fail to achieve a native-
like competence.

2) These models also indicate that SLA involves processes of a very general kind, which are also
found in the formation and elaboration of pidgin languages.

3) The notions of ‘internal’ and ‘external’ norms are elegant devices for explaining why early and
late interlanguage systems are so very different.

4) The gradual transition of attention from an internal to an external norm and the switch that
learners make from reliance on simplifying to reliance on inferencing strategies explain the
devolpmental sequence which has been observed in SLA.

Weaknesses
1) There is no specification of the learner’s assembly mechanisms. Neither model sheds light on how
L2 knowledge is internalized and used. The Nativization model does consider internal factors but
there is no discussion of how assimilation and accommodation operate. The internal processing
strategies which convert the primary linguistic data (input) into intake and how this intake is
integrated into the existing interlanguage system have not been explained. Is intake controlled by the
way the input is shaped in interection between learners and other speakers, between situation and
learner? Or is it controlled by the structure of the internal processing mechanisms themselves?
(environment or internal structure?) No answer to these questions is given.

2) The Acculturation and Nativization Models address naturalistic SLA, where the L2 learner has
contact with the TLC. It is not clear whether the models are also applicable to classroom SLA, where
no such contact is possible. Presumably the factors responsible for social distance are not relevant in
foreign language learning, although those responsible for psychological distance may be.

Interlanguage
The term ‘interlanguage’ was first used by Larry Selinker (1972). It refers to the intermediate states
or interim grammars of a learner’s language as it moves toward the target language. In other words,
interlanguage is the structured system which the learner constructs at any given stage during his
journey towards the L2. Learners are believed to pass through an interlanguage continuum as they
continue to learn the target language. Selinker considered the development of the IL to be a creative
process influenced both by L1 and by input from the target language.

The concept of ‘hypothesis-testing’ was first used to explain how the L2 learner progressed along the
interlanguage continuum. Pit Corder (1967) proposed that at least some of the strategies used by the
L2 learner were the same as those by which L1 acquisition takes place. Corder suggested that both
L1 and L2 learners make errors in order to test out certain hypotheses about the nature of the
language they are learning. Corder saw the making of errors as a strategy, evidence of learner-
internal processing. This view was in opposition to the view of the SLA presented in the Contrastive
Analysis Hypothesis. ‘Hypothesis-testing’ was a mentalist notion and had no place in behaviourist
accounts of learning.

Selinker (1972), on the other hand, stresses that there are differences between IL development in
SLA and L1 acquisition by children, including different cognitive processes involved. However, the
notion of L1 interference is not rejected entirely but is seen as one factor among many of the
cognitive processes responsible for SLA. Selinker suggests that the following five principal
processes operate in interlanguage:

 language transfer from L1 to L2.

 transfer of training, or how L2 is taught (i.e. a rule enters the learner’s system as a result of
instruction).
 overgeneralization of target language rules, that is, L2 rules are applied too broadly.
 strategies of L2 learning (i.e. how learners approach the L2 materials and the task of L2
learning).
 strategies of L2 communication (i.e. ways that learners try to communicate with others in
the L2).

The five processes together constitute the ways in which the learner tries to internalize the L2
system. They are the means by which the learner tries to reduce the learning burden to manageable
proportions. It has been suggested by Henry Widdowson (1975) that they can be subsumed under the
general process of ‘simplification’. Learners have limited processing space and, therefore, cannot
cope with the total complexity of a language system, so they limit the number of hypotheses they test
at any one point in time.

Selinker also noted that many L2 learners fail to reach target language competence. That is, they do
not reach the end of the interlanguage continuum. They stop learning when their interlanguage
contains at least some rules different from those of the target language system. He referred to this as
‘fossilization’. Fossilization occurs in most language learners and cannot be remedied by further
instruction. Fossilized structures can be realized as errors or as correct target language forms.
Common fossilized errors cited by Selinker (1972) are French uvular /r/ in English interlanguage and
German time-place order after the verb, also in English interlanguage. Fossilized structures may not
be persistent, however. On occasion the learner may succeed in producing the correct target language
form, but when the learner is focused on meaning – especially if the subject matter is difficult – s/he
will ‘backslide’ towards their true interlanguage norm.

As we have seen above, the account of interlanguage theory has close links with the principles of
mentalist theories of language acquisition. The emphasis on hypothesis-testing and internal
processes, together with the insistence on the notion of a continuum of learning involving successive
restructuring of an internal system, are direct borrowings from L1 acquisition theory. Selinker’s 1972
paper was seminal providing the theoretical framework for interpreting SLA as a mentalistic process
and for the empirical investigation of language-learner langrage. Subsequent discussions of
interlanguage focused on its several principal features, all of which were raised by Selinker in one
way or another.

Language-learner language is permeable: The L2 learner’s interlanguage system is permeable, in

the sense that rules that constitute the learner’s knowledge at any one stage are not fixed, but are
open to amendment.

Language-learner language is dynamic: The L2 learner’s interlanguage is constantly changing.

However, they do not jump from one stage to the next, but rather slowly revise the interim systems to
accommodate new hypotheses about the target language system.

Language-learner language is systematic: The L2 learner does not select haphazardly from their
store of interlanguage rules, but in predictable ways. They base their performance plans on their
existing rule system in much the same way as the native speaker bases her plans on her internalized
knowledge of the L1 system.

Language-learner language is variable: Although the IL is systematic, differences in context result

in different patterns of language use. The communicative contexts include linguistic, psychological
and microsocial contexts.

Language-learner language is a reduced system both in form and function: The L2 learner often
produces rather simplified grammatical structures as they have a small range of communicative
needs.

Interlanguage theory was based on ‘behavioural events’. As Selinker acknowledged, the behavioural
events that have aroused the greatest interest in discussions of SLA have been ‘errors’. However,
whereas the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis was devised to justify procedures for predicting errors,
interlanguage theory constitutes an attempt to explain errors. Early interlanguage theory, then, was
closely associated with Error Analysis.

Socio-cultural theory
Lev Vygotsky (1896--1934)

From your childhood, can you remember tasks that you could perform as a child without any
assistance? What are things that you couldn’t do alone, but could do with assistance as a child?
When did you learn to do the things alone that you couldn’t perform without assistance as a child?
According to socio-cultural theory, all learning including language learning happens in collaboration
with others as a result of interaction between them. Sociocultural theory emphasizes the role of
interaction in SLA. According to the theory:

 Interaction not only facilitates language learning but is a causative force in acquisition.
 All of learning is seen as essentially a social process which is grounded in sociocultural
settings.

Sociocultural theory emphasizes learner activity and involvement over innate and universal
mechanisms. It focuses on factors outside the learner rather than inside them. Sociocultural
theory attaches little importance to the structural patterns of L2 and the notion that the learner is a
largely autonomous processor.
According to sociocultural theory, learning occurs when simple innate mental activities are
transformed into ‘higher order”, more complex mental functions. This transformation typically
involves symbolic mediation, which is a link between a person’s current mental state and higher
order functions that is provided primarily by language.
Interpersonal interaction refers to communicative events and situations which occur between people.
One important context for symbolic mediation is such interpersonal interaction between learners and
experts, i.e. teachers or more knowledgeable peers. Vygotsky calls the level where much of this type
of interaction occurs the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD).

Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)

This is an area of potential development, where the learner can achieve that potential only with
assistance. According to Sociocultural theory, mental functions that are beyond an individual
learner’s current level must be performed in collaboration with other people before they are achieved
independently. Vygotsky pioneered the notion that children learn within communities, rather than
strictly as individuals. According to him, learning occurs in ZPD with children gradually developing
autonomy in thought and action with the support of adults around them.

Scaffolding

One way in which others help the learner in language development within the ZPD is through
scaffolding. For example, in ‘modified interaction’ between parents and children in first language
development, or between native speakers and non-native learners in SLA, experts commonly provide
novice learners with chunks of talk that the learner can then use to express concepts which are
beyond their independent means. This type of mediation also occurs when peers collaborate in
constructing language which exceeds the competence of any individual among them. More
generally, the metaphor of scaffolding refers to verbal guidance which an expert provides to help a
learner perform any specific task, or the verbal collaboration of peers to perform a task which would
be too difficult for any one of them individually. Very importantly, scaffolding is something that
happens to a learner as a passive recipient, but happens with a learner as an active participant.

Collaborative scaffolding in L1 or L2?

For L2 learners, L1 as well as L2 can provide helpful mediation. Talk between peers who are
collaborating in tasks is often in their common L1, which provides an efficient medium for problem-
solving and can enhance learning of both L2 and any academic subjects that students are studying in
the second language.

Symbolic mediation

Symbolic mediation can be interactional without involving face-to-face communication. Symbolic

mediation need not even necessarily involve language but can also be achieved with such non-
linguistic symbols as gestures, diagrams and illustrations, and algebraic symbols.

Intrapersonal interaction

Intrapersonal interaction, i.e. communication that occurs within an individual’s own mind, is also
viewed by Vygotsky as a sociocultural phenomenon. When reading, for example, we engage in
interpersonal as well as intrapersonal activity. A second type of intrapersonal interaction that occurs
frequently in beginning stages of L2 learning makes use of L1 resources. This takes place through
translation to oneself as part of interpretive problem-solving processes. Yet another type is private
speech. This is the self-talk that many children engage in that leads to the inner speech that more
mature individuals use to control thought and behaviour. Private speech by children provides
good evidence that even when they are not interacting with others, they are not merely passively
assimilating L2 input; they are using intrapersonal interaction in an active process of engagement
with the input they hear, practicing to build up their competence.

Implication of intrapersonal interaction for L2 teaching learning

Private writing, such as personal journals, diaries, notes in the margins of textbooks, L1 translations,
highlighting important points represent intrapersonal interaction which facilitate learning.
To sum up, overall, sociocultural theory claims that language is learned through socially mediated
activities. Access to or participation in a learning community, the amount of mediation one receives
from experts or peers to a great extent determines one’s level of success.

Bibliography and further reading

Brown, H. D. 1994. Principles of language learning and teaching (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall Regents.
Ellis, R. 1994. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. 1985. Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gass, S., and L. Selinker. 1994. Second Language Acquisition: An Introductory Course. Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lightbown, P., and N. Spada. How languages are learned (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

McLaughlin, B. 1987. Theories of Second Language Learning. Edward Arnold.

Mitchelle, R., and F. Myles. 2004. Second language learning theories (2nd ed.). London: Arnold.
Ortega, L. 2009. Understanding second language acquisition. Hodder Arnold.
Saville-Troike, M. 2006. Introducing Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Selinker, L. 1972. Interlanguage. IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language

Teaching 10(3).

Swain, M. 1993. The Output Hypothesis: Just Speaking and Writing Aren't Enough. Canadian
Modern Language Review 50(1):158-64.

Swain, M., and S. Lapkin. 1995. Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A
step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics 16: 371-391.

Study questions

1. Distinguish between language “acquisition” and “learning”.

2. What is “comprehensible input”?
3. What are affective variables?
4. What is the role of the monitor?
5. Discuss the natural order hypothesis. What implications does it have for language teaching?
6. Write a note on “output hypothesis”.
7. What is “acculturation”?
8. What role do social and psychological factors play in second language development?
9. “The early stages of SLA are characterized by the same processes that are responsible for the
formation of pidgin languages.” Explain.
10. Discuss the processes of “nativization” and “denativization” in SLA.
11. What is interlanguage?
12. What is meant by “hypothesis testing”?
13. Discuss the five principal processes of interlanguage, according to Selinker (1972).
14. Discuss Vygotsky’s notion of Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)
15. What is “scaffolding”?
16. How can “scaffolding” be provided in SLA?
17. Distinguish between “interpersonal interaction” and “intrapersonal interaction”.
18. How do sociocultural theories of language development differ from psycholinguistic models
of language acquisition?
19. What is the role of “mediation” or interpersonal interaction in SLA?

History of Language Teaching Methodology

In the Western world back in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries, foreign language learning was
associated with the learning of Latin and Greek, both supposed to promote speakers' intellectuality.
At the time, it was of vital importance to focus on grammatical rules, syntactic structures, along with
rote memorisation of vocabulary and translation of literary texts. There was no provision for the oral
use of the languages under study. Late in the nineteenth century, this “Classical Method” came to be
known as the Grammar Translation Method. Later on, as trade and commerce grew around the
world, the traditional method was seen as inadequate for developing spoken language skills and a
plethora of alternative new approaches and methods emerged in the arena of foreign language
teaching. Some have enjoyed more popularity and success than the others but most of them continue
in their original or modified forms in diverse foreign language teaching contexts around the world
today.
Grammar-Translation Method
The Grammar Translation (GT) Method dominated foreign language teaching (FLT) in the 19th
century and in some respects continues to be influential in FLT up to this day. Proponents of this
method believe that learning a foreign language is achieved through the constant and fast translation
of sentences from the target language into the learner’s first language and vice versa. Correct
translations of written texts require (a) knowledge of a vast amount of vocabulary, and (b)
knowledge of rules of grammar, which allow learners to analyse and understand the construction of
target language sentences, thus preventing their misinterpretation. In Bangladesh, the traditional
method of English language teaching in schools before the advent of Communicative language
teaching is often termed as Grammar Translation Method.

Direct Method
The GT Method (also known as the Natural Method) was replaced by the Direct Method, posited by
Charles Berlitz in late 19th century. The basic tenet of Direct or Berlitz's Method was that second
language learning is similar to first language learning. In this light, there should be lots of oral
interaction, spontaneous use of the language, no translation, and little analysis of grammatical rules
and syntactic structures. The Direct Method enjoyed great popularity at the end of the nineteenth
century followed by a little decline, but it was revived as Audiolingual Method in the middle of 20 th
century. In Bangladesh, many English medium schools have adopted the Direct method as they teach
English “directly” without translation or recourse to learners’ mother tongue.

Audiolingual Method
The outbreak of World War II heightened the need for Americans to become orally proficient in the
languages of their allies and enemies alike. The Direct Method was modified to suit the purpose.
During the 1950s it came to be known as Army Method, and later Audiolingual Method. The
Audiolingual Method was based on linguistic and psychological theories. One of its main premises
was “descriptive or structural linguistics” which popularized scientific descriptive analysis of the
structures of a given language. Another premise was conditioning and habit-formation models of
learning put forward by behaviouristic psychologists. Thus structure or pattern practice of various
types, known as Audiolingual drills, became the main classroom activity in this method. Many
Bangladeshi language schools in the private sector, known as coaching centres, make use of
Audiolingual drills with beginner level learners of foreign languages.

Situational Language Teaching

The Situational Language Teaching, often termed as the Oral Approach, is an approach to foreign
language teaching developed by British applied linguists between the 1930s and the 1960s. The Oral
or Situational approach had an impact on language courses which survive in some parts of the world
even today. The structural view of language is the view behind this approach. Speech was viewed as
the basis of language and structure as being at the heart of speaking ability. It stresses that language
must be taught in situations in which they normally occur. Many spoken English courses in
Bangladesh seem to have been based on the situational approach as everyday language is presented
in the form of situation-based dialogues.

Communicative Language Teaching

Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) began in Britain in the 1960s as a replacement to the
earlier Situational Language Teaching. This was partly in response to Chomsky's criticisms of
structural theories of language and partly based on the theories of British functional linguists, such as
Firth and Halliday, as well as American sociolinguists, such as Hymes, Gumperz and Labov and the
writings of Austin and Searle on speech acts. The functional view of language is the primary concern
behind CLT. The method aims at promoting real communication skill of the learners. Students are
supposed to learn to use language as a means of expression. They are expected to be able to use
language as a means of expressing values and judgements and the functions that best meet their own
communication needs. In Bangladesh, CLT was introduced in secondary level schools in 1997 and
despite some difficulties in its implementation it has been persisted with.

Content Language Integrated Learning

Content Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is an approach to teaching foreign languages where
curriculum subjects such as history or geography are taught using the foreign language. The main
focus here is the acquisition of content; that is, ideas and concepts rather than the foreign language.
But because content is presented through the target language, it is believed the target language will
automatically be learned. In the UK, foreign languages such as German, French and Spanish are
taught through CLIL programmes. In Bangladesh, English medium institutions use one form of
CLIL as Bengali-speaking students learn curriculum subjects in English and develop proficiency in
both.

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) has become popular these days in many contexts as a form
of Communicative approach where students are engaged in a number of meaningful and interactive
tasks in order to learn the target language. Group work, pair work involving a lot of real or simulated
interaction is believed to underlie successful language learning and TBLT advocates just that.
Proponents of TBLT include Rod Ellis, van der Branden, Peter Skehan, Jane Willis among others.

Other methods
The twentieth century has witnessed the emergence of a number of innovative language teaching
methods. Some of these are: Natural Approach, Total Physical Response, Silent Way,
Desuggestopedia and Community Language Learning. The methods are often called fringe
methodologies, as these are not widely accepted and only practised by selected number of teachers at
selected institutions. Also, language educators have come to the realisation that there is no best
method and therefore the way forward may be an “eclectic approach” where pedagogic techniques
are selected from several methods rather than one single method. Kumaravadivelu (1994), however,
has proposed an alternative to method based on “principled pragmatism” and several universal
macrostrategies and adaptable micro-strategies. His approach is known as “post-method pedagogy”
and is often referred to in ELT pedagogy.

Bibliography and further reading

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Methodology: Approach, Design and Procedure

 (Anthony’s model)
The "methodology" is an umbrella-term to describe the job of teaching a language. Most often,
"methodology" is understood to mean "methods" in a general sense, and in some cases it is even
equated to specific teaching "techniques".  It does in fact mean and involve much more than that.
Methodology is the study of pedagogical practices in general including theoretical underpinnings and
related matters. Whatever considerations are involved in "how to teach" are methodological.

Anthony’s model
(Approach, method and technique)

In 1963, American applied linguist Edward Anthony proposed a scheme known as Anthony’s model
in an attempt to dispel terminological confusions over “methods” and “techniques” as well as to
differentiate between the philosophy of language teaching and actual classroom procedure. He
clarified that an approach is the large system of ideas and beliefs underlying a teacher’s lesson plans.
Method refers to specific ways to teach a target language and each method uses a variety of specific
techniques. In Anthony’s own words:

…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, cited in Richards and Rodgers, 2001, p. 19)

In a review of Anthony’s ideas, two later thinkers – Jack Richards and Theodore Rodgers – suggest a
rethinking of this hierarchy. They point out that Anthony model “fails to give sufficient attention to
the nature of a method itself. Nothing is said about the roles of teachers and learners assumed in a
method, for example, nor about the role of instructional materials…” (p. 20). Anthony’s package can
be improved, they suggest, by eliminating the notion of technique from the framework, and adding
design and procedure. The following two categories replaced technique at the bottom of their
hierarchy.

Design: The two thinkers propose that design is “that level in which objectives, syllabus, and
content are determined, and in which the roles of teachers, learners and instructional
materials are specified.”

Procedure: The implementation phase of language classes is where the activities that help
language learning occur. Rather than use the term implementation, they prefer the “slightly
 more comprehensive term procedure.”

(ibid, p. 20)

Thus, as Richards and Rodgers (2001) clarify in their proposed framework, “…a method is
theoretically related to an approach, is organizationally determined by a design, and is practically
realized in a procedure.” (ibid, p. 20)

The revised framework of Richards and Rodgers

(Approach, Design and Procedure)

Method
Method

Approach Design Procedure

Approach
Approach is theoretical position and belief about the nature of language, the nature of language
learning, and the applicability of both to pedagogical settings.
The theory of language presents an account of the nature of language as viewed from structural,
functional and interactional perspectives. The structural view says that language is a system of
structurally related elements for the coding of meaning. So it emphasizes the learning of different
structural elements like phonological units, lexical items and grammatical operations. From the
functional perspective, language is a vehicle for the expression of functional meaning. It emphasises
learning content through categories of meaning and function rather than structure and grammar.
From the interactional perspective, language is seen as a vehicle for realisation of interpersonal
relations and social transaction. Here language teaching content is organized by patterns of exchange
and interaction.
The theory of language learning provides an account of the psycholinguistic and cognitive
processes involved in language learning. It also gives an account of the conditions that allow for
successful use of these processes. Process-oriented theories build on learning processes, such as habit
formation, induction, inferencing, hypothesis testing and generalisation. Condition-oriented theories,
on the other hand, emphasize the nature of the socio-cultural contexts in which language learning
takes place.

Design
Design is the syllabus or curriculum for carrying out a particular language programme. It includes
the specification of teacher and student roles, objectives, syllabus, selection and sequencing of
instructional materials and types of activities to meet the needs of a designated group of learners in a
defined context.
Objectives: Design recounts the general and specific objectives of the method setting the criteria
for the selection and organisation of linguistic and/or subject-matter content. Different methods
might set out to achieve different objectives. Traditional methods set out linguistically oriented or
product-oriented objectives focusing on basic grammar, vocabulary, oral skills, pronunciation,
general communication skills, etc. More recent methods such as task-based language teaching focus
on the processes or abilities the learner is supposed to acquire as a result of instruction.
Learner roles: Design also determines learner roles taking into account several factors: a. types
of learning or learning tasks set for learners; b. degree of control learners have over the content of
learning; c. patterns of learner groupings that are recommended or implied; d. degree to which
learners influence the learning of others; e. the view of the learner as a processor, performer,
initiator, problem solver etc.
Teacher roles: Design determines teacher roles considering the following factors: a. types of
functions teachers fulfil; b. degree of teacher influence over learning; c. degree to which teacher
determines the content of learning; d. types of interaction between teachers and learners.

Syllabus: The choice of a syllabus is a major decision in language teaching, and it should be
made as consciously and with as much information as possible. Several distinct types of language
teaching syllabi exist, and these different types may be implemented in various teaching situations.
We discuss six different types of language teaching syllabi separately below but it should be
remembered that almost all actual language teaching syllabi are combinations of two or more of the
types mentioned here. For a given course, one type of syllabus usually dominates, while other types
of content may be combined with it. Furthermore, these types of syllabi are not entirely distinct from
each other. For example, the distinction between skill-based and task-based syllabi may be minimal.
In such cases, the distinguishing factor is often the way in which the instructional content is used in
the actual teaching procedure. The characteristics of individual syllabi are defined as follows:
1. "A structural (formal) syllabus." The content of language teaching is a collection of the grammar
items and structures of the target language. Examples include nouns, verbs, adjectives, statements,
questions, subordinate clauses, and so on.
2. "A notional/functional syllabus." The content of the language teaching is a collection of the
functions that are performed when language is used, or of the notions that language is used to
express. Examples of functions include: informing, agreeing, apologizing, requesting; examples of
notions include size, age, color, comparison, time, and so on.
3. "A situational syllabus." The content of language teaching is a collection of real or imaginary
situations in which language occurs or is used. The primary purpose of a situational language
teaching syllabus is to teach the language that occurs in the situations. Examples of situations
include: seeing the dentist, complaining to the landlord, buying a book at the book store, meeting a
new student, and so on.
4. "A skill-based syllabus." The content of language teaching is a collection of specific abilities that
may play a part in using language. Skills are things that people must be able to do to be competent in
a language, relatively independently of the situation or setting in which the language use can occur.
While situational syllabi group functions together into specific settings of language use, skill-based
syllabi group linguistic competencies (pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, and discourse) together
into generalized types of behavior, such as listening to spoken language for the main idea, writing
well-formed paragraphs, giving effective oral presentations, and so on.
5. "A task-based syllabus." The content of teaching is a series of complex and purposeful tasks that
the students want or need to perform with the target language. Language learning is subordinate to
task performance, and language teaching occurs only as the need arises during the performance of a
given task. Tasks integrate language (and other) skills in specific settings of language use. Task-
based teaching differs from situation-based teaching in that while situational teaching has the goal of
teaching the specific language content that occurs in the situation (a predefined product), task-based
teaching has the goal of teaching students to draw on resources to complete some piece of work (a
process). Examples include: applying for a job, talking with a social worker, getting housing
information over the telephone, and so on.
6. "A content-based-syllabus." The primary purpose of instruction is to teach some content or
information using the target language. The students are simultaneously language students and
students of whatever content is being taught. An example of content-based language teaching is a
science class taught in the target language, possibly with linguistic adjustment to make the science
more comprehensible.
In general, the six types of syllabi or instructional content are presented beginning with the one based
most on structure, and ending with the one based mostly on language use. Although the six types of
syllabus content are defined here in isolated contexts, it is rare for one type of syllabus or content to
be used exclusively in actual teaching settings. Syllabi or content types are usually combined in more
or less integrated ways, with one type as the organizing basis around which the others are arranged
and related. In discussing syllabus choice and design, it should be kept in mind that the issue is not
which type to choose but which types, and how to relate them to each other.

Materials: Design also ascertains the role of instructional materials. For this purpose it specifies
the primary functions of materials, the form of materials (e.g. textbook, audiovisual), the relations of
materials to other inputs and the assumptions made about teachers and learners.

Teaching learning activities: Teaching and learning activities used in the classroom determine
success or failure in achieving the objectives of a language programme. Different methods may
adopt different sets of classroom activities. Since different methods have different objectives,
activities they use will also vary. For example, the Grammar Translation method which aims to attain
reading comprehension, translation skills and grammar knowledge will use translation and grammar
activities alongside reading literary extracts. The Audiolingual method which aims to achieve
structural knowledge and oral skills will adopt structure drills and dialogue practice. Communicative
language teaching which promotes the development of communication skills, on the other hand, will
employ role plays, free discussions and debates as classroom activities.

Theories of language and language learning may also influence choice of activities. For example,
proponents of the Total Physical Response believe that learning should be fun and as stress-free as
possible and, therefore, use physical activities in class while advocates of Desuggestopedia who
believe that language learning is adversely affected by psychological barriers (such as fear) attempt
to tap into students' mental potential to learn through positive suggestion, visualization and
peripheral learning.

Procedure
Procedure, sometimes called ‘technique’ in a narrow sense, is any of a wide variety of exercises,
activities, or devices used in the language classroom for realising lesson objectives. It is the level at
which approach and design are realised through classroom practices and behaviours. There are three
dimensions to a method at the level of procedure: a. the use of teaching activities, such as drills,
dialogues, information-gap activities, etc.; b. the ways in which teaching activities are used; and c.
giving feedback to learners concerning the form or content of their utterances.

Conclusion
Although we have described Method in terms of approach, design and procedure, Richards and
Rodgers (2001) remind us that in practice “very few methods are explicit with respect to all of these
dimensions” (p. 32). Teaching methods often develop spontaneously without explicating their model
specifications. Moreover, methodological development is supposed to proceed from approach,
through design, to procedure, but it may not happen all the time (ibid, p. 34). They clarify that
methods can develop out of this formulaic transition, without any order or with reverse order. For
example, one can invent at first a set of teaching procedures and later formulate its design and, even
later, explain its underlying approach.
Bibliography and further reading

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Study questions
1. What do ‘approach’, ‘design’ and ‘procedure’ mean?
2. Discuss Anthony’s model.
3. What is meant by ‘method’?
4. Discuss Richards and Rodgers’s revised framework of language teaching method.
5. What are teachers and learners roles?
6. What is a syllabus?
7. Discuss different types of language syllabuses.
8. Distinguish between ‘method’ and ‘techniques’.
9. What determines the choice of activities in the classroom?
10. What are the sub-components of “design” in Richards and Rodgers’s revised framework of
language teaching method?

The Grammar Translation Method

The Grammar Translation Method (GTM) of foreign language teaching is one of the most traditional
methods, dating back to the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It was originally used to
teach classical or so-called 'dead' languages such as Latin and Greek with a view to appreciating their
rich literature and developing second language reading proficiency. This is why the method was
known as the Classical Method back then. The Classical Method dominated for centuries in language
teaching history, though it had no theoretical foundations. In the 18th and 19th centuries, the Classical
Method was adopted as the chief means for teaching foreign languages. In the 19 th century the
Classical Method came to be known as the Grammar Translation Method.

GTM, the new avatar of the Classical Method, came to be used for teaching foreign languages across
Europe in order to give learners access to literature of the target language as well as to develop
learners’ grammar, reading, vocabulary and translation skills. According to Richards and Rodgers
(2001), GTM was “the offspring of German scholarship” and was known in the USA as the Prussian
method (p. 5). GTM was the dominant language teaching method in Europe and elsewhere until the
oral-skills oriented methods arrived on the scene but it is still prevalent in modified form in many
contexts where oral communication is still not the main goal of language learning.

Key Features (principles and characteristics)

Richards and Rodgers (2001) mention the following features of the Grammar Translation Method:
1) Goal: “The goal of foreign language study is to learn a language in order to read its literature
or in order to benefit from the mental discipline and intellectual development that result from
foreign language study” (p. 5)
2) Skills focus and materials: Reading and writing are emphasized; listening and speaking
receive little or no attention. Materials mostly comprise literary extracts and classical texts.
3) Vocabulary: Vocabulary is based on the reading texts and taught through translation, often in
the form of bilingual wordlists, memorization and dictionary study.
4) “The sentence is the basic unit of teaching and language practice. Much of the lesson is
devoted to translating sentences into and out of the target language...” (p. 6)
5) Accuracy of grammar and translation is emphasized.
6) Deductive teaching of grammar: The teacher explains grammar rules and then gives
examples. Grammar provides the rules for putting words together and instruction often
focuses on the form and inflection of words rather than on communicative use of the rules.
7) Medium of instruction: Classes are taught in the mother tongue, with little active use of the
target language. Comparison and contrast between the target language and learners’ mother
tongue is carried out in order to enhance proficiency in both.

To the list above, we may add another principle mentioned in Larsen-Freeman (2000):

8) Roles of the teacher and students: In GTM, the teacher and learners take on traditional roles
of knowledge transmitter and knowledge receiver. The teacher is the authority in the
classroom while students simply do what they are asked to do.

Techniques
Larsen-Freeman (2000) discusses the following techniques of the Grammar Translation Method:
(1) Translation: Students translate literary extracts from the target language into learners’ native
language and vice versa.
(2) Reading Comprehension: Students find information in a passage, make inferences and relate
to personal experiences.
(3) Antonyms/Synonyms: Students find antonyms and synonyms for words or sets of words that
occur in the text.
(4) Cognates: By learning spelling or sound patterns that correspond between L1 and the target
language, students are trained to recognize cognates.
(5) Deductive Application of Rule: Students are supposed to understand grammar rules and their
exceptions before being asked to apply them to new examples.
(6) Fill-in-the-blanks: Students fill in gaps in sentences with new words or items of a particular
grammar type.
 (7) Memorisation: Students memorise bilingual vocabulary lists, grammatical rules and
grammatical paradigms.
(8) Vocabulary practice: Students create sentences to demonstrate that they know the meaning
and use of new words.
(9) Composition: Students write paragraphs, essays or summaries on a topic using the target
language.

Drawbacks
Obviously, there are many drawbacks to the Grammar Translation Method. Virtually no class time is
allocated to allow students to produce their own sentences, and even less time is spent on oral
practice. There is often little productive use of grammar rules. Culture, when discussed, is
communicated through means of reading passages, and there is little exposure to everyday life styles
of target language communities. Also, the type of error correction that this method requires can
actually be harmful to the students' learning processes.
There are very few modern language teaching experts who support the Grammar Translation
method. According to Richards and Rodgers (2001), "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” (p. 7).

Usefulness
Despite all of these drawbacks, there are certain positive traits to be found in this traditional method.
The method is still common in many countries, even popular.  Brown (1994) attempts to explain why
the method is still employed by pointing out:
It requires few specialised skills on the part of teachers.  Tests of grammar rules and of
translations are easy to construct and can be objectively scored.  Many standardised 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. (p. 53)
Besides, the study of literature does contribute to intellectual development by promoting critical
analytical abilities. Literature has the potential to broaden the mind by helping learners develop
multiple perspectives. Translation of literary texts can also help to build strong vocabulary base and
lead to the improvement of language skills. Guy Cook ( ), a prominent British applied linguist, has
lent his support to the method by arguing that translation and language play are central to foreign
language learning and teaching.

Conclusion
Over-emphasis on 'correct' grammar and translation of literary texts with little regard for the free
application and production of speech led to the decline of the method in many contexts. However, in
recent times, language educators have come to realize that GTM can be useful in modified form and
in conjunction with other methods. Surely GTM is still alive and kicking in contexts where large
classrooms and poor logic support is an everyday reality.

Bibliography and further reading

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Study questions
1. What is the goal of the Grammar Translation method?
2. Where did GTM originate?
3. When and why did the GTM fall out of favour with language teachers?
4. Mention some principles or characteristics of the GTM.
5. Discuss the major techniques of the Grammar Translation method.
6. What are the roles of the teacher and students in the GTM?
7. Identify some strengths of the GTM.
8. Identify some drawbacks of the GTM.
9. Will you use the GTM in your intermediate-level class? Why?

Language teaching innovations in the nineteenth century and the

Reform Movement
In the second half of the 19th century, the grammar-translation method came in for criticism because
it did not lead to a practically useful knowledge of the target language. With an increase in trade and
commerce and the need for communication in Europe, the goal of language learning shifted to
acquiring everyday language, the oral use of the target language, and a practically useful knowledge
of the target language country, culture and institutions. Marcel and Gouin from France and
Prendergast from England, among others, aimed at innovation in second language teaching
methodology based on their observation of child language acquisition and everyday situational
contexts in which interaction took place. All these educators and language specialists “recognized the
need for speaking proficiency rather than reading comprehension, grammar, or literary appreciation
as the goal for foreign language programmes” (Richards and Rodgers, 2001, p. 8). Unfortunately,
their ideas did not receive widespread attention in the absence of organizational structures such as
professional associations or journals. However, a concerted effort arose towards the end of the
nineteenth century as linguists and language teachers began to write focusing on the need to change
and reform language teaching. The books, articles, speeches and pamphlets that they produced led to
a movement known as the Reform Movement.

Principles of the reform movement

Linguists such as Henry Sweet from England, Wilhelm Vietor from Germany and Paul Passy from
France were at the forefront of the Reform Movement. The main principles of the movement were as
follows:
i. The spoken (not written) language is primary;
 ii. Classroom discourse should mainly be in the target language.
iii. The findings of phonetics and modern linguistic studies should be applied to teaching, and
teachers should receive a proper training.
iv. Limits must be imposed on the number and kind of vocabulary and grammar taught in class,
and it should be carefully selected; everyday vocabulary and phrases must be included.
v. Words and phrase should be presented and practiced in contexts, not as isolated, disconnected
elements.
vi. Materials (grammar) should be graded from simple to complex.
vii. Grammar should be taught inductively.
viii. Translation should be avoided, and direct associations of objects with words and phrases in
the target language should be encouraged.
The reform movement which emerged as a reaction against the Grammar Translation method lead to
the development of the Direct method which we are going to look at below.

Bibliography and further reading

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Study questions
1. Why was it thought necessary to move away from the GTM in the late nineteenth century?
2. What were the principles of the reform movement?
3. What were the contributions of the reform movement?

The Direct Method

The Direct Method stresses that all foreign language teaching should occur in the target language only
and that there should be no use of translation. There is an emphasis on linking meaning to the language
being learned.  The method became very popular during the first quarter of the 20th century, especially in
private language schools in Europe where highly motivated students could study new languages and not
need to travel far in order to try them out and apply them communicatively.  One of the most famous
advocates of the Direct Method was the German scholar Charles Berlitz, whose schools and ‘Berlitz
Method’ are now known all over the world.

Objectives
The basic premise of the Direct Method is that students will learn to communicate in the target
language, partly by learning how to think in that language and by not involving L1 in the language
learning process whatsoever.  Objectives include teaching the students how to use the language
spontaneously and orally, linking meaning with the target language through the use of realia, pictures
or pantomime.  There is to be a direct connection between concepts and the language to be learned.

Key Features
According to Richards and Rodgers (2001), the key features of the Direct Method are the following:
(1) Medium of instruction: Classroom instruction is conducted exclusively in the target language.
(2) Vocabulary and sentences are selected and taught on the basis of their usefulness in everyday
situations.
(3) For the sake of developing oral communication skills, question-and-answer exchanges are
frequently arranged between teachers and students in small, intensive classes.
(4) Grammar is taught inductively. That is, ‘rules’ are not given by the teacher; students are
made to discover the ‘rules’.
(5) New teaching points are introduced orally first. That is, students listen and speak before they
read or write.
(6) Translation is not allowed in teaching vocabulary; so concrete vocabulary is taught through
demonstration, objects, and pictures; abstract vocabulary is taught by association of ideas.
(7) Unlike in GTM, both speech and listening comprehension are taught.
(8) Native-like pronunciation and correct grammar are emphasized.

Techniques
Larsen-Freeman (2000) discusses the following techniques of the Direct Method:
1) Reading Aloud: Students read sections of passages, plays or dialogues aloud.
2) Question and Answer Exercise: The teacher asks questions in the target language and
students answer in full sentences.
3) Student Self-Correction: The teacher creates opportunities for students to self-correct using
follow-up questions, tone, etc.
4) Conversation Practice: The teacher asks students and students ask students questions using
the target language.
5) Fill-in-the-blank Exercise: Students are supposed to fill in the blanks using knowledge of
grammar that they acquired inductively.
6) Dictation: The teacher reads the passage aloud a number of times at various speed and tempo
while students write down what they hear.
7) Using maps: In order to develop learners’ listening comprehension skills, the teacher may give
students an unlabeled map and give directions; students listen and label the map.
8) Paragraph Writing: Students write paragraphs in their own words using the target language
and various models.

Advantages and Limitations

The Direct Method was very effective in private language schools in Europe where learners were
highly motivated and most of the teachers were native speakers. The method, however, failed to live
up to expectations in public secondary schools. The lack of provision for translation or learners’
mother tongue makes it counterproductive. Richards and Rodgers (2001) cite psychologist Roger
Brown who “described his frustration in observing a teacher performing verbal gymnastics in an
attempt to convey the meaning of Japanese words, when translation would have been a much more
efficient technique” (p. 13). Moreover, it requires small class size, motivated learners and highly
proficient teachers in order to succeed really well. There is a fundamental flaw to the Direct Method
—it cannot ensure students’ achievement of a sufficient level of proficiency in L2 reading and
structure. Another limitation is that the method does not say anything about learners or their affective
factors (i.e. emotion, feelings, fear, shyness, motivation).

Conclusion
The Direct Method was an important turning point in the history of foreign language teaching, and
represented a step away from the Grammar Translation Method. It continues to enjoy a popular
following in many contexts and it was one of the foundations upon which the well-known
Audiolingual Method expanded through the 20th century. In Bangladesh, many English medium
schools have adopted the Direct Method with success. However, lack of provision of translation
makes it unsuitable for the mainstream Bangla medium institutions at the primary or secondary level.

Bibliography and further reading

Brown, H. D. 1994. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. NJ:

Prentice Hall.
Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T.S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching. Cambridge
University Press.
Study questions
1. What does the word “direct” mean in the direct method?
2. What are the main principles of the direct method?
3. Discuss the main characteristics of the direct method.
4. Evaluate the major techniques used in the direct method.
5. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the direct method?
6. Compare and contrast the GTM and the direct method.

The Audiolingual Method

The Audiolingual Method, also known as the Army Method, is the mode of language instruction
based on behavioural psychology, which professes that certain habits can be formed through a
system of repetition and reinforcement, and structural linguistics, which views language as a system
of structures. In this oral-based approach, the instructor would orally present the correct model of a
sentence and the students would have to repeat it. The teacher would then continue by presenting
new words for the students to sample in the same structure. There is no explicit grammar instruction
—everything is simply memorised in form through repetition drills. The idea is for the students to
practice the particular pattern until they can use it spontaneously. In this manner, the lessons are built
on a series of drills rather than free conversations.

According to Richards and Rodgers (2001), the Army method originated during the Second World
War in the US as there was an urgent need for personnel who would be fluent in foreign languages
and work as interpreters, code-room assistants and translators. There was an immediate need to set
up a special language training programme and the government commissioned American universities
to develop foreign language training programmes for military personnel. As a result of this initiative,
the Army Specialized Training Programme (ASTP) was established in 1942. As many as fifty-five
American universities were involved and were working in collaboration within a year of its
establishment.

The objective of the army programme, as Richards and Rodgers (2001) clarify, was to help
participants to “attain conversational proficiency in a variety of foreign languages”, and since this
was not the goal of traditional foreign language teaching in the US, “new approaches were
necessary” (p. 50). However, the army programme had something to fall back on. Linguist Leonard
Bloomfield and his colleagues had already developed an intensive training programme for teaching
and learning American Indian (indigenous) languages. They army adopted this system of training
and “in small classes of mature and highly motivated students, excellent results were often achieved”
(p. 51).

After the Second World War, the “Army Method” which became popular in the academic
community, laid the foundations for the development of the Audio Lingual Method. This happened
against the backdrop of the emergence of American as a superpower and the increase in demand for
English courses for foreign students in American universities. Around the year 1950, American
approach to ESL led to the emergence of Audiolingualism. One of the earliest proponents of
Audiolingualism was Charles Fries of the University of Michigan. Fries and colleagues rejected
principles and techniques of the Direct Method whereby students gradually absorb the grammar or
structure from exposure to the target language. For Fries, pattern practice through intensive drilling
should be the starting point.

Objectives

The overall goal of the Audiolingual Method is to develop communicative competence in learners. It
is thought that the most effective way to do this is for students to overlearn the language being
studied through extensive repetition and a variety of elaborate drills.  The idea is to hammer the
linguistic patterns of the language, based on the principles of structural linguistics, into the minds of
the learners in a way that makes responses automatic and habitual.  To this end, it is held that the
language habits of the first language would constantly interfere, and the only way to overcome the
problem is by facilitating the learning of a new set of habits in the target language.

Key Features
Here is a summary of the key features of the Audiolingual Method:
(1) New material is presented in dialogue form.
(2) There is dependence on mimicry, memorisation of set phrases, and overlearning.
(3) Structures are sequenced by means of contrastive analysis (of L1 and L2) and taught one at a
time.
(4) Structural patterns are taught using a series of 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.
Techniques (activities)
Larsen-Freeman (2000) discusses the following techniques of the Audiolingual Method:
(1)  Dialogue Memorisation: Students memorise an opening dialogue 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)  Repetition 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 dialogue, 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: This is the same as the Single Slot drill, except that there are
multiple cues to be substituted into the line.
(7)  Transformation Drill: The teacher provides a sentence that must be turned into something
else, for example a question to be turned into a statement, an affirmative sentence to be
turned into a negative statement, etc.
(8) Question-and-answer Drill: Students answer or ask questions very quickly.
(9) Use of Minimal Pairs: Using contrastive analysis, the 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. For example, “pet” and “pat” form
a minimal pair.
(10) Complete the Dialogue: Selected words are erased from a line in the dialogue and students
find and insert them back in.
(11) Grammar Games: Various games designed to practice a grammar point in context, using lots
of repetition.

Strength and limitations

The Audio-lingual Method represents a major step in language teaching methodology that is 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
designed to facilitate overlearning and develop good language habits were the considered as an
innovation and many of them now feature as essential parts of communicative methods that followed
the Audiolingual Method.

However, 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 is based emphasises surface forms of language and not the deep structure. The method does
nothing to address the issues of errors and their analysis. Wilga Rivers (1964) pointed out
misconceptions of ALM, arguing that language was not really acquired through a process of habit
formation and over-learning and that errors were not necessarily to be avoided at all costs.
A factor that accounted for the method's popularity was the quick success it achieved in leading
learners towards communicative competence.  Through extensive mimicry, memorisation 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.

Conclusion

Still there are reasons why the Audiolingual Method is still popular, and perhaps even appropriate in
certain educational contexts.  The method was widely used in the United States and other countries
in the 1950's and 1960's. It is still used in some programmes today. In Bangladesh, Audiolingual
drills are frequently used to develop speaking skills of lower-proficiency learners in private language
coaching centres. Students who have almost never practiced speaking in English will find some of
the activities useful in getting over fear and inhibitions. Once learners have reached a certain level of
speaking fluency, the teacher may use other methods in conjunction with it. The method was one of
the first to have its roots "firmly grounded in linguistic and psychological theory" (Brown 1994),
which surely added to its credibility and acceptance over a long period of time. It also had a major
influence on the language teaching methods that were to follow.

Bibliography and further reading

Brown, H. D. 1994. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. NJ:

Prentice Hall.
Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rivers, W. M. 1968. Teaching Foreign Language Skills. Chicago and London: The University of
Chicago Press.
Study questions
1. What does “the Army Method” refer to?
2. When and why did “the Army Method” emerge?
3. What is the link between “the Army Method” and Audiolingualism?
4. What are the main principles of the Audiolingual Method?
5. Evaluate the major techniques (or teaching and learning activities) used in the Audiolingual
Method.
6. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the Audiolingual Method?
7. Compare and contrast the Audiolingual Method and the direct method.
8. In which contexts would you use the Audiolingual Method?

Situational Language Teaching

Situational Language Teaching (SLT) was developed by the British applied linguists, such as
Palmer, Hornby, Firth and Halliday, from the 1930s to the 1960s, and it had an impact on language
courses used today. It is also called the Oral Approach since utmost importance is laid on oral skill
here—vocabulary and grammar are taught through oral practice. The Oral Approach was the
accepted British approach to English language teaching by the 1950s.

Approach (Theoretical Basis)

The structural view of language is the view behind Situational Language Teaching. There is an
emphasis on speech and knowledge of structure is viewed as the heart of speaking ability. This is a
view similar to American structuralists (and Audiolingualism), but the notion of the British applied
linguists, that structures must be presented in situations in which they could be used, gave its
distinctiveness to Situational language teaching.
The theory of learning underlying Situational Language Teaching is behaviourism which addresses
the processes rather than the conditions of learning. It includes the following principles:
1. Language learning is habit-formation.
2. Mistakes are bad and should be avoided, as they make bad habits.
3. Language skills are learned more effectively if they are presented orally first, then in written
form.
4. Analogy is a better foundation for language learning than analysis.
5. The meanings of words can be learned only in a linguistic and cultural context.

Design
The design of the Situational Language Teaching is realised through objectives, syllabus, materials
and teacher and student roles. These are discussed below.

Objectives
Here are some of the objectives of Situational Language Teaching:
1. A practical command of the four basic skills of a language, through structure.
2. Accuracy in both pronunciation and grammar.
3. Ability to respond quickly and accurately in speech situations.
4. Automatic control of basic structures and sentence patterns.

Syllabus
Basic to the Situational Language Teaching is a structural syllabus and a list of words and phrases. A
structural syllabus is a list of the basic structures and sentence patterns, arranged according to their
level of difficulty or usefulness. Structures and vocabulary are always taught within sentences. The
most important point to remember about SLT is that everything that is taught is taught against the
backdrop of situations.

Materials: Instructional materials comprise a number of situation-based dialogues. Units are often
named after the situations, such as “at the dentist”, “at the airport”, “in the restaurant”, etc. Both
textbooks and visual aids may be used.

Roles of teachers and students

In Situational Language Teaching, lessons are teacher-directed and the teacher sets the pace. S/he
presents the lesson setting up situations in which the need for target structure is created. S/he is
required to be a skilled manipulator with the ability to elicit correct sentences from the learners using
questions, commands and other cues.
 In the initial stage of learning, the student is required simply to listen and repeat what the teacher
says and respond to questions and commands. In the later stages, active participation of students is
encouraged, through interaction among themselves. In any case, however, the student has no control
(or say) over the content of learning.

Procedure
A situational presentation of new sentence patterns and drills to practice the patterns are central to
Situational Language Teaching. Procedure moves from controlled to freer practice of structures. It
also moves from guided oral use of sentence patterns to their automatic use in speech, reading and
writing. Richards and Rodgers (2001), discuss the main characteristics of the approach as follows:
1. Teaching and learning of speaking begins from the very outset; material is taught orally before
it is presented in written form.
2. The target language is the medium of instruction in the classroom.
3. New language points are introduced and practised against the backdrop of situations.
4. Vocabulary selection procedure is followed to ensure that an essential general service
vocabulary is covered.
5. Items of grammar are graded from simple forms to complex ones.
6. Reading and writing are introduced gradually after sufficient lexical and grammatical basis is
established.

Conclusion
Situational Language Teaching continues to be widely used in many parts of the world, particularly
when materials are based on a structural syllabus. The principles of this method with its strong
emphasis on oral practice, grammar and sentence patterns conform to the intuitions of many
language teachers. In Bangladesh, situation-based dialogue practice might be effective for people
who want to work abroad. Learners in private language schools who need basic speaking proficiency
in limited predictable situations will also benefit from Situational Language Teaching. However, in
the mid-1960s SLT came to be judged as inadequate to develop communicative competence in
learners and was replaced by Communicative Language Teaching which we are going to discuss in
the next section.

Bibliography and further reading

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Study questions
1. When and where did “Situational Language Teaching” emerge?
2. Who were the pioneers of Situational Language Teaching?
3. What are the main principles of Situational Language Teaching?
4. Evaluate the major techniques (or teaching and learning activities) used in Situational
Language Teaching.
5. Compare and contrast the GTM and Situational Language Teaching.
 6. In which contexts would you use Situational Language Teaching?

Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)

The Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) is an approach to the teaching of second and foreign
languages that emphasizes communication or interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of
learning a language. The CLT was the product of educators and linguists who had grown dissatisfied
with earlier Grammar Translation, Situational and Audiolingual Methods, where students were not
learning enough realistic, socially necessary language. Therefore, they became interested in the
development of communicative-style teaching in the 1970s, focussing on authentic language use and
classroom exchanges where students engaged in real communication with one another.

According to Henry Widdowson (cited in Larsen-Freeman 2000: 121), “being able to

communicate required more than mastering linguistic structures. Students may know the rules of
linguistic usage, but be unable to use the language.” It was also clear that communication involved
performing certain functions, such as requesting, promising, expressing regrets within a social
context (Wilkins 1976). That is, being able to communicate required more than linguistic
competence; it required what Hymes (1972) referred to as communicative competence. CLT emerged
out of these realizations and theoretical developments in the field of applied linguistics.
CLT sets the goal of developing ‘communicative competence’ in the learners. Teaching
students how to use the language is considered to be as important as learning the language itself.
Communicative language teaching makes use of real-life situations that necessitate communication.
The teacher sets up a situation that students are likely to encounter in real life. The real-life
simulations change from day to day. Students' motivation to learn comes from their desire to
communicate in meaningful ways about meaningful topics.

Approach (Theoretical Basis)

CLT is built on a theory of language as communication. The goal of language teaching is to develop
among learners what Hymes in 1972 referred to as communicative competence. Communicative
competence means what a speaker needs to know or be able to do in order to be communicatively
competent in a given speech community. Hymes (1972) asserts that to be communicatively
competent one needs to have the knowledge and ability for language use with respect to:
1. Whether (and to what degree) something is formally possible
2. Whether (and to what degree) something is feasible in virtue of the means of implementation
available
3. Whether (and to what degree) something is appropriate (adequate, happy, successful) in
relation to a context in which it is used and evaluated
4. Whether (and to what degree) something is in fact done, actually performed, and what its
doing entails
(Hymes 1972: 281)
The four components above represent four areas of language users’ knowledge and ability,
namely grammatical, psycholinguistic, sociocultural and de facto norms. Richards and Rodgers
(2001) clarify that Hymes’ concept of communicative competence “offers a much more
comprehensive view than Chomsky’s view of competence, which deals primarily with abstract
grammatical knowledge” (p. 159). We may remember here that Chomsky had earlier (in 1965) made
a distinction between competence (knowledge of language) and performance (using that knowledge
in speaking and writing).
 Learning a second language is viewed by the proponent of CLT as acquiring the linguistic means
to perform different kinds of functions, such as giving directions, making an appointment, accepting
or declining a proposal, etc. Michael Halliday’s functional theory of language was one of the pillars
of this functional approach to language teaching. Halliday (1975: 11-17) identifies seven functions
that language has for children in their early years:
1) Instrumental: This is when the child uses language to express their needs (e.g.'Want
juice')
2) Regulatory: This is where language is used to tell others what to do (e.g. 'Go away')
3) Interactional: Here language is used to make contact with others and form relationships
(e.g. 'Love you, mummy')
4) Personal: This is the use of language to express feelings, opinions, and individual
identity (e.g. 'Me good girl')
5) Heuristic: This is when language is used to gain knowledge about the environment (e.g.
'What the tractor doing?')
6) Imaginative: Here language is used to tell stories and jokes, and to create an imaginary
environment.
7) Representational: The use of language to convey facts and information.
The first four functions help the child to satisfy physical, emotional and social needs while the next
three functions help the child to come to terms with his or her environment. For Halliday, children
are motivated to develop language because it serves these purposes or functions for them. Another
influential theory of communicative competence was put forward by Canale and Swain (1980) in
which four dimensions of communicative competence was identified:

1) Grammatical competence (concerned with mastery of the language code itself)

2) Discourse competence (concerns mastery of how to combine grammatical forms and

meanings to achieve a unified spoken or written text in different genres)
3) Sociolinguistic competence (addresses the extent to which utterances are produced and
understood appropriately in different sociolinguistic contexts depending on contextual
factors)

4) Strategic competence (is composed of mastery of verbal and non-verbal communication

strategies that may be called into action to compensate for breakdowns in communication
and to enhance the effectiveness of communication.
Thus it is clear that at the level of language theory, CLT has drawn on many diverse sources.
Richards and Rodgers (2001: 161) sum up four characteristics of the communicative view of
language:
1. Language is a system of expression of meaning.
2. The primary function of language is to allow interaction and communication.
3. The structure of language reflects its fundamental and communicative uses.
4. The primary units of language are functional and notional categories, rather than structural
ones.
Richards and Rodgers (2001: 161) also mention a number of elements underlying the learning theory
of CLT:
1. The communication principle: Activities that involve real communication promote learning.
2. The task principle: Activities in which language is used for carrying out meaningful tasks
promote learning.
3. The meaningfulness principle: Language that is meaningful to the learner supports the
learning process.

Objectives
The main goal or objective of CLT is to enable students to communicate in the target language.
Larsen-Freeman (2000) explains that “to do this students need knowledge of the linguistic forms,
meanings, and functions... They must also be able to manage the process of negotiate meaning with
their interlocutors” (p. 128).

Basic Features or characteristics

Here are 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.

Syllabus
In CLT usually a notional-functional syllabus is followed. In this type of syllabus, instruction is
organised not in terms of grammatical structure, but in terms of ‘notions’ (concepts such as time,
place, appearance, etc) and ‘functions’ (agreeing, inviting, etc.). British linguist D. A. Wilkins (1972)
was the proponent of a notional functional syllabus. But there are other proposals. The type of
syllabus may be: 1. structures plus functions, 2. structural, functional and instrumental, 3.
interactional, 4. task-based, and 5. learner-generated.

Roles of teachers and students

Teachers in communicative classrooms will find themselves talking less and listening more and
becoming active facilitators of their students' learning. S/he may play the role of a needs analyst,
counsellor and group process manager. The students do most of the speaking, and frequently the
scene of a classroom during a communicative exercise is active, with students leaving their seats to
complete a task. Students are more responsible managers of their own learning.

Teaching Procedure
CLT is a generic approach and various kinds of activities may be used in classroom such as role
play, interviews, information gap, rearranging scrambled sentences, picture strip stories, games,
language exchanges, surveys and pair work. However, not all teachers will restrict their activities
solely to these. Some classes will have the students take occasional grammar quizzes, or prepare at
home using non-communicative drills, for instance. The classroom practice may include the
following:
1. Presentation of a brief dialogue or several mini-dialogues, preceded by a motivational
discussion of the function and situation.
2. Oral practice of each utterance of the dialogue segment.
3. Questions and answers based on the dialogue topics and situation.
4. Questions and answers related to the students’ personal experiences.
5. Studying basic communicative expressions in the dialogue or structure that exemplifies certain
function.
6. Learner discovery of the generalisations or rules underlying the functional expression or
structure.
7. Oral recognition and interpretative activities.
8. Oral production activities, proceeding from guided to freer communication.

Conclusion
The Communicative Language Teaching is best considered an approach rather than a method. It
refers to a diverse set of principles that reflect a communicative view of language and language
learning and that can be used to support a wide variety of classroom procedures. Hence although a
reasonable degree of theoretical consistency can be discerned at the levels of language and learning
theory, at the levels of design and procedure there is much greater room for individual interpretation
and variation than most methods permit. There is also confusion and misunderstanding about the
term CLT and many language teachers claiming to use CLT may not clearly understand what CLT
entails and use the Direct Method instead.

Bibliography and further reading

Canale, M., and M. Swain. 1980. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second
language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics 1(1): 1-47.

Halliday, M.A.K. 1975. Learning How to Mean: Explorations in the Development of Language.
London: Edward Arnold.

Hymes, D. 1972. On Communicative Competence. In J. B. Pride and J. Holmes (eds.),

Sociolinguistics. Harmondsworth: Penguin. 269-293.

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wilkins, D. A. 1976. Notional Syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Study questions
1. When and where did “Communicative Language Teaching” emerge?
2. Mention the scholars on whose work Communicative Language Teaching is built.
3. Define “communicative competence”.
4. What, according to Halliday (1975) are the functions of language?
 5. What are the components of “communicative competence”, according to Canale and Swain
(1983)?
6. What are the main principles of Communicative Language Teaching?
7. Evaluate the major techniques (or teaching and learning activities) used in Communicative
Language Teaching.
8. What are the strengths and limitations of Communicative Language Teaching?
9. Compare and contrast the GTM and Communicative Language Teaching.
10. Why is CLT considered an approach rather than a method?
11. In which contexts would you use Communicative Language Teaching?

CLT Versus Audiolingualism

The Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and Audio-lingual Method (ALM) have both been
widely used around the world to develop communication skills in learners but they differ from each
other on a number of aspects. The major differences between the two are discussed below:
1. Meaning and structure: In CLT meaning is paramount, whereas ALM attends to structure and
form more than meaning.
2. Dialogues: In CLT dialogues, if used, centre around communicative functions and are not
normally memorised. ALM demands more memorisation of structure-based dialogues.
3. Context: In CLT contextualisation is a basic premise. In ALM language items are not
necessarily contextualised.
4. Learning objective: In CLT language learning is learning to communicate. In ALM language
learning is learning structures, sounds or words.
5. Goal: In CLT effective communication is sought. In ALM mastery or ‘overlearning’ is
sought.
6. Drilling: In CLT drilling may occur, but peripherally. In ALM drilling is a central technique.
7. Pronunciation: In CLT comprehensible pronunciation is sought. In ALM native-speaker-like
pronunciation is sought.
8. Grammatical explanation: In CLT any device which helps the learners is accepted, varying
according to their age, interest, etc. In ALM grammatical explanation is avoided.
9. Stage of communicative activities: In CLT attempts to communicate may be encouraged from
the very beginning. In ALM communicative activities only come after a long process of rigid
drills and exercises.
10. Native language: In CLT judicious use of native language is accepted where feasible. In
ALM the use of the students' native language is forbidden.
11. Translation: In CLT translation may be used where students need or benefit from it. In ALM
translation is forbidden at early levels.
12. Reading and writing: In CLT reading and writing can start from the first day, if desired. In
ALM reading and writing are deferred until speech is mastered.
13. Teaching patterns: In CLT the target linguistic system will be learned best through the
process of struggling to communicate. In ALM the target linguistic system will be learned
through the overt teaching of the patterns of the system.
14. Competence: In CLT communicative competence is the desired goal. In ALM linguistic
competence is the desired goal.
 15. Language variation: In CLT linguistic variation is a central concept in materials and
methods. In ALM varieties of language are recognised but not emphasised.
16. Sequencing: In CLT sequencing is determined by any consideration of content function, or
meaning which maintains interest. In ALM the sequence of units is determined solely on
principles of linguistic complexity.
17. Teacher role: In CLT teachers help learners in any way that motivates them to work with the
language. In ALM the teacher controls the learners and prevents them from doing anything
that conflicts with the theory.
18. Error: In CLT language is created by the individual often through trial and error. In ALM
"Language is habit" so error must be prevented at all costs.
19. Accuracy: In CLT fluency and acceptable language is the primary goal; accuracy is judged
not in the abstract but in context. In ALM accuracy, in terms of formal correctness, is a
primary goal.
20. Interaction: In CLT students are expected to interact with other people, either in the flesh,
through pair and group work, or in their writings. In ALM students are expected to interact
with the language system, embodied in machines or controlled materials.
21. Student language: In CLT the teacher does not know exactly what language the students will
use. In ALM the teacher is expected to specify the language that students are to use.
22. Intrinsic motivation: In CLT intrinsic motivation will spring from an interest in what is being
communicated by the language. In ALM intrinsic motivation will spring from an interest in
the structure of the language.

The final choice of a method will depend on the classroom context, the proficiency levels of learners
and the goals of foreign language learning. In intensive programmes, ALM might be ideal in
developing limited short-term speaking fluency while CLT might be useful with more advanced
learners with higher proficiency targets. The comparison above will help language teachers in the
process of understanding the strengths and limitations of the two methods.
Bibliography and further reading

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

CLT in Bangladesh: Problems and Prospects

Background of CLT in Bangladesh

Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) was launched in Europe in the 1970s to cope with the
rising demand for English language training programmes against the backdrop of influx of new
immigrants and guest workers. “The Communicative Approach” soon became a buzzword and took
the whole ELT world by storm. It was claimed to be a scientific and effective method, based on a
scientific theory of language, and language teaching and learning. However, it was not until the 90’s
that this method formally entered the arena of English language teaching in Bangladesh.

The communicative approach was introduced as a corrective intervention since students in

Bangladesh “are very weak in English and as a result can’t apply English in their practical life
successfully” (NCTB 2003, cited in Hamid and Baldauf 2008: 16) despite years of schooling. The
English Language Teaching Improvement Project (ELTIP Bangladesh) had two specific objectives
(Hamid and Baldauf 2008):

1. To produce CLT-based English textbooks for secondary and higher secondary level students,
2. To train school teachers and empower them to teach communicative English.

As a result of the innovation, as Hamid and Baldauf (2008: 17) explain: “CLT textbooks replaced
old, non-CLT textbooks, and English teachers in some schools received CLT training for 13 days.”
Apart from these changes, very little actually changed as “English teaching and learning continued in
the same classrooms, surrounded by the same external socioeconomic and political realities, with the
same learners, and the same generally inadequate facilities.” Within a couple of years, therefore,
there were reports of dissatisfaction among teachers and learners and disillusionment among policy
makers and planners. Some corrective measures were immediately taken such as the inclusion of
discrete point grammar items and tests.

CLT in the classroom: The real picture

Rumana Siddique (2004) provides a detailed overview of the state of CLT in Bangladesh a few years
after its implementation in secondary and higher secondary levels of education. She points out that
CLT is facing severe challenges at the ground level in mainstream Bangla-medium institutions in
Bangladesh. Hamid and Baldauf (2008: 17), too, express doubt over the suitability or efficacy of the
new approach in the mainstream context of Bangladesh:

…although the introduction of CLT marked a significant shift in Bangladeshi ELT in theory,
there is little evidence to suggest that the policy brought about any significant changes in
teaching practice at the school level, particularly in rural areas….despite the changes in
policies, classroom English teaching in much of Bangladesh has remained basically the same
over two decades.

Based on reports of English language teachers from all over the nation, Siddique (2004) identifies
and lists the following factors as constraining the implementation of CLT in Bangladesh:

Lack in academic competence and ability of local ELT practitioners

Bangladesh is one of the few countries of the world where teachers can start teaching without any
formal training. In addition to this factor, very limited in-service training programs are offered to
teachers. Teacher trainers and teachers alike have reported that a majority of the teachers at the
primary and secondary level themselves lack competence in the four basic skills and are thus far
from having mastered the 'communicative competence' they are supposed to be teaching. Not
surprisingly then, what communicative skills these teachers are capable of imparting is questionable.
Although the CLT approach has been launched in the form of textbooks and curricula at both
primary and secondary levels, a large number of teachers do not fully comprehend the concepts of
communicative competence and CLT. The textbooks provided are thus often used ineffectively.
Observers report that teachers frequently revert to traditional grammar translation and rote-learning
methods.

Economic constraints

Bangladesh, of course, is a country with limited resources, and economic constraints inevitably
hamper the efforts and motivation of local ELT practitioners. The teaching community in
Bangladesh is, on the whole, relatively underpaid. A majority of the teachers at all levels resort to
extra teaching jobs, working either as private tutors or in several institutions to remain financially
solvent. This results in both de-motivation in classrooms and a lack of initiative of higher-level
teachers to carry out the much-needed training sessions and classroom research. Moreover, although
for effective implementation, CLT needs to be supported with adequate materials and related
teaching aids such as overhead projectors, computers, tape recorders, photocopiers etc, there is a
considerable deficit in both equipment and facilities necessary.

Administrative set-up

English is mandatory in the academic curricula in Bangladesh and carries heavy weightage at both
primary and secondary levels. The country has a rigid education policy, language policy, curricula
and testing processes. These result in constraints on teaching methodology and goals. There is
considerable pressure on local ELT practitioners from both institutions and guardians alike to focus
on exam-oriented teaching. Teachers report being repeatedly prompted to focus on completing the
syllabus. Given these limitations, the scope for application of some of the aspects of ‘communicative
competence' in the classroom is quite limited. Teachers report that there is a conflict between the
curricula and the examination system regarding the receptive skills of speaking and listening
proficiency. Although these are integral and vital parts of the communicative approach, there is no
provision for testing them in the examination system. This results in lack of student motivation in
acquiring these skills.

Infra-structural limitations

Bangladesh is a developing country with one of the largest populations in the world. The
combination of scarcity of funds and an over population imposes strains on teaching conditions.
Nearly all English classrooms in the public sector in Bangladesh are overcrowded ones and often
have as many as 200 students in them. This makes the interaction that is a necessary part of CLT
difficult. Teachers report that the lack of basic materials such as microphones, visible boards or seats
that can be adjusted for students to converge in interactive groups render communicative activities
impossible. Due to shortage of relatively qualified English teachers, individual teachers have to cater
to several groups and thus contact time with each group is inadequate. Classes are often not of more
than 45 minutes from which time must be allocated for registering attendance. This contact time is
hardly enough for effective communicative activities.

Cultural conflicts

The cultural milieu of Bangladesh plays an important part in how students and teachers respond to
CLT pedagogy. Teachers and students alike are reluctant to accept the change from teacher-centered
classes to learner-centered classes. Teachers are often uncomfortable with the role of facilitator and
many who attempt to do so are perceived by students as ineffective teachers due to their failure to
take on the traditional "authority" model. Local students prefer the traditional familiar methods of
reading aloud or repeating in chorus after the teacher. Furthermore local cultural codes deem it
inappropriate for students to be informal or to argue their point of view with a teacher since such
behavior is traditionally seen to be disrespectful. This makes many of the activities of CLT such as
role-play or communicative games fail in class. Raqib Chowdhury (2004:35-6) concurs with this
view:
The culture of Bangladesh is one that has a long tradition of unconditional obedience to
authority. The teacher is seen not as a facilitator but as a “fount of knowledge” which is
delivered without any concession to students ….the Southeast Asian teacher is the
authoritarian purveyor of knowledge, one to lead and to draw matters to a
conclusion….hierarchy determines the nature of teacher-student interaction, which is
facilitated by mutual respect. First names and physical proximity can make things
uncomfortable and unfamiliar.

Seating Arrangement, and Language Teaching and Learning

The arrangement of students' sitting also has an important bearing on classroom teaching and
learning. In our classroom there are fixed benches, or chairs and desks arranged in long rows which
is suitable for the lecture mode of teaching and learning, or at best for individual tasks in the
classroom, or some teacher-student interaction but not suitable for pair or group work.

Class size and Language Teaching and Learning

Size of the classroom is another important situational factor that largely determines the mode of
teaching and learning in a context. If the class size is small, it is possible for the teacher to take an
active interest in each individual student, and address each individual problem; it is also possible to
manage the classroom activities and ensure student participation. But all these are not possible in a
large class. It is held that a small class size is more suitable for language teaching and learning; it is
particularly important for interactive teaching and learning. A large class size is not suitable for
teaching and learning.

Testing and assessment

Like teaching methods, testing methods used in our country also need to be re-examined. If language
learning means being able to use a language, mastering communicative competence, or developing
competence in the major skills of English and their sub-skills, a reliable and valid language test
should try to test students' communicative competence or their command of reading, writing,
speaking and listening skills with their sub-skills mentioned earlier.

The tests of language in Bangladesh traditionally meant discrete point grammar tests, and mostly
controlled tests. Reading tests are given in the form of comprehension tests but the questions are
mostly of lift out type, and in most cases what the students usually do is they divide the text with the
number of questions, and use the first part to answer the first question, second part to answer the
second question, and so on. We test writing skills also, but it is basically a test of memory. Students
memorize answers and reproduce them in the exams, and when they are asked to write a few
sentences of their own, they feel helpless. There has been no direct test of the skills, except for
reading and writing. We do not have tests of speaking and listening skills in our public examinations,
because these are considered difficult to administer on a national scale. Shanaz Sinha (2006),
suggests that a percentage of marks be allocated to classroom-based assessment devoted to the test of
speaking in order to make students more motivated to participate in classroom activities.

Suggestions
In light of the development of CLT in Bangladesh, Siddique (2004) argues, the theory of
communicative competence calls for some clarifications and consensus in order to overcome the
frustrations on the part of the researchers and practitioners. She believes that the following
suggestions should be instrumental for administrators and policy makers at different levels.

First, CLT is learner centered, so teachers should adopt more strategies in order to mobilize the
class. Teachers should be proficient in the target language, and they should also learn how to
organize a big class of some 40 to 200 students into groups, pairs, rows, and teams, to carry out
meaningful activities. Given the large number of students in one class, presentations and group work
should be organized with precaution, so as not to bring chaos into the classroom.

Second, teachers should not rely too much on the textbooks. Teacher's initiative in selecting or
developing their own materials and providing learners with a range of communicative tasks should
be encouraged. More genuine materials with "real English" contents and cultural milieu should be
presented to students, whether they are abridged and revised from English newspapers and radio
programmes, or from the worldwide websites. A key element is the relevance, since research proves
that learners learn fast when learning materials are relevant to their daily life.

Third, CLT does not exclude the teaching of grammar, nor does it exclude error correction. It is an
eclectic or compromising method to combine the traditional ways of teaching with something new.
CLT is more of a revolution on the minds of teachers as to how learners acquire the target language
rather than a mere change of leaching approaches or new textbooks.

Fourth, the training of teachers is of paramount importance in Bangladesh should CLT be successful
and fruitful. Many school teachers of English in Bangladesh themselves cannot speak or understand
the language very well. One thing may be done in case of training the teachers. At first one teacher
from every thana may be trained and he or she will train the other teachers step by step. In the same
way, the teachers of college may be trained at first and they will train secondary level teachers. And
viva voce may be introduced in the exam. In that case, we have to see to it that teachers do not earn
money from the students anyway.

To sum up, in order for CLT to survive and really become successful, some misconceptions must be
clarified and dispelled through teacher training programmes. Efforts on the part of the teachers, local
educational authority and central educational authorities should be devoted to the implementations
and research of CLT in actual classrooms rather than scholarly discussions only at the level of policy
or theory. If all stakeholders come together and share responsibility, it will be possible to make the
best of the new insights and promises that CLT offers in the context of Bangladesh. Also, as Sinha
(2006) proposes, a balanced combination of traditionally valued Grammar Translation activities and
CLT might also be beneficial.

Bibliography and further reading

Siddique, R. 2004. CLT: Another Assumed Ideal from the West? The Dhaka University Studies
61(1): 15-28.

Sinha, B. S. 2006. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), and English for Today (EFT): Our
Dream vs. Reality. The Arts Faculty Journal 1.
Hamid, M. O., and R. B. Baldauf. 2008. Will CLT bail out the bogged down ELT in Bangladesh?
English Today 24(3): 16-24.

Chowdhury, R. 2004. The Cultural Disillusionment Factor in International TESOL Training. The
Dhaka University Studies. 59(1&2) & 60(1): 29-54.
Study questions
1. When was CLT introduced in Bangladesh and why?
2. How has CLT fared in the mainstream context of Bangladesh?
3. Identify and discuss the challenges in implementing CLT in Bangladesh.
4. Give suggestions for the improvement of state of affairs in CLT in Bangladesh.

Desuggestopedia
In the late 1970s, a Bulgarian psychologist Georgi Lozanov introduced the contention that students
naturally set up psychological barriers to learning based on fears.  Lozanov believed that learners may
have been using only 5 to 10 percent of their mental capacity, and that the brain could process and retain
much more material if given ‘optimal’ conditions for learning.  Based on psychological research on
extrasensory perception, Lozanov began to develop a language learning method that focused on
‘desuggestion’ of the limitations learners think they have, and providing the sort of relaxed state of mind
that would facilitate the retention of material to its maximum potential.  This method became known as
‘Desuggestopedia’ – the name reflecting the application of the power of ‘suggestion’ to the field of
pedagogy.

Objectives
The prime objective of Desuggestopedia is to tap into more of students' mental potential to learn, in
order to accelerate the process by which they learn to understand and use the target language for
communication.  Four factors considered essential in this process are: a) the provision of a relaxed
and comfortable learning environment, b) the use of soft Baroque music to help increase alpha brain
waves and decrease blood pressure and heart rate, c) ‘desuggestion’ in terms of the psychological
barriers learners place on their own learning potential, and d) ‘suggestibility’ through the
encouragement of learners assuming ‘child-like’ and/or new roles and names in the target language.

Key Features
Here are some of the key features of Desuggestopedia:
(1)  Learning is facilitated in an environment that is as comfortable as possible, featuring soft
cushioned seating and dim lighting.
(2) ‘Peripheral’ learning is encouraged through the presence in the learning environment of
posters and decorations featuring the target language and various grammatical information.
(3) The teacher assumes a role of complete authority and control in the classroom.
(4) Self-perceived and psychological barriers to learners' potential to learn are ‘desuggested’.
(5) Students are encouraged to be child-like, take ‘mental trips with the teacher’ and assume new
roles and names in the target language in order to become more ‘suggestible’.
(6) Baroque music is played softly in the background to increase mental relaxation and potential
to take in and retain new material during the lesson.
(7) Students work from lengthy dialogues in the target language, with an accompanying
translation into the students' native language.
 (8) Errors are tolerated, the emphasis being on content and not structure.  Grammar and
vocabulary are presented and given treatment from the teacher, but not dwelt on.
(9) Homework is limited to students re-reading the dialogue they are studying, once before they
go to sleep at night and once in the morning before they get up.
(10) Music, drama and ‘the arts’ are integrated into the learning process as often as possible.

Techniques
Larsen-Freeman (2000) identifies the following techniques closely associated with
Desuggestopedia: 
(1)  Classroom Set-up: Emphasis is placed on creating a physical environment that does not ‘feel’
like a normal classroom, and makes the students feel as relaxed and comfortable as possible.
(2)  Peripheral Learning: Students can absorb information ‘effortlessly’ when it is perceived as
part of the environment, rather than the material ‘to be attended to’.
(3)  Positive Suggestion: Teachers appeal to students' consciousness and subconscious in order to
better orchestrate the ‘suggestive’ factors involved in the learning situation.
(4) Visualisation: Students are asked to close their eyes and visualise scenes and events, to help
them relax, facilitate positive suggestion and encourage creativity from the students.
(5)  Choose a New Identity: Students select a target language name and/or occupation that places
them ‘inside’ the language they are learning.
(6)  Role-play: Students pretend temporarily that they are someone else and perform a role using
the target language.
(7)  First Concert: Teacher does a slow, dramatic reading of the dialogue synchronised in
intonation with classical music.
(8) Second Concert: Students put aside their scripts and the teacher reads at normal speed
according to the content, not the accompanying pre-Classical or Baroque music—this
typically ends the class for the day.
(9)  Primary Activation: Students playfully reread the target language out loud, as individuals or
in groups.
(10) Creative adaptation: Students engage in various activities designed to help the students learn
the material and use it more spontaneously—activities include singing, dancing,
dramatisations and games—‘communicative intent’ and not ‘form’ being the focus.

Limitations
Desuggestopedia does not provide for the majority of language teaching environments teachers
typically encounter. The dim lighting, large comfortable chairs and music selections are not readily
available to the majority of schools, and these ‘environmental factors’ are certainly close to
impossible for very large classes.  It does not take account of the fact that many learners in many
countries do not necessarily bring an intrinsic desire to learn the language into their English lessons,
and its basic foundations in cognitive theory very much limit it to the realm of adult learning. For the
same reasons, it does not seem to be very appropriate in mainstream schools in Bangladesh.

Conclusion
Despite its limitations, Desuggestopedia provides some valuable insights into the power of cognition
and creating/employing techniques that make students feel comfortable and relaxed, and
‘suggestible’ to the material being learned. Some of its techniques such as desuggestion, or positive
suggestion can be useful in increasing students’ motivation in Bangladeshi schools. Also, by creating
a relaxed classroom environment, teachers can remove fear and anxiety that many students have
about learning English. Thus, although not suitable in its entirety in contexts like Bangladesh,
Desuggestopedia does offer some valuable guidelines for us. A teacher using CLT or GTM should
consider incorporating some of these principles and techniques.
Bibliography and further reading

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Study questions
1. What is “desuggestion”?
2. What is “peripheral learning”?
3. What are the main principles of “Desuggestopedia”?
4. What are the main techniques or classroom activities of “Desuggestopedia”?
5. What are the strengths and limitations of “Desuggestopedia”?
6. Can “Desuggestopedia” be used alongside other methods?

Total Physical Response

The Total Physical Response (TPR), developed by James Asher in 1970s, is based on some basic
principles of language acquisition in young learners, most notably that the process involves a
substantial amount of listening and comprehension in combination with various ‘physical responses’
(smiling, reaching, grabbing, looking, etc). It also focuses on the ideas that learning should be fun
and as stress-free as possible, and that it should be dynamic through the use of accompanying
physical activity. Asher also stressed the right-brained learning as that part of the brain deals with
motor activity, believing it should precede the ‘language processing’ element covered by the left-
brain.

Theoretical Foundation: Trace Theory

The ‘trace theory’ claims that memory is increased if it is stimulated (or ‘traced’) through association
with motor activity (the principle of psychomotor association). The Trace Theory gave rise to the
teaching method called Total Physical Response (TPR). TPR insights based on child language
acquisition: 1) Children do a lot of listening before speaking, 2) Child listening is accompanied by
physical responses, and 3) Motor activity is a right-brain function that should precede left-brain
language processing.

Key Features
Here are some of the key features of TPR:
(1) The teacher directs and students ‘act’ in response – ‘The instructor is the director of a stage
play in which the students are the actors’.
 (2) Listening and physical response skills are emphasised over oral production.
(3) The imperative mood is the most common language function employed, even well into
advanced levels. Interrogatives are also heavily used.
(4) Whenever possible, humour is injected into the lessons to make them more enjoyable for
learners.
(5) Students are not required to speak until they feel naturally ready or confident enough to do
so.
(6) Grammar and vocabulary are emphasised over other language areas. Spoken language is
emphasised over written language.

Techniques
Larsen-Freeman (2000) and Richards and Rodgers (2001) discuss the following techniques closely
associated with TPR:
(1) Using Commands to Direct Behaviour: The teacher uses commands requiring physical
actions from the students.
(2) Role Reversal: Students direct the teacher and fellow learners.
(3) Action Sequence: Teacher gives interconnected directions which create a sequence of actions,
also called an ‘operation’. As students progress in proficiency, more and more commands are
added to the action sequence. Most everyday activities can be broken down into a sequence of
actions.
(4) Circle Action: It is more effective if the students are standing in a circle around the teacher
and the teacher can even encourage them to walk around as they do the action.
(5) Lessons: The teacher can teach many things including vocabulary connected with actions
(smile, chop, headache, wriggle); tenses past/present/future and continuous aspects;
classroom language; imperatives/instructions; and story-telling.

Advantages
The advantages of TPR are as follows:
1. It is a lot of fun, students enjoy it and it can be a real stirrer in the class. It lifts the pace and
the mood.
2. It is very memorable. It really helps students to remember phrases or words.
3. It is good for kinaesthetic learners who need to be active in the class.
4. It can be used in large or small classes. It doesn't really matter how many students one has as
long as one is prepared to take the lead, the students will follow.
5. It works well with mixed-ability classes. The physical actions get across the meaning
effectively so that all the students are able to understand and use the target language.
6. It doesn't require a lot of preparation or materials. As long as the teacher is clear what he
wants to practise, it won't take a lot of time to get ready.
7. It is very effective with teenagers and young learners.
8. It involves both left and right-brained learning.

Disadvantages
The disadvantages of TPR are as follows:
 1. Students who are not used to such things might find it embarrassing.
2. It is only really suitable for beginner levels.
3. The teacher cannot teach everything with it and if used a lot it would become repetitive.

Conclusion
One of the primary objectives underlying Asher's TPR methodology is that learning needs to become
more enjoyable and less stressful. A natural way to accomplish this is to recreate the natural way
children learn their native language. TPR is widely acclaimed as a highly effective method at
beginning levels, and a standard requirement in the instruction of young learners. It is also admired
as a method due to its inherent simplicity, making it accessible to a wide range of teachers and
learning environments. In Bangladesh, many kindergartens and primary schools use TPR activities.
Bibliography and further reading

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Study questions
1. What is meant by “Total Physical Response”?
2. What are the main principles of “Total Physical Response”?
3. What are the main techniques or classroom activities in “Total Physical Response”?
4. What are the strengths and limitations of “Total Physical Response”?
5. Compare and contrast “Desuggestopedia” and “Total Physical Response” at the levels of
approach, design and procedure.

The Natural Approach

The Natural Approach was developed by Tracy Terrell and Stephen Krashen in 1970s. It came to
have a wide influence in language teaching in the United States and around the world. The
communicative view of language is the view behind the Natural Approach. Particular emphasis is
laid on language as a set of messages that can be understood.

Theoretical basis
The Natural Approach is based on the following theoretical assumptions:
1. The Acquisition/Learning Hypothesis: Language acquisition, i.e. an unconscious process
developed through using language meaningfully, is different from language learning, i.e.
consciously learning or discovering rules about a language, and language acquisition is the
only way competence in a second language occurs.
2. The Monitor Hypothesis: Conscious learning operates only as a monitor or editor that checks
or repairs the output of what has been acquired.
3. The Natural Order Hypothesis: Grammatical structures are acquired in a predictable order
and it does little good to try to learn them in another order.
4. The Input Hypothesis: People acquire language best from messages that are just slightly beyond
their current competence.
5. The Affective Filter Hypothesis: The learner's emotional state can act as a filter that impedes
 or blocks input necessary to acquisition.

Objectives
The objectives of the Natural Approach are the following:
1. To help beginners become intermediates, and
2. To teach according to and depending on learner needs.

Syllabus
The syllabus for the Natural Approach is a communicative syllabus with a list of topics and
situations which are likely to be useful to beginner level learners. Communicative functions are not
listed as it was thought that they would automatically derive from the topics and situations.

Techniques
Comprehensible input is presented in the target language, using techniques such as TPR, mime and
gesture. Group techniques are similar to Communicative Language Teaching. Learners start to talk
when they are ready. It may take techniques and activities from different sources but always uses
them to provide comprehensible input.
The classroom activities include games, role-plays, dialogues, group work and discussions.
There are three generic stages identified in the approach: (1) Preproduction: Developing listening
skills; (2) Early Production: Students struggle with the language and make many errors which are
corrected based on content and not structure; (3) Extending Production: Promoting fluency through a
variety of more challenging activities.

Connection with other methods

The Natural Approach shares a lot in common with Asher's Total Physical Response method in terms
of advocating the need for a ‘silent phase’, waiting for spoken production to ‘emerge’ of its own
accord, and emphasising the need to make learners as relaxed as possible during the learning process.
Some important underlying principles are that there should be a lot of language ‘acquisition’ as
opposed to language ‘processing’, and there needs to be a considerable amount of ‘comprehensible
input’ from the teacher. Meaning is considered as the essence of language and vocabulary (not
grammar) is the heart of language.
As part of the Natural Approach, students listen to the teacher using the target language
communicatively from the very beginning. It has certain similarities with the much earlier Direct
Method, with the important exception that students are allowed to use their native language
alongside the target language as part of the language learning process. In early stages, students are
not corrected during oral production, as the teacher is focusing on meaning rather than form (unless
the error is so drastic that it actually hinders meaning).

Criticism
Krashen's theories and the Natural approach have received plenty of criticism, particularly orientated
around the recommendation of a ‘silent period’ that is terminated when students feel ready to
‘emerge’ into oral production, and the idea of ‘comprehensible input’. Critics point out that students
will ‘emerge’ at different times or perhaps not at all and it is hard to determine which forms of
language input will be ‘comprehensible’ to the students. These factors can create a classroom that is
essentially very difficult to manage unless the teacher is highly skilled.
Conclusion
Still, this was the first attempt at creating an expansive and overall ‘approach’ rather than a specific
‘method’, and the Natural Approach led naturally into the generally accepted norm for effective
language teaching: Communicative Language Teaching.
Bibliography and further reading

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Study questions
1. What is meant by “The Natural Approach”?
2. What are the main principles of “The Natural Approach”?
3. Discuss Krashen’s hypotheses.
4. What are the main techniques or classroom activities in “The Natural Approach”?
5. What are the strengths and limitations of “The Natural Approach”?
6. Compare and contrast “The Natural Approach” and “The Natural Method (the Direct
Method)” at the levels of approach, design and procedure.

Task-based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) has been introduced in many language teaching classrooms
as the latest ‘state-of-the-art’ language teaching method originating mainly in the ‘communicative’
tradition. TBLT appears to be the toast of methodologists at the present moment which is evident in
the fact that in recent years this particular approach has dominated discussions in various seminars
and conferences more than any other method. As Littlewood (2004, p.319) observes:

The task-based approach has achieved something of the status of a new orthodoxy: teachers
in a wide range of settings are being told by curriculum leaders that this is how they should
teach, and publishers everywhere are describing their new textbooks as task-based.
In this essay we aim to examine the feasibility of TBLT in the mainstream secondary and higher
secondary schools in Bangladesh and is organised in four main sections. In the first part, we have
discussed the different aspects of TBLT and provided a rationale for it in the light of recent research.
The criticisms that the method has received along with how the method has fared in different EFL
contexts, particularly in South East Asia, has been presented in the second part. The context of
Bangladesh has been considered in the third section while the final section critically examines the
feasibility of the method in that context. The paper is rounded up with a conclusion based on the
discussions above.

Part I
What are ‘tasks’?

Ellis (2003) reviewing different definitions of ‘task’ prevalent in SLA literature observes that there is
no complete agreement as to what constitutes a ‘task’ and how it is different from other devices such
as ‘activity’, ‘exercise’, or ‘drill’. On the one hand, there are those, such as Breen (1989) who adopt
a broader definition of ‘task’ that incorporates any kind of language activity, including ‘exercises’.
Researchers such as Long (1985), Richards, Platt, and Weber (1985), Nunan (1989), and Skehan
(1996), on the other hand, are in favour of restricting the use of the term to ‘activities where meaning
is primary’. Eliis (2003) adopts the ‘narrower’ view to define ‘tasks’ as ‘activities that call for
primarily meaning-focused language use’, and ‘exercises’ as ‘activities that call for primarily form-
focused language use’.

Thus the main distinction between a ‘task’ and an ‘exercise’ seems to be that in completing a ‘task’,
participants function primarily as ‘language users’ and ‘any learning that takes place is incidental’
while in doing an ‘exercise’ they function as ‘language learners’ where ‘learning is intentional’.
However, Ellis (2003, p.5) concedes that
...the extent to which a learner acts as language user or language learner and attends to
message or code when undertaking tasks and exercises is best seen as variable and
probabilistic rather than categorical.

Littlewood (2004, p.319) who acknowledges this uncertainty and terminological difficulties
advocates the ‘everyday, non-specialist definition’ of ‘task’ and suggests that ‘rather than accept the
common communicative definition, we should return to a broader definition’. He views form-focused
and meaning-focused tasks as complimentary and ranging along a continuum and includes ‘the
degree of learner-involvement that a task elicits’ to design the following two-dimensional figure of
TBLT:
High task involvement High task involvement
Low focus on meaning High focus on meaning
Task (High focus on form) (Low focus on form)

Low task involvement Low task involvement

Involvement Low focus on meaning High focus on meaning
(high focus on form) (Low focus on form)

Focus on form focus on meaning

Figure: Two dimensions in TBLT (Littlewood 2004)

Ellis (2003, p.16) identifies several criterial features of a ‘task’ which are evident in the following
definition:
A task is a workplan that requires learners to process language pragmatically in order to
achieve an outcome....To this end, it requires them to give primary attention to meaning and
to make use of their own linguistic resources, although the design of the task may
predispose them to choose particular forms. A task is intended to result in language use that
bears a resemblance, direct or indirect, to the way language is used in the real world. Like
other language activities, a task can engage productive or receptive, and oral or written
skills, and also various cognitive processes.

Different types of tasks

Ellis (2003) distinguishes between ‘focused’ and ‘unfocused’ tasks: ‘unfocused’ tasks ‘may
predispose learners to choose from a range of forms but they are not designed with the use of a
specific form in mind’ while ‘focused’ tasks encourage learners to process a grammatical structure
either receptively or productively as a result of performing the task.

Focused tasks have two aims: i) to stimulate communicative language use and ii) to target a language
feature. They can do this by designing the task so the language feature has to be used, or by making
the language feature the focus of the task. At this point we need to distinguish between a focused
task and a situational grammar exercise. In the case of a focused task a learner will pay attention
mainly to message content, and any attention to form will only be incidental while during a grammar
exercise, the attention to form will be intentional.

Designing focused tasks

Ellis (2003, p.151) considers three principle ways in which focused tasks have been designed by
researchers: i) structure-based production tasks, ii) comprehension tasks, and iii) consciousness-
raising tasks.

Ellis (2003, p.152) cites Loschky and Bley-Vroman (1993) who distinguish three ways in which a
task can include a specific grammatical feature. Structure-based communication tasks can
incorporate ‘task-naturalness’ where the target structure occurs naturally, ‘task-utility’ where the
structure is useful and ‘task-essentialness’ in which learners must use the feature to be able to
complete the task. However, research suggests that it is not easy to construct the tasks and it is also
not very clear to what extent they can ensure use of the target features productively. Another
structure-based task is ‘dictogloss’ where learners reconstruct a text using key words and phrases
which promote over-all syntactic processing.

Comprehension tasks which are designed to facilitate ‘noticing’ include ‘input enrichment’ tasks and
‘input processing instruction’ which can be contrasted with ‘consciousness-raising tasks’ which aim
to teach grammatical rules inductively.

Task-supported language teaching and task-based language teaching

Ellis (2003) states that tasks ‘are an important feature of Communicative Language Teaching
(CLT)’. Task-supported language teaching (TSLT) which adopts the weak version of CLT is based
on linguistic content specified in structural terms such as a list of grammatical features or
functions/notions. TSLT typically uses present-practice-produce (PPP) with tasks in the final free
production stage while task-based language teaching (TBLT) is basically the strong version of CLT
where tasks themselves ‘provide the basis for the entire language curriculum’.

Theoretical Rationale

In his preface to Task-based Language Learning and Teaching, Ellis (2003) provides some rationale
for TBLT. According to him,

If learners are to develop the competence they need to use a second language easily and
effectively in the kinds of situations they meet outside the classroom they need to
experience how language is used as a tool for communicating inside it.
Thus, ‘tasks’ serve as the ‘most obvious means for organising teaching along these lines’. Here
below we will look at the rationale for TBLT from two very different perspectives – one is
psychological and the other is socio-cultural.

Ellis (2003) observes that tasks can be useful ‘devices for generating interaction involving L2
learners’ which facilitate language acquisition. This is supported by interactionist theories which
view language learning as an outcome of participating in discourse, in particular face-to-face
interaction. Pica (1992 and 1994, cited in Ellis 2003) contends that opportunities to negotiate
meaning assist language learners in three principle ways. First, they help learners to obtain
comprehensible input. Second, they provide learners with feedback on their own use of the L2.
Thirdly, they prompt learners to adjust, manipulate, and modify their own output.

Thus from a psychological perspective, tasks allow for the production of ‘output’ which contributes
to the development of automaticity in speaking. The role of production in automatising linguistic
knowledge is recognised by the skill-developing models of language acquisition. Anderson’s (2000)
ACT model, for example, views language learning as development of a skill in which learners
progress from an initial declarative knowledge stage to a final procedural stage where knowledge is
automatic. Proponents of skill-building theories argue that language comprehension and production
are distinct skills which involve different sets of skills. Thus, practice in processing input will only
serve to develop comprehension, not production, and production will be necessary in developing
automaticity in speaking.

The need for practice in the context of ‘real operating conditions’ has also been stressed in cognitive
theories of language acquisition (Johnson 1988, cited in Ellis 2003). Tasks allow learners to ‘perform
their competence’ in the same conditions that apply in real-life situations by focusing on message
conveyance and using language rather than learning language.

Thus, Ellis (2003) cites Skehan (1998) as suggesting the following six roles for production which
point to the benefits of using tasks in the language classroom: i) it serves to generate better input
through the feedback that learner’s efforts at production elicit; ii) it forces syntactic processing; iii) it
allows learners to test out hypotheses about the target-language grammar; iv) it helps to automatise
existing L2 knowledge; v) it provides opportunities for learners to develop discourse skills; and vi) it
is important for helping learners to develop a ‘personal voice’.

According to socio-cultural theory, on the other hand, ‘learning arises not through interaction but in
interaction’ and ‘social interaction mediates learning’ in which ‘new functions are ‘scaffolded’ by
the participants’ (Ellis 2000, p.209). Ellis also cites research by Donato (1994), Swain (1998),
Samuda (2000) which point to the usefulness of collective scaffolding employed by groups as well as
‘implicit scaffolding’ provided by the teacher. Over all, socio-cultural perspective emphasises that
‘learners collaboratively construct knowledge’ and that ‘such co-construction of knowledge engages
learners in cognitive processes’ that facilitate language learning (Shehadeh 2005, p.24)

Task performance and production

Ellis (2003) lists a number of task design variables and argues that each of them can potentially
impact on learner production. Input variables (e.g. contextual support, topic), task conditions (e.g.
whether information is split or shared) and task outcome factors (i.e. whether the task is open or
closed, convergent or divergent, pre-structured or without set structures, and the discourse mode the
task is likely to elicit) may all affect production in terms of fluency, accuracy and complexity even
though it may be unclear which factor is responsible for an observed effect as one may interact with
the others. Similarly, task implementation factors, such as planning, rehearsal and post-task
requirements can affect the different aspects of production in varying degrees.

Syllabus, methodology and assessment in TBLT

Unlike the earlier ‘product’ syllabuses where linguistic units are pre-specified, TBLT does not
involve any pre-specification of content. Their only aim is to immerse students in language activities,
leaving to the learner’s natural learning processes what is to be learned. They are thus concerned
only with learning processes and are ‘non-interventionist’. The distinction between ‘syllabus’ and
‘methodology’ is therefore hard to sustain in TBLT. In recent years, researchers have argued that
process syllabuses such as TBLT are superior to product syllabuses because i) they are more learner-
centred and ii) they are more consistent with theories of language learning.

There are four steps in constructing a task-based syllabus. At first, designers have to determine the
goals of the course in terms of pedagogic focus, skill focus and language focus. The next step is to
make a list of tasks organised by theme. Once we have a list, we need to specify the nature of the
task in terms of input, conditions, processes and outcomes. Finally, we are required to sequence tasks
by using task complexity as criteria.

The Issue of Grammar Teaching in TBLT

Ellis (2003) suggests that we can incorporate a language focus into the syllabus in one of two ways:
i) Proactively by using focused tasks
ii) By introducing a focus on form into unfocused tasks, either proactively or reactively
According to him, if focused tasks such as consciousness raising tasks are used, they could be
threaded through a syllabus either through
 An integrated approach such as a content-based language course
 Via a modular approach in which the syllabus has two separate modules:
i) A communicative module with unfocused tasks
ii) A code based module using either PPP and/or focused tasks
Now if focused tasks are used that would mean the linguistic content has to be selected and
sequenced too. One issue here is to match the content with the developmental stages of the learners.
Another is how to align the syllabus with the development of the learners’ ‘implicit’ linguistic
knowledge.

Task-based assessment

In task-based assessment tasks are used ‘for eliciting and evaluating communicative performances
from learners in the context of language use that is meaning-focused and directed towards some
specific goal’ (Ellis 2003). A task can either be system-referenced (based on a particular view of
language and communication) or performance-referenced (based on a domain of activity) or both.
Fulcher (2000, cited in Ellis 2003) lists three characteristics of communicative tests: they i) involve
performance, ii) are authentic, and iii) are scored in real-life outcomes. Some relevant issue that arise
out of this are described below:

Problems with task-based assessment

Ellis (2003) lists some complications with task-based assessment.
Representativeness: The test should elicit a representative performance from the candidates.
However, implementational variables such as planning time and the manner in which the interviewer
interacts with candidates will have an effect on the testees’ performance and the rating they obtain.

Authenticity: The test task should be ‘authentic’ as regards its relationship to target language
physical setting, activity and interaction.

Generalisability: Performance on a test should be predictive of performance in real world situations.

Inseparability: The test should be content free and not advantage any group of test takers.
Reliability: In oral tests, personal disposition of the candidate may affect their performance. The role
of the assessor in the interaction may influence performance too. Again, issues such as intra-rater and
inter-rater variation may be hard to resolve.

Logistic factors
One important consideration in task-based assessment would be the logistics of test administration.
Factors to be taken into account here include physical setting of the assessment, the nature and
quantity of input provided, the number of candidates assessed together, the familiarity of the
candidates to one another, how the performance is to be measured etc. Add to the above list the
logistics of test administration and we have a complete recipe for disaster for the TBLT curriculum,
for how many institutions can afford the time and money** that this task-based assessment would
incur!

Part II

In part two, we will have a look at some of the criticisms TBLT has received and also examine how
the method has fared in EFL settings mainly in South East Asian classrooms. The discussion here,
we believe, will have some implications for the EFL classrooms in Bangladesh.

Criticisms of TBLT

Swan (2005) criticises TBLT for rejecting ‘proactive syllabus design’ and ‘misrepresenting
traditional classroom practice’. He argues that heavily task-based programmes are inappropriate in
situations where exposure outside classroom is unavailable and time is limited. He also calls into
question the validity of online, noticing and teachability hypotheses and argues that traditional
wisdom has something to offer. He also argues that ‘TBI provides learners with substantially less
new language and doubts interaction is possible unless a knowledge base is already established
through teaching’.

Bruton (2005) evaluating the applicability of TBLT to secondary EFL classes finds many potential
limitations ‘when it comes to the sources of new language and the maintenance of accuracy’. He also
cites studies attacking the empirical basis of TBLT as most of the research has been in NS-NNS pairs
whereas in most EFL settings it would be NNS-NNS working in pairs.

TBLT in EFL Contexts

Littlewood (2007) reviews some of the practical and conceptual concerns that have affected the
implementation of CLT and TBLT in primary and secondary schools of East Asia. He mentions
‘classroom management’, ‘avoidance of English’, minimal demands on language competence’,
‘incompatibility with public assessment demands’ and ‘conflict with educational values and
traditions’ as the main concerns.

Carless (2002) too lists some conditions as impeding implementation of TBLT in Hong Kong
primary schools. Large class sizes, cramped classrooms, lack of appropriate resources, teachers not
trained in task-based methodologies, teachers with limited language proficiency and traditional
examination-based syllabi are among factors affecting successful task-based pedagogy.

Bax (2003) cites the context of Czech Republic, Holland, Taiwan to state that the ‘CLT attitude’
prevailing now is having a negative effect, and argues that CLT needs to be ‘deposed’ and replaced
by a ‘Context Approach’.

Part III
The Bangladesh context

Bangladesh, a small republic in South Asia with an area of 55000 square miles, has a population of
150 million, and a significant percentage of them are students. Prior to 1947, when Bangladesh was a
part of the undivided India and between 1947 and 1971, a part of Pakistan, English was the dominant
medium of instruction alongside Bangla. However, the independence of Bangladesh in 1971 saw a
greater rise of linguistic nationalism and ‘English was increasingly marginalised in public life’
(Alam, 2007). English was dropped from its elevated position and Bangla replaced English as the
medium of instruction in the colleges and universities and as the standard official language in the
offices and the media. As Fakrul Alam observes, ‘it (English) was not taught beyond the
intermediate level outside literature departments in the universities and rarely spoken in public life
any more or used in official correspondence extensively’.

The result of these sweeping changes as Alam succinctly puts was: ‘without the widespread use of
English, and with a new generation of teachers coming to schools and colleges who had not read the
language at an advanced level, English language teaching suffered.’ The demand for English
suddenly grew with the changing context of globalisation and more and more employers started
seeking graduates qualified among things in English and ‘it was only in this changed situation that
the futility of rote English grammar learning in Bengali medium schools began to be apparent to
English language professional consultants.’ Against this backdrop, ELT professionals in the country
began to decry the literature-based language teaching materials and the accompanying Grammar
Translation method for the decline in the general English language proficiency and the rot in English
language education across the country. The ministry of Education and the National Curriculum and
Textbook Board decided to respond by introducing the new textbooks English For Today (EFT)
based on ‘authentic materials’, and advocating ‘Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)’ as the
preferred method of teaching in the classroom.

The communicative method of language teaching, and the new text book written to foster
communicative activities in the classroom, however, soon came under fire from many quarters,
mainly from teachers and teacher trainers, and it is important to have a look at the criticisms here
because they shed light on the particular language teaching context in Bangladesh.
Shahnaz Sinha (2006) states that the introduction of CLT and the new text English for Today ‘seems
to be creating some serious complications for our teachers and learners’ due mainly to ‘some
practical constraints prevailing in the teaching learning situation in Bangladesh.’ She cites socio-
cultural and psychological factors, such as teachers’ beliefs and preferred teaching styles, demand on
the learners and teachers, etc as well as limitations in educational institutions, such as large class
size, lack of logistic support, teacher student ratio for reasons why the communicative mode of
teaching has not been successful in delivering the goods.

Sujit Dutta (2006) reports of practising secondary and higher secondary teachers of English in
Bangladesh who ‘reacted sharply’ against the newly introduced text book and the teaching method
and who, in the absence of any prior orientation and training found themselves ‘lost in a deep forest’
as they were unable to make use of language activities to foster teacher-student and student-student
interactions. In general, Dutta’s paper puts the blame squarely on teachers for ‘their lack of practical
knowledge’ and ‘negative attitude’ to the new approach and recommends training for the teachers in
order to ‘make them skilled in applying the approach in the classrooms’ because if that is done, he
believes, it will ‘produce a generation of good communicators in English.’

Ahmed (2006) voices similar opinions in his feedback essay on Communicative English in
Bangladesh. He observes that students ‘make a lot of mistakes in the use of fundamentals of English
grammar’ but feels that the Communicative approach is a very good way of teaching English even
though ‘for various reasons it is not being implemented properly at Secondary and Higher Secondary
level in our country.’ Talking about why the Communicative approach and English for Today are not
working well in the country, he highlights the lack of competent teachers and shyness and reluctance
on the part of students as the main reasons.

Rumana Siddique (2004) reports on the struggles of ELT practitioners in adapting CLT to their local
conditions across Bangladesh, and attempts an analysis of the possible reasons. Her paper is mainly
based on papers presented and the forum discussions held at the second Bangladesh English
Language Teachers Association (BELTA) conference that took place in July, 2004. Siddique states
that the conference ‘brought to the forefront a number of practical problems and constraints faced by
the local ELT community’. She believes that the problems arise out of academic, economic,
administrative, as well as cultural constraints. Thus what sounds ‘so good in theory has proved to be
difficult to implement in the classrooms in Bangladesh’. Siddique’s paper is also valuable in so far as
it represents perhaps the most-detailed account of the English learning and teaching context in
Bangladesh bringing to light ‘the real picture’ of the classroom. Siddique lists untrained and
incompetent ELT practitioners, economic constraints, administrative set-up, poor infra-structure,
cultural conflicts, and gap between theory and practice among the major constrains in her paper.

Part IV
Difficulties with TBLT

We are now in a position to evaluate the suitability and feasibility of TBLT at the secondary and
higher secondary schools in the EFL context of Bangladesh. In the earlier section we have looked at
some of the reactions of practitioners to the communicative approach which also brought to the fore
the particular contextual and cultural issues peculiar to the Bangladesh ELT arena. Against this
backdrop we will now examine TBLT with particular focus on the syllabus, teacher and learner
roles, materials, implementation in the classroom in the form of lesson plan, and assessment.
The syllabus

The traditional product syllabuses, the lexico-grammatical in particular, do not pose much difficulty
for the language teachers as the average teacher can easily select and sequence linguistic content and
materials are also available in the market. Teachers who are themselves products of the grammar
translation method can draw on their own previous learning experience as students and there are no
innovations involved. Both teachers and learners are therefore comfortable with this syllabus as they
can retain their traditional roles. However, language teachers with limited communicative
competence and without any in-service training, as most of them are in Bangladesh (Siddique 2004),
are unlikely to be able to select and sequence tasks based on a complex set of criteria. Since they are
themselves unable to perform the tasks in English they cannot decide what tasks would involve
linguistically or cognitively.

Incorporating a language focus into the syllabus

Using focused tasks means that we would have to select and sequence linguistic content which again
brings us to a grammatical syllabus: unless we test our learners on a discrete-point grammar test we
will not be able to ascertain their developmental stage. Again, maintaining a checklist of items that
the learners have or have not mastered is impossible in a large classroom. The only way to develop a
checklist in a large class is through conducting an indirect grammar test which clearly goes against
the grains of TBLT as it emphasises an integrated and direct approach to teaching and learning a
foreign language. Again, if we are to adopt a modular approach combining a communicative and a
code-based module, a pertinent question would arise -- why not just add the communicative
component to the previously existing literature and grammar-based syllabus instead of a wholesale
change in pedagogy and curriculum?

Roles of teachers and learners

TBLT requires both teachers and learners to be active agents in the classroom. The teacher has to
structure lessons around tasks and divide the task into different phases. In pre-task phase, the teacher
will generally prepare learners for task focusing on content and language that performing the task
might involve. In the during-task phase the teacher needs to monitor their students’ performance
carefully to ensure appropriate classroom processes are happening. In the post-task phase, the teacher
may give learners an opportunity to repeat performance and then report to the class evaluating task
performance and reviewing errors that learners made. In Bangladesh where teachers are ‘relatively
underpaid’ and therefore ‘resort to extra teaching jobs’ resulting in ‘demotivation in the classroom’,
as Siddique (2004) observes, it is hard to see how they will bear with huge demands that TBLT
makes on them.

Again, as discussed above, TBLT necessitates group work and pair-work in the classroom which are
possible only in small classrooms where the teacher can organise and monitor task performance. The
teacher also needs to intervene when a group is experiencing difficulties (Jacobs 1998 cited in Ellis
2003). However, in Bangladesh where most classrooms are large and overcrowded this is clearly not
possible.

Then comes the question of cultural conflict! TBLT demands a learner-centred classroom and it has
often been reported in the literature that learners are not always keen to participate in communicative
activities as they often prefer ‘traditional’ over ‘communicative’ activities (Nunan 1989). The same
is reported from Bangladesh as ‘local cultural codes deem it inappropriate for students to be
informal’ or ‘to argue their point of view’ in the classroom (Siddique 2004). Khan (2000) observes
that students tend to discard the new style and complain that the teacher is not teaching which is what
they think the teacher should be doing.

Role of Materials

Mike Long (2007) notes that most genuine TBLT materials are ‘produced locally for specific learner
groups’ which is quite appropriate but observes that ‘published reports describing the research bases
for, or formative or summative evaluations of, such task-based materials are few and far between’.
While commenting on the communicative textbook English for Today, which was prepared by
English Language Teaching Improvement Project (ELTIP) jointly funded by the government of
Bangladesh and DFID of the UK government, Sinha (2006) notes some strengths and shortcomings
of the texts. According to her, their strength was that they ‘provide learners a variety of materials
such as reading texts, dialogues, tasks and activities’ and ‘there is scope for learners to participate
actively in the classroom through activities like pair work, group work as well as individual work.
However, one problem with them is that the listening and speaking activities ‘may create problems
for the teachers’ in larger classes. Another problem is that there are few literary texts and they
deprive the learners from, as Alam earlier notes, imaginatively engaging with the texts and ‘nurturing
the creative impulses of learners.’

Facilities and Logistic Support

Reviewing the errors, consciousness raising tasks, noticing activities must derive from performing
the task, and unless the teacher has recorded the performance in some way, it would be impossible to
review. However, as Siddique (2004) observes,

...lack of basic materials such as microphones, visible boards or seats that can be adjusted
for students to converge in interactive groups render communicative activities impossible.

Issues with task-based assessment

Because of all the factors and conditions considered in section one, introduction of task-based
assessment in a country like Bangladesh where more than two million candidates take the secondary
and higher secondary school certificate examinations (SSC & HSC respectively) every year would
involve an investment of huge amount of money which the fledgling economy can hardly supply.
The logistic support needed, therefore, renders task-based assessment impracticable and undesirable.
It is because under the present system indirect and largely discrete-point tests incur less investment
in time and money.

In view of such difficulties, Shahidullah (2003) contends that Bangladesh now needs the ‘anti-
methods pedagogy’ which would be a combination of traditional as well as progressive methods and
free from the rigidity of models and methodological paradigms. This is also echoed in Siddique’s
paper who argues for the adoption of ‘a hybrid approach’ appropriate for the particular socio-cultural
and socio-economic context in Bangladesh.

Conclusion
To sum up, TBLT is likely to work well with advanced-level and independent learners who are
instrumentally motivated to improve their communication skills in settings where ideal class size,
and competent teachers will allow for the implementation of a variety of tasks. This set of learners
will already have the basic linguistic proficiency to make use of tasks in automatising their linguistic
knowledge and converting their declarative knowledge into procedural knowledge. However, with
the secondary and higher secondary level learners at the mainstream public schools TBLT is unlikely
to work due to classroom size, learners’ background knowledge and proficiency level, traditional
assessment, poor teacher competence, incongruence with university entrance examination, etc.
However, a task-supported pedagogy complemented by the traditional grammar and reading
comprehension-based models and a literature syllabus (that is, a multi-syllabus) would provide the
ideal solution for the moment. Within such a model, tasks should be used in the production stage of
traditional PPP teaching style. Thus, once a generation of learners have been created with a good
level of communication skills and the mistake of dropping English from curriculum redressed to
some extent, within twenty years or so from here, we will hopefully have a strong pool of next-
generation graduates taking on the positions of English teachers who will be in a position to take
English language teaching to the next level by implementing TBLT in the classroom in all sectors.
Until that time comes around, a task-supported content-based and material-dependent English
language curriculum seems to be the ideal stop-gap, as opposed to permanent, solution in
Bangladesh.

Bibliography and further reading

Ahmed, S. S. 2006. Communicative English in Bangladesh: A Feedback. Stamford Journal of

English. Vol. 2. Summer issue.

Alam, F. 2007. Imperial Entanglements and Literature in English. Writers.ink. 2007

Bax, S. 2003. The end of CLT: a context approach to language teaching. ELT Journal. Vol. 57/3

Bruton, A. 2005. Task-Based Language Teaching: For the state secondary FL classroom? Language
Learning Journal. Summer issue

Carless, D. 2002. Implementing task-based learning with young learners. ELT Journal. Vol. 56/4

Dutta, S. K. 2006. Grammar Translation Method vs. Communicative Language Teaching: Objectives
and Strategies. Stamford Journal of English. Vol. 2. Summer issue.

Ellis, R. 2003. Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. 2000. Task-based research and language pedagogy. Language Teaching Research.

Harmer, J. 2003. Popular culture, methods, and context. ELT Journal Volume 57/3 July 2003.

Khan, R. 2000. The English Foundation Course at Dhaka University: An Evaluation. The Dhaka
University Studies. Vol.57, No.1. June issue.

Littlewood, W. 2007. Communicative and task-based language teaching in East Asian classrooms.
Language Teaching. Vol.40.
Littlewood, W. 2004. The task-based approach: some questions and suggestions. ELT Journal. Vol.
58/4.

Long, M. 2007. A Research agenda for TBLT. Retrieved from

https://segue.atlas.uiuc.edu/uploads/nppm/TBLT%25202007%2520A%2520research%2520agenda
%2520for%2520TBLT.doc+"Long"+"research+agenda+*+TBLT"&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

Nunan, D. 1989. Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Shahidullah, M. 2003. An Empirical Survey of Learning Style Preferences of Students, and its
Pedagogic Implications for ELT in Bangladesh. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bangladesh.
Humanities. Vol.48, No.1. June issue.

Shehadeh, A. 2005. Task-based Language Learning and Teaching: Theories and Applications. In
Edwards, C and Jane Willis., ed. Teachers Exploring Tasks in English Language Teaching. Palgrave
Macmillan.

Siddique, R. 2004. CLT: Another Assumed Ideal from the West? The Dhaka University Studies.
Vol.61, No.1. June issue.

Sinha, B. S. 2006. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), and English for Today (EFT): Our
Dream vs. Reality. The Arts Faculty Journal. Vol.1

Swan, M. 2005. Legislation by Hypothesis: the Case of Task-Based Instruction. Applied Linguistics
26/3

Study questions
1. What is a task?
2. What is “Task Based Language Teaching”?
3. Discuss the theoretical basis of “Task Based Language Teaching.”
4. Can grammar be taught in “Task Based Language Teaching”?
5. What are the different stages in the design of a task?
6. How is assessment done in TBLT?
7. What are the strengths and limitations of “Task Based Language Teaching”?

Content-Based Instruction (CBI) or Content Language Integrated

Learning (CLIL)
*content = subject matter

In recent years Content-Based Instruction (CBI) or Content Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)
has become popular as a means of developing linguistic ability alongside knowledge of academic
content. The focus of a CLIL lesson is on a particular topic or subject matter. During the lesson
students are focused on learning about the topic which could be anything that interests them from a
serious science subject to their favourite pop star or even a topical news story or film. They learn
about the subject using the target language. It is assumed that the target language will be learned
even though it is not the main focus of the lesson.

Theoretical Basis: Krashen's theory (1982) of second language acquisition has influenced the
development of integrated instruction at all levels. Krashen suggests that a second language is most
successfully acquired when the focus of instruction is on ‘meaning’ (content or message) rather than
on ‘form’ (structure); when the language input is at or just above the proficiency of the learner; and
when there is sufficient opportunity to engage in meaningful use of that language in a relatively
anxiety-free environment.
Theory of language: i) Language is text- and discourse-based and therefore longer stretches than
phrases or sentences are used. ii) Language use draws on integrated skills. iii) Language is
purposeful. The purpose may be academic, social, or recreational.

Theory of Learning: i) People learn a second language most successfully when the information they
are acquiring is perceived as interesting, useful, and leading to a desired goal. ii) Some content areas
(e.g. geography) are more useful as a basis for language learning than others. iii) Students learn best
when instruction addresses students’ needs.
Versions of CLIL
The Content-based Instruction has several versions. These are:
i. Immersion Education: This is a type of foreign language instruction in which the regular school
curriculum is taught through the medium of the foreign language. The foreign language is the vehicle
for content instruction; it is not the subject of instruction. The first immersion programmes were
developed in Canada in the 1970s to provide English-speaking students with the opportunity to learn
French. The English-medium institutions in Bangladesh can be considered as examples of
‘immersion education’.
ii. Adjunct model: This model links a specific language learning course with a content course. The
courses share a content base, but the focus of instruction differs. The language teacher emphasises
language skills, such as academic reading or writing, while the content teacher focuses on traditional
academic concepts. This model requires substantial coordination between the language and content
teacher. Thus language and content instruction are integrated. Many Departments at Dhaka
University, for example, offer English language courses to their students even though they are
majoring in Computer Engineering, Physics, Soil Sciences, Zoology, etc. The content of these
English language courses, for example, could come from the main academic disciplines.
iii. Sheltered subject matter teaching: This approach involves adapting the language of texts or tasks
and use of certain methods (demonstrations, visuals, graphic organizers, or cooperative work) to
make content instruction more accessible to students of different English proficiency levels. This
type of instruction is also called Sheltered English or Language-Sensitive Content Instruction and is
given by the regular classroom or content teacher, or by a language teacher with special expertise in
another academic area. In many institutions in Bangladesh, at the tertiary level in particular, teachers
simplify their lectures in English to help their better understand the academic content.
iv. Language across the curriculum: This is the name given to content-centred instruction that
involves a conscious effort to integrate language instruction into all subject areas in the curriculum.
Language skills are taught in the content subjects and not left exclusively for the English teacher to
deal with as “Every teacher is an English teacher.” This form of content-language integrated learning
is often found in classrooms with a significant number of immigrant children who need language-
support in a new country.
Syllabus: In most CLIL courses, the syllabus is derived from the content area. The topical themes of
the modules in the Intensive Language Course at the Free University of Berlin, for example, are:
drugs, religious persuasion, advertising, nuclear energy, native Americans, Dracula, professional
ethics, etc.
Learner roles: Learners are expected to be autonomous and support each other in collaborative
modes of learning.
The role of teachers: Instructors must be knowledgeable in the subject matter and good language
teachers as well.
Materials: Materials that facilitate language learning are used with the subject matter of the content
course.
Teaching techniques: Since CLIL refers to an approach rather than a method, no specific techniques
are associated with it. However the following four types are frequently observed:
i. Cooperative learning: In this technique, students of different linguistic and educational
backgrounds and different skill levels work together on a common task. Cooperative groups
encourage students to communicate, to share insights, test hypotheses, and jointly construct
knowledge. Other grouping strategies involve peer tutoring or pairing a second language learner with
a more English-proficient peer.
ii. Task-based or experiential learning: In this approach, students learn by carrying out specific tasks
or projects: for example, ‘doing science’ and not just reading about it.
iv. Whole language approach: Whole language strategies that have been implemented in CBI classes
include dialogue journals, reading response journals, learning logs, process-based writing, and
language experience stories.
iv. Graphic organiser: This provides a means for organising and presenting information so that it can
be understood, remembered, and applied. Graphs, realia, tables, maps, flow charts, timelines, and
Venn diagrams are used to help students place information in a comprehensible context. They enable
students to organise information obtained from written or oral texts, develop reading strategies,
increase retention, activate schema as a pre-reading or pre-listening activity, and organise ideas
during the prewriting stage.

Advantages
CLIL has become very popular among EAP (English for Academic Purposes) teachers as it helps
students to develop valuable study skills such as note taking, summarising and extracting key
information from texts.
Taking information from different sources, re-evaluating and restructuring that information can help
students to develop very valuable thinking skills that can then be transferred to other subjects.
The inclusion of a group work element within the framework given above can also help students to
develop their collaborative skills, which can have great social value.

Potential Problems
There are some potential problems involved with CLIL. As CLIL is not explicitly focused on
language learning, some students may feel confused or may even feel that they are not improving
their language skills. Some students are overwhelmed by the quantity of new information in their
CLIL courses and may flounder. It can also be hard to find information sources and texts that
students with lower levels of proficiency can understand. Again, in certain contexts where large
classrooms, resource-constraint and poor quality teaching are real issues, it is difficult to see how
CLIL can be useful.
Conclusion
To sum up, in CLIL teaching is organised around the content or information that students will
acquire, rather than around language items such as grammar, notions, functions, etc. Students learn
the target language as a by-product of learning about real-world content. The CLIL is being used in
the United States and many parts of the world, especially in countries where English serves as the
medium of instruction for part of the educational programme. The degree to which the teacher adopts
this approach may well depend on the willingness of his students, the institution in which he works
and the availability of resources within his/her environment.
Bibliography and further reading

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Study questions
1. What is meant by “Content Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)”?
2. What are the different versions of “Content Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)”?
3. What are the main techniques or classroom activities in “Content Language Integrated
Learning (CLIL)”?
4. What are the strengths and limitations of “Content Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)”?

Integrated Skills Approach

It is crucial for the language teacher to teach the four primary skills of listening, reading, speaking,
and writing in the classroom. The skill strand of the tapestry leads to optimal L2 communication
when the skills are interwoven during instruction. This is known as the Integrated Skills Approach. If
this weaving together does not occur, the strand consists merely of discrete, segregated skills—
parallel threads that do not touch, support, or interact with each other. This is sometimes known as
the segregated-skill approach.

Two Forms of Integrated Skills Approach

There are at least two forms of instruction that are oriented toward integrating the skills. These are
content-based instruction and task-based instruction. The first of these emphasizes learning content
through language, while the second stresses doing tasks that require communicative language use.

Content-Based Instruction
In content-based instruction, students practice all the language skills in a highly integrated,
communicative fashion while learning content such as science, mathematics, and social studies. It is
valuable at all levels of proficiency, but the nature of the content might differ by proficiency level.
For beginners, the content often involves basic social and interpersonal communication skills, but
past the beginning level, the content can become increasingly academic and complex. The Cognitive
Academic Language Learning Approach (CALLA), created by Chamot and O'Malley (1994), shows
how language learning strategies can be integrated into the simultaneous learning of content and
language.
At least three general models of content-based instruction exist: theme-based, adjunct, and
sheltered. The theme-based model integrates the language skills into the study of a theme, e.g. urban
violence, cross-cultural differences in marriage practices, natural wonders of the world, or a broad
topic such as change. The theme must be very interesting to students and must allow a wide variety
of language skills to be practised, always in the service of communicating about the theme. This is
the most useful and widespread form of content-based instruction today, and it is found in many
innovative ESL and EFL textbooks. In the adjunct model, language and content courses are taught
separately but are carefully coordinated. In the sheltered model, the subject matter is taught in
simplified English tailored to students' English proficiency level.

Task-Based Instruction

In task-based instruction, students participate in communicative tasks in English. Tasks are defined
as activities that can stand alone as fundamental units and that require comprehending, producing,
manipulating, or interacting in authentic language while attention is principally paid to meaning
rather than form.
The task-based model is beginning to influence the measurement of learning strategies, not just
the teaching of ESL and EFL. In task-based instruction, basic pair work and group work are often
used to increase student interaction and collaboration. For instance, students work together to write
and edit a class newspaper, develop a television commercial, enact scenes from a play, or take part in
other joint tasks. More structured cooperative learning formats can also be used in task-based
instruction. Task-based instruction is relevant to all levels of language proficiency, but the nature of
the task varies from one level to the other. Tasks become increasingly complex at higher proficiency
levels. For instance, beginners might be asked to introduce each other and share one item of
information about each other. More advanced students might do more intricate and demanding tasks,
such as taking a public opinion poll at school, the university, or a shopping mall.

Advantages of Integrated Skills Approach

The integrated skills approach, as contrasted with the purely segregated approach, exposes second
language learners to authentic language and challenges them to interact naturally in the language.
Learners rapidly gain a true picture of the richness and complexity of the second language as
employed for communication. Moreover, this approach stresses that L2 is not just an object of
academic interest nor merely a key to passing an examination; instead, it becomes a real means of
interaction and sharing among people. This approach allows teachers to track students' progress in
multiple skills at the same time. Integrating the language skills also promotes the learning of real
content, not just the dissection of language forms. Finally, the integrated-skills approach, whether
found in content-based or task-based language instruction or some hybrid form, can be highly
motivating to students of all ages and backgrounds.

Conclusion
With careful reflection and planning, any teacher can integrate the language skills and strengthen the
tapestry of language teaching and learning. When the tapestry is woven well, learners can use L2
effectively for communication. In Bangladesh, listening and speaking skills have been traditionally
neglected but with the recent emphasis on communication, integrated skills approach seems to be the
way forward. In fact, listening and speaking activities can easily be integrated with traditional
reading and writing activities.

Bibliography and further reading

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.
Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Study questions
1. Distinguish between “integrated skills approach” and “segregated skill approach”.
2. What are the benefits of integrating skills? How can you do this?

Multiple Intelligences
Intelligences theory is a pluralised way of understanding the intellect, used in teaching language,
among other things. The theory claims that each person's level of intelligence is made up of
autonomous faculties that can work individually or in concert with other faculties. The principle
proponent of this theory is Howard Gardner. Gardner's multiple intelligences theory (1983)
challenged traditional beliefs in the fields of education and cognitive science. According to a
traditional definition, intelligence is a uniform cognitive capacity people are born with. But
according to Gardner, people are born with varying degrees and combinations of intelligences in
compartmentalized faculties.

Intelligences
According to Howard Gardner, intelligence is:
1. the ability to create an effective product or offer a service that is valued in a culture;
2. a set of skills that make it possible for a person to solve problems in life;
3. the potential for finding or creating solutions for problems, which involves gathering new
knowledge.
Gardner identified a total of nine faculties, which he labelled as ‘intelligences’. These are: 1.
Verbal/Linguistic Intelligence, 2. Logical/Mathematical Intelligence, 3. Musical/Rhythmic
Intelligence, 4. Visual/Spatial Intelligence, 5. Bodily/Kinaesthetic Intelligence, 6. Interpersonal
Intelligence, and 7. Intrapersonal Intelligence. He later added Naturalist Intelligence and Existential
Intelligence to the list.
The intelligences can be defined in the following ways:
1. Verbal/Linguistic Intelligence – well-developed verbal skills and sensitivity to the sounds,
meanings and rhythms of words;
2. Logical/Mathematical Intelligence – ability to think conceptually and abstractly, and capacity
to discern logical or numerical patterns;
3. Musical/Rhythmic Intelligence – ability to produce and appreciate rhythm, pitch and timber;
4. Visual/Spatial Intelligence – capacity to think in images and pictures, to visualise accurately
and abstractly;
5. Bodily/Kinaesthetic Intelligence – ability to control one's body movements and to handle
objects skilfully;
6. Interpersonal Intelligence – capacity to detect and respond appropriately to the moods,
motivations and desires of others;
7. Intrapersonal Intelligence – capacity to be self-aware and in tune with inner feelings, values,
beliefs and thinking processes;
8. Naturalist Intelligence – ability to recognise and categorise plants, animals and other objects
 in nature;
9. Existential Intelligence – sensitivity and capacity to tackle deep questions about human
existence, such as the meaning of life, why do we die, and how did we get here.
The theory recognises that we communicate, learn and solve problems in a least nine ways.
While the intelligences are discrete in terms of their existence in the brain, real world activities
inevitably involve a blend of intelligences. It is unlikely that the intelligences can operate in pure
form in everyday functioning.

Classroom, teacher and students

In Gardner's view, learning is both a social and psychological process. Students begin to understand
how they are intelligent. When students understand the balance of their own multiple intelligences
they begin, first, to manage their own learning and second, to value their individual strengths.
Teachers understand how students are intelligent as well as how intelligent they are. Knowing
which students have the potential for what will help the teacher create opportunities where the
strength can be fostered in others.
Below is a table of learner types and some suggested activities for each type.

personality Is good at Learns

Learner type Activities
best by
Memory
Saying,
word player Reading, games
hearing and
Linguistic writing and Trivia
seeing
stories quizzes
words
Stories.
Asking
Solving
questions,
Questioner puzzles,
categorisin Puzzles
Logical/ exploring
g and Problem
mathematical patterns,
working solving.
reasoning
with
and logic
patterns
Flashcards
Drawing, Colours
Visualise Visualising
building, Pictures
Visual/ Spatial , using the
arts and Drawing
mind's eye
crafts Project
work.
Singing,
Using
listening to Using songs
music lover rhythm,
Musical music and Chants
with music
playing Drilling.
on
instruments

Bodily/ Moving Moving, TPR

Kinaesthetic around, touching activities
 mover Action
touching songs
things and Running
and doing
body dictations
language Miming
Realia.

Mixing
with others,
socialiser Co- Mingle
leading
operating, activities
groups,
Interpersonal working in Group work
understandi
groups and Debates
ng others
sharing Discussions.
and
mediating

Working Working
alone and individually
Working
Intrapersonal Loner pursuing on
alone
own personalised
interests projects

Working
outside and Environmen
Naturalistic nature lover Nature observing tal projects.
nature

Criticism
Multiple Intelligences Approach has faced criticisms from different quarters.
1. It's not new. Gardner's work isn't groundbreaking—that what he calls ‘intelligences’ are
primary abilities that educators and cognitive psychologists have always acknowledged.
2. It isn't well defined. There is no fixed number of ‘intelligences’ and it ever continues to
increase. Bodily-kinaesthetic or musical ability represents individual aptitude or talent rather
than intelligence. The theory lacks the rigour and precision of a real science.
3. It's culturally embedded. The theory states that one's culture plays an important role in
determining the strengths and weaknesses of one's intelligences. Critics counter that
intelligence is revealed when an individual must confront an unfamiliar task in an unfamiliar
environment.
4. It defeats national standards. Widespread adoption of multiple intelligence pedagogy would
make it difficult to compare and classify students' skills and abilities across classrooms.
5. It is impractical. Educators faced with overcrowded classrooms and lack of resources see
multiple intelligence theory as utopian.

Conclusion
Howard Gardner (1983) claims that all human beings have multiple intelligences. These intelligences
can be nurtured and strengthened, or ignored and weakened. Multiple Intelligences has been claimed
to be an ideal framework to use in ensuring good teaching practices and improved outcomes or
results for students. It provides a framework to extend children who are talented and gifted and also
for children requiring assistance.
Bibliography and further reading

Gardner, H. 1983. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Study questions
1. What is meant by “Multiple Intelligences”?
2. Discuss the different intelligences identified by Howard Gardner.
3. Which classroom activities are suitable for developing multiple intelligences?
4. What are the strengths and limitations of the theory of multiple intelligences?

Humanistic Language Teaching

Humanism is one of those constructs that people argue about passionately. Instead of attempting to
define it, perhaps it makes more sense to focus on some commonly agreed characteristics of
humanism. These are: problem-solving, reasoning, free will, self-development, and co-operation.
Perhaps the most well-known applications of humanism in ELT are those of Curran (1976) and
Gattegno (1972). The former advocated the use of 'Counselling-Learning'. In this practice, teachers
sit outside a circle of learners and help them to talk about their personal and linguistic problems. The
students decide the 'curriculum', while the teacher is more of a facilitator, who fosters an emotionally
secure environment. Gattegno advocated the Silent Way approach. In this, he presented challenges
for learners. These challenges developed the students' awareness and encouraged their independence.
It is possible to apply the characteristics of humanism to ELT in a less radical way than described in
the practices above. In a way that might be more appealing for students, more practicable for
teachers, and more plausible for education inspectors.

The Humanistic Teacher

The humanistic teacher should have a good grasp of language learning theories. He will realise the
importance of change, which is implicit in all learning.
1. He will be aware of the individual learners' 'developmental readiness' (Piaget, 1970), which
will determine when and how to teach each student something.
2. He will offer their students problems to solve, as, according to cognitivists, this is precisely
how we learn things.
3. He will probably be a pragmatist, allowing a combination of language learning theories and
their own experience to interact with each other to produce effective language lessons.
4. He would be aware of what motivates their students. He will observe students’ motivation
whether it is 'extrinsic’ or 'intrinsic ' and teach accordingly. He should remember that the
 students who are more extrinsically motivated will be more goal-oriented and might want, for
example, a lot of tests and exams. And the students who are intrinsically motivated will
derive a lot of satisfaction from solving language problems; the solution will be a reward in
itself. In reality, of course, students can be both intrinsically and extrinsically motivated.
They may be learning English for a specific purpose (e.g. to be accepted into a speech
community or to get promotion), but they might also really enjoy the process of learning.
5. He must be flexible. Without flexibility, a teacher cannot teach humanistically, because
students will never learn completely in step with any designated syllabus. The teacher always
makes a point of observing students very carefully so that he knows when to introduce certain
tasks, according to the progress they're making.
6. He tries to provide students with learning opportunities, which the students are free to take or
not.

Teaching Language Items

In an attempt to be a humanistic language teacher, he introduces every new language item at the
optimum time of readiness for class.
1. The teacher firstly elicits the target language. This fosters a sense of co-operation between the
students and the teacher.
2. Then the teacher tries to make the meaning of the language items as clear as possible by
using a number of techniques (e.g. pictures, mime, or a mini-explanation).
3. At the appropriate time, students also need to practise speech production by saying or writing
the target language.
4. After enough practice, through both teacher-centred and student-centred phases, the student
should gradually learn the target language. The student will have fundamentally changed.

Ahmed Bashir (2013), discusses the characteristics of humanistic language teaching as reflected in
instructional materials, activities, assessment, feedback options and teacher student relations.

Materials

In humanistic teaching, teachers do not stick to a fixed coursebook. They develop and modify
materials according to the needs of learners. In humanistic language teaching materials, not only
linguistic matters but also matters related to everyday life and experiences of learners are included.
Humanistic teachers modify and change materials according to the needs, competence level and
psychological characteristics of learners. Often the humanistic teacher allows learners to choose their
own learning materials.

Classroom tasks and activities

Tasks or activities are not imposed on learners; they are given the freedom to choose their own
activities. And teachers can make the activities interesting and useful by making them relevant to
their lives, experiences and level of competence. In the classroom students participate in various
activities like role play, simulation, debates, story telling, etc. if they wish to. Teacher’s
responsibility is to encourage learners to feel free to share their experiences with classmates so that
they can learn from each other.

Assessment
Although classroom activities and examinations may be necessary for evaluation purposes, the
humanistic approach does not prescribe any formal examination for learners’ evaluation. It is
because it may create anxiety and fear among learners and produce a threatening atmosphere in the
classroom. In humanistic teaching, assessment is a continuous process in which learners’ gradual
development is the main focus. Another important aspect of humanistic assessment is learners’
freedom in self-evaluation because when learners evaluate their own learning, it becomes responsible
learning. In a formal education setting, final assessment is done by teachers through formal
examinations. But in a classroom situation students can be encouraged to monitor and assess their
performances.

Feedback

Assessment and classroom activities or tasks should be followed by positive feedback. In a

humanistic model of teaching, feedback does not come from teachers only but may also come from
peers. The provision of peer-feedback develops the sense of critical judgement of learners.
Humanistic teachers are always positive in giving feedback on students’ performances. They always
praise students for their initiatives and do not criticize them for making mistakes because mistakes
are an inevitable part of learning.

Learner autonomy

In humanistic teaching, one of the key principles is learners’ freedom because “any sort of
humanistic approach to language teaching would be self-defeating if it were imposed on students
against their will” (Appel, 1989, p. 266). Learners are given the freedom to choose materials, and
activities and evaluate their own performances. Thus humanistic teaching attempts to develop
students as responsible and independent learners.

Teacher-student relation (Learning environment in the classroom)

In humanistic teaching the teacher plays a vital role in developing good relations between him/her
and the learners both inside and outside the classroom. The teacher is friendly and cooperative with
students with positive attitudes towards them and shows sympathy and empathy for them. There is a
sense of mutual respect and trust between the teacher and learners. The teacher creates a facilitative
and non-threatening learning atmosphere in the classroom. The easy and friendly relationship
between teacher and learners facilitates the teaching-learning process.

Conclusion
The thrust of humanism is the ability to advance as a species through understanding and cooperation.
This means that humanistic language teachers need to have a thorough grasp of both how people
learn and what motivates them to learn. They need to shed the old image of the teacher being the
fount of wisdom and replace it with the teacher as facilitator.
Bashir’s (2013) investigation of humanistic methodological characteristics in teaching English to
undergraduate students in Bangladesh is illuminating. Focusing on six key areas of materials, tasks
and activities, assessment, feedback, learner autonomy, and teacher-student relation in the classroom,
he revealed that “in general language teachers followed humanistic approach in their classes, but
lagged behind in certain areas, such as using modern teaching aids, humanizing teaching materials,
providing differentiated learning support, and showing tolerance for mistakes.” The results in his
study also showed that “among the six areas of investigation teachers were most humanistic in
managing classroom tasks and activities, and least humanistic in materials selection and use.”
However, although his study revealed that students actually preferred humanistic methodological
characteristics, there was no evidence that teachers also believed in them.

In the final analysis, the strength of humanistic language teaching is still not proven in the context of
Bangladesh. Good teachers will always use some of the principles of humanistic language teaching
in their classrooms by granting their students some degree of autonomy and voice in classroom
affairs. But the scope of using humanistic principles in mainstream classrooms may be limited. The
particular sociocultural context, large classrooms, discipline issues, centrality of standardized
examinations may render the ideals of humanistic language teaching unattainable.
Bibliography and further reading

Appel, J. 1989. Humanistic approaches in the secondary school: how far can we go? ELT Journal
43(4): 261-267.

Bashir, A. 2013. Investigating Humanistic Methodological Characteristics in Teaching English to

Bangladeshi Undergraduate Students. Spectrum: the Journal of the Department of English
(forthcoming issue).

Brown, H. D. 1994. Principles of Language Learning and Language Teaching (3rd ed.).
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Stevick, E.W. 1990. Humanism in Language Teaching: A Critical Perspective. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

Study questions
1. What is “humanistic language teaching”?
2. Discuss the different characteristics of “humanistic language teaching”.
3. What are the strengths and limitations of “humanistic language teaching”?

Reflective teaching
Reflective teaching means looking at what the teacher does in the classroom, thinking about why
s/he does it, and thinking about if it works—a process of self-observation and self-evaluation. By
collecting information about what goes on in the classroom, and by analysing and evaluating this
information, the teacher identifies and explores his own practices and underlying beliefs, leading to
changes and improvements in teaching.

Things to Ponder
Reflective teaching is a means of professional development, which begins in the classroom. It
implies a systematic process of collecting, recording and analysing the teachers’ thoughts and
observations, as well as those of students, and then going on to making changes. The teacher may
ponder the following matters:
1. If a lesson went well the teacher can describe it and think about why it was successful.
2. If the students didn't understand a language point the teacher introduced, s/he needs to think
about what they did and why it may have been unclear.
3. If students are misbehaving, what were they doing, when and why?

Process of Reflection
The teacher may begin a process of reflection in response to a particular problem that has arisen in
the class, as a way of finding out more about teaching. S/he may decide to focus on a particular class
of students, or to look at a feature of teaching, for example, how she deals with incidents of
misbehaviour or how she can encourage students to speak more target language in class.
The first step is to gather information about what happens in the class. Keeping diary is the
easiest way to begin a process of reflection since it is purely personal. After each lesson the teacher
writes in a notebook about what happened. She may also describe her own reactions and feelings and
those observed on the part of the students. She is likely to begin to pose questions about what she has
observed. Diary writing does require a certain discipline in taking the time to do it on a regular basis.
The teacher may focus on the following areas while writing diary:
1. Peer observation: A teacher may invite a colleague to come into the class to collect
information about lesson. This may be with a simple observation task or through note taking.
This will relate back to the area she has identified to reflect upon. For example, she might ask
her colleague to focus on which students contribute most in the lesson, what different patterns
of interaction occur or how she deals with errors.
2. Recording lessons: Video or audio recordings of lessons can provide very useful information
for reflection. She may do things in class she is not aware of or there may be things happening
in the class that as the teacher she does not normally see. Audio recordings can be useful for
considering aspects of teacher talk. Video recordings can be useful in showing her aspects of
her own behaviour.
3. Student feedback: The teacher can also ask her students what they think about what goes on in
the classroom. Their opinions and perceptions can add a different and valuable perspective.
This can be done with simple questionnaires or learning diaries, for example.
Once the teacher has some information recorded about what goes on in her classroom, she can then
think, talk, read and ask about it.
1. Think: The teacher may have noticed patterns occurring in her teaching through her
observation. She may also have noticed things that she was previously unaware of. She may
have been surprised by some of the students' feedback. She may already have ideas for
changes to implement.
2. Talk: Just by talking about what she has discovered to a supportive colleague or even a
friend, she may be able to come up with some ideas for how to do things differently.
3. Read: She may decide that she needs to find out more about a certain area. There are plenty
of websites for teachers of L2 now where she can find useful teaching ideas, or more
academic articles. There are also magazines for teachers where she can find articles on a wide
range of topics. Or if she has access to a library or bookshop, there are plenty of books for
second language teachers.
4. Ask: She may pose questions to websites or magazines to get ideas from other teachers. Or if
 she has a local teachers' association or other opportunities for in-service training, she may ask
for a session on an area that interests her.

Conclusion
Reflective teaching is a cyclical process, because once the teacher starts to implement changes, then
the reflective and evaluative cycle begins again. Reflections go on continuously—What am I doing?
Why am I doing it? How effective is it? How are the students responding? How can I do it better? As
a result of reflection the teacher may decide to do something in a different way, or she may just
decide that what are she is doing is the best way. And that is what professional development is all
about.
Bibliography and further reading

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Study questions
1. What is meant by “reflective teaching”?
2. Discuss the process of reflection.
3. How can teachers collect information about their teaching? From whom?
4. What are the strengths of “reflective teaching”?

Group Work Vs. Whole-Class Activities

Group work is promoted as an important part of successful teaching and learning of the target
language in communicative and task-based language teaching. However, group work may not always
be the best option. There will be a time and a place for whole-class activities in the English language
classroom, just as there's a time and a place for group and pair work.

Group Work
Group work came into the standard EFL teaching repertoire with communicative methodologies in
the 1970s. At that time, studies of contemporary foreign language classes revealed that as much as
80% of lesson time consisted of the teacher talking to the students. In a class of, say, 30 students, it is
evident that the learner hardly got a chance to practice the language. Teacher Talking Time (TTT)
became taboo and ways were devised to stamp it out and train the students to actually perform in the
language they were learning.
Group work was thus introduced into the EFL repertoire to come to grips with a particular
problem. Group work made it possible for the teacher to devote more time to the students' oral
production. Thanks to group work, less confident students get the chance to put their knowledge of
the new language into practice in a non-threatening environment, away from the critical eye and ear
of the teacher. Instead of being dependent on the teacher, students get used to helping and learning
from each other. Meanwhile, the teacher is left free to discreetly monitor progress and give help,
advice and encouragement where and when it is needed.
Dealing with group work demands much tact and sensitivity. The teacher may have to decide
whether to intervene to bring an enthusiastic discussion onto a more linguistically fruitful path, or to
stay in the background to allow the students to make their own discoveries about the language and
the best way to learn it.
Like any kind of praxis, group work can lose its meaning if it is handled in an automatic and
unthinking way. Badly handled group work can be as detrimental for the learning process as any
other inappropriate technique.

Whole Class Activities

An important aspect of whole-class discussion is the welding together of the whole group and the
camaraderie that comes about when a whole group works together towards a common goal.
Moreover, there is diversity in numbers; the larger the group, the more variety there is in the ideas,
opinions and experiences which can contribute to the learning process. This can stimulate a greater
involvement in each member of the class. Furthermore, whole class discussion is likely to be
content-based, rather than form-based, encouraging fluency and a more memorable and meaningful
exchange among the participants. It might also be more appropriate for the introverted and reflective
learner. Finally, if we are talking about classes of 15 students or so, there are likely to be many
opportunities of letting the whole class function as a single unit instead of dividing it into groups.
Dealing with whole-class discussions requires the experience and sensitivity to strike the right
balance between neutrality and commitment, the tact to deal with explosive situations and
domineering students, the knowledge and the analytic mind demanded by the topic under discussion,
and the diplomacy to ensure a fair discussion with maximum participation.

Combining group work and whole-class activities

The two techniques can go hand in hand. After a session of group work, a whole-class feedback
phase will give cohesion to the learning process. Ideally, the group work that has gone before will
ensure that everyone has something to say, and also a reason for listening. Having ‘rehearsed’ in a
more intimate context beforehand, students may face the whole class with more confidence in their
ability to handle the target language.
It is generally recognised today that individual learners have different learning styles, strategies
and preferences. It is also generally accepted that to be effective lessons need a change of pace and
focus to maintain the concentration of the learners. For both these reasons it is important that the
teachers have as wide and flexible repertoire. And for this reason, asked to choose between group
work and whole class activities, many a teacher would be inclined to say: Both!

Bibliography and further reading

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Study questions
1. What is “group work”?
 2. What are “whole-class activities”?
3. What are the strengths of “group work”?
4. What are the strengths and limitations of “whole-class activities”?
5. How will you combine “group work” and “whole-class activities”?

Teaching Large Classes

Challenges of a large class
Large classes are a reality in many countries such as Bangladesh and they pose particular challenges.
Challenges of teaching a large class include the following:
1. It is difficult to keep good discipline going in a large class.
2. The teacher has to deal with students of different ages and different abilities, wanting to learn
different things at different speeds and in different ways.
3. The teacher cannot easily give each student the individual attention they need.
4. The teacher may not have enough books or teaching and learning aids.

Group work
In a large class, student pairs and groups can help each other and learn from each other. They don't
get bored listening to teacher talk. Here are some strategies:
a. Organising groups to suit learners’ abilities: Teachers of large classes have to organise different
groups. In mixed-ability groups, the more able learners in the group can help the others to master
the work so that the teacher need not teach some parts. In same-ability groups, the teacher can
leave the groups of faster learners to get on with the work on their own. S/he can give extra help
to individual learners in the slower groups. Some teachers appoint faster, more able learners as
group leaders or monitors who can help slower learners.
b. Monitoring the groups: The teacher needs to move around the classroom to see what progress
learners are making and what problems are coming up. S/he can give advice, encouragement and
extra individual help where it is needed.
c. Managing resources: Group work can help the teacher manage with very few textbooks, or even
only one text book. If the teacher does not have enough books for each student, he may form
groups so that each group has one book. If the teacher has only one book, he may let each group
have some time to work with the book. The other groups can do activities that fit in with the
theme of the passage in the book. With or without group work, if the teacher has only one book,
he could either write the important bits of text on the blackboard before the lesson or make the
text into a dictation, so everyone has a copy of the text written down.

Establishing and maintaining discipline

For the sake of discipline, the teacher should establish a code of behaviour that is created by teacher
and learners together. It should state clear basic rules of conduct that learners understand, such as: 1.
They have to work quietly; 2. They may talk, but not loudly; and 3. Students who have finished the
lesson tasks can read a book to keep them busy.
The teacher should use the environment outside the classroom. It offers a new, different space
when students get noisy or bored, and helps to reduce overcrowding. He should remember that: 1. He
can work with some groups inside the classroom while the other groups are working outside; and 2.
He needs to set up outdoor activities clearly and carefully and monitor them.
The teacher should appoint responsible group leaders who can help maintain discipline. They can
also give out and take in work for the groups, and explain what groups must do.

Advantages
A large class has the following advantages:
1. When there are many students in a class they can share many different ideas and interesting
life experiences. This stimulates the students and enlivens those parts of lesson where
students can discuss and learn from each other.
2. During project work, students can learn to share responsibility and help each other. This also
brings variety and speeds up the work.

Conclusion
The teacher should remember these are not the best or only ways to teach and learn in large classes.
S/he may devise his/her own techniques and employ them to suit the situation for the optimum
language development of the students.
Bibliography and further reading

Harmer, J. 2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching (3rd ed.). Essex, England: Longman.

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Study questions
1. What are the challenges of a large class?
2. Give some suggestions for teaching a large class?
3. Which techniques are suitable for a large class?

Teaching Mixed-Ability Classes

One may often teach a class which has students who are clearly of different levels. They may have
different starting levels of second language or they may learn at very different speeds, for any
number of reasons. There are several strategies that a teacher can use to deal with this situation.

Open discussion
It is easy for students to get frustrated in a class of mixed ability. Stronger students may feel held
back, weaker students may feel pressured. The teacher may feel stressed. The best solution to this is
to have an open class discussion about the classroom situation. To ensure the best for everyone it is
better to acknowledge the situation and for everyone to agree how to deal with it. It is probably best
to stage and structure the discussion.

Needs analysis
The teacher needs to use a needs analysis to prompt the students to reflect upon their learning style,
learning strategies, language needs, learning enjoyment, motivation, language strengths and
weaknesses.

Making students self-aware

The teacher needs to encourage students to develop an awareness of their own language abilities and
learning needs. What are their strengths and weaknesses, and how can they focus on these? How can
they measure their own progress? This may take the form of a learner's diary, regular self-
assessment, keeping records of mistakes, keeping a record of things learnt.

Work groupings
Varying the way students work in the class will help meet the variety of levels in the class.
1. Pair work: The teacher can pair strong with strong, weak with weak, or strong with weak.
Perhaps in a very controlled activity, the strong with weak will work well. In a freer activity,
perhaps strong with strong will be of benefit.
2. Group work: These groups could be of mixed levels or similar ones. The hope is that in a
smaller group, the weaker student will feel more able to contribute. Also, if the group is
working with a set of information, the teacher may divide the information between the
students, forcing them to work together.
3. Whole class mingles: A mingle activity involves students talking or interacting with many
different members of the class in a short period of time in order to achieve a task. This means
that any one student will work with students at different levels, experiencing stronger and
weaker levels of communication. This supports the weaker students and provides
opportunities for the stronger ones.

Class activity
A classic activity is a 'Find someone who...'
In this activity the student has to survey the class to find people who…(for example)
…have got something – Do you have a CD player? Or…
…have done something – Have you eaten fish and chips? Or…
…like something – Do you like tennis?
If a student answers “yes” to a question, then the other student should ask for more information.
If a student answers “no”, then the other should find a new person to ask, and may come back to the
first student with another question later on.

Levelling tasks
This involves creating or providing different tasks for different levels. For example, the number of
comprehension questions for a text. The teacher might have two sets of questions, A and B. Perhaps
all students have to complete set A, the stronger ones also have to complete set B. Or, they even have
an extra reading text.

Extra work/homework
It is straightforward to give different students different homework unless it is part of a standardised
assessment procedure. The teacher may give weaker students homework which really does
consolidate the class work, and give the stronger students work that will widen their knowledge or
put it to the test a little more.

Student nomination
This is a simple classroom management technique that really helps in the mixed ability class. When
asking for answers to questions, the teacher may ask particular students, rather than asking the class
in an open fashion e.g. 'What's the answer to number 9?' is an open question, whereas 'What's the
answer to number nine, Maria?' is a nominated question. If the teacher asks open questions, the same
old strong students will provide the answers. This creates a poor dynamic to the class, for many
reasons.

Error correction
In a mixed level class the teacher can have different expectations of the language the different
students produce. Sometimes, it can push stronger students if the teacher corrects them heavily,
although the teacher should be sensitive about this. And for weaker students, the teacher must be
more selective in error correction.

Conclusion
The key strategies for teaching mixed level classes are probably developing a positive and
collaborative working atmosphere and providing a variety of work suitable for different levels. It
doesn't work to stick one’s head in the sand and pretend the class is all of one homogenous level, a
situation which doesn't exist anywhere.
Bibliography and further reading

Harmer, J. 2001. The Practice of English Language Teaching (3rd ed.). Essex, England: Longman.

Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C., and T. S. Rogers. 2001. Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Study questions
1. What are the challenges of a mixed-ability class?
2. Give some suggestions for teaching a mixed-ability class?
3. Which tasks or activities are suitable for a mixed-ability class?
4. What kind of adaptation and adjustments are necessary in a mixed-ability class?

[The following are student-written sample essays and reproduced here to serve as guidance. Readers
of the book are advised to exercise discretion in using any information provided in them.]

Sample answer 1
How can you combine the principles of GTM and Communicative approach to design an
effective methodology for the tertiary level learners in Bangladesh?
An enlightened, eclectic approach is suitable for every kind of teacher. Because there is no single
best rule of teaching and to have successful teaching, various challenges and attempts for different
approaches are necessary. Especially, the needs for employing different techniques for different
situations demand an effective methodology to fulfill the requirements of the situation and support
the idea of an eclectic approach.

To quote Nunan:

It has been realized that there never was and probably never will be a method for all,
and the focus in recent years has been on the development of classroom tasks and activities
which are consonant with what we know about second language acquisition, and which
are also in keeping with the dynamics of the classroom itself (1991, p. 228)

Rationale

The goal of language teaching is to develop what Dell Hymes (1972) referred to as "communicative
competence". In Hymes' view, a person who acquires communicative competence acquires both
knowledge and ability for language use. The Communicative Approach in language teaching starts
from a theory of language as communication. The principles of Grammar-Translation Method
(GTM) and Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), seen as an approach can be combined to
provide the tertiary level learners with the syntactic knowledge of language and "communicative
competence" both at the same time "in keeping with the dynamics of the classroom itself". Also,
integration of the four skills (reading, writing, speaking and listening) will be emphasized as a goal.

Tertiary level learners who have just entered the graduation course in a university are expected to
understand the content of the text in the target language and communicate their ideas in the exam
papers and in practical life respectively. With the tertiary level learners in mind, the prescribed
eclectic approach will focus on a syllabus and class-room techniques which will enable them to carry
out their expected jobs.

Problems of Teaching C.L.T in Bangladesh:

It was thought that explicit grammar teaching is an impediment to natural learning process.
Therefore, when C.L.T was first floated in the country, grammar was completely excluded.
However, after 2 years grammar was reintroduced.

Under the given circumstances, teachers found it difficult to engage learners in communication
throughout the whole class.

- Lack of proper training on CLT approach for the teachers

- No option for proper testing and evaluation on speaking and listening skills
- Economic constraints do not support the use of over-head projectors, computers, tape-
recorders etc. required in a CLT classroom (Siddique, 2004)
- Infrastructural limitations like over-crowded class, lack of skilled and adequate number of teachers
etc.
- Uncongenial sitting arrangements

Khan (2000) comments that students feel tempted to discard the new style and complain that
teacher is not teaching. Furthermore, local culture codes deem it inappropriate for students to be
informal or to argue their point of view with a teacher since such behaviour is traditionally seen to be
disrespectful.

In my opinion, learner's autonomous learning is the most difficult factor when using CLT approach
to teach English in Bangladesh. Bangladeshi students tend to be passive and dependent to find their
efficient way of learning because Grammar-Translation has been the method mainly used in the
class. And also students have been watching teacher-centered instruction due to lots of exam for
entering university. If we use CLT approach in the class they might be reluctant to participate and do
not know what to do by themselves or how to be creative. And also they might complain about new
approach which can affect their grades.

Therefore, in order to motivate the tertiary level students with real communication, meaningful task,
meaningful to the learners, an eclectic approach combining CLT approach with GTM have been
proposed. Students' previous experience with the principles of GTM will make some of the class
room techniques familiar to them while the underlying learning theory of CLT practices will make
the classroom activities more interesting for them. In addition, the economic and infrastructural
constraints will be handled with due consideration in the proposed methodology.

The Principles of Communicative Language Teaching Approach:

a. Focus on components (grammatical, discourse, functional, sociolinguistic, and strategic) of

communicative competence with usable language which is grammatically correct.

b. Language techniques are designed to engage learners in the pragmatic, authentic, functional use of
language for meaningful purposes.

c. Fluency and accuracy are complementary, but fluency is more important to keep meaningful
engagement of language use.

d. Classroom tasks must provide students to communicate in unrehearsed contexts.

e. With student-centered circumstance, students understand their own styles of learning and they can
develop strategies for autonomous learning.

f. The teacher helps students construct meaning through interaction with others.

Syllabus: (notional-functional)

The syllabus for the eclectic approach will provide the text book as a "think tank" that provides a
good number of situational topics which the teachers use creatively in class room to generate
students' interest and ensure their active participation by devising stimulating activities out of them.
Instead of teaching grammar in isolation, grammar items will be integrated into the main language
activities which will help students to understand the role of grammar rules better. All the four skills
(reading, writing, speaking and listening) will also get adequate attention.

Use of Authentic Materials

To overcome the typical problem that students cannot transfer what they learn in the classroom to the
outside world and to expose students to natural language in a variety of situations, adherents of CLT
advocate the use of language materials authentic to native speakers of target language. The teacher
e.g. can use a real newspaper, magazine article, recipe, etc. More accessible materials (e.g. the use of
weather forecast when working on predictions) or at least ones that are realistic, are most desirable.

Class-room Techniques/ Teaching Procedure

The class room techniques are borrowed from both GTM and CLT for the tertiary level learners.
Teacher will be the authority and facilitator in the classroom at the same time. Students will actively
participate. Error correction will be done by the teacher but he/she will practice due toleration in
terms of error correction. Target language will be the medium of instruction. However, the teacher
might use the native language if necessary. Following are some of the techniques:

i) Scrambled Sentences

The students are given a passage (a text) in which the sentences are in a scrambled order. This may
be a passage they have worked with or one they have not seen before. They are told to unscramble
the sentences so that the sentences are restored to their original order. This type of exercise teaches
the students about the cohesion and coherence properties of language.

In addition to written passages, students might also be asked to unscramble the mixed up dialogue.

ii) Translation of a Literary Passage

As one of the techniques from GTM, students will translate a reading passage from the target
language into their native language. The passage may be extracted from some work in the target
language literature. In GTM this technique is believed to reveal how much a student understands the
meaning of a foreign language and eventually enhances his/her translation skills.

iii) Reading comprehension question

In GTM, students also answer questions in the target language based on their understanding of a
reading passage. Here, they will make inferences based on their understanding of the given passage
and relate the passage to their own experience. The primary skills to be developed are reading and
writing.

iv) Antonym/Synonym

Students are given one set of words and are asked to find antonyms in the given passage. A similar
exercise could be done by asking students to find synonyms/antonyms for a particular set of words.

e.g. enthusiasm south-coast fade

dependence working days ordinary

v) Role Play

The use of role plays as a technique is also there in the De-Desuggestopedia. Role plays give the
students an opportunity to practice communicating in different social context and in different social
roles. For example, the teacher tells the students who they are, what the situation is, and what they
are talking about but the students will determine what they will say. Role play structured like this
also provide information gap congenial to effective communication. For a larger class, the teacher is
recommended to divide the students in several groups and continue the activities serially. It will
enhance the listening and speaking skills of the students in the course of time.

vi) Fill in the Gaps

Finally to refute those who claim there is no scope to teach grammar in the communicative approach,
the teacher prepares a grammar exercise based on any one of the passages given in ii) or iii) or iv).
There are some instances of the present tense forms of the verb to be used in the passage. To
illustrate the use of the verb to be, (not in an isolated context, but in a given context), the teacher
designs the following exercise in which the students will be called upon to use the present tense
forms of the verb to be, either in the positive or in the negative, as the situation demands.

The teacher will write a conversation presenting a group of students going to stage a play and
looking for everyone's presence. The students are asked to fill up the gaps.

Neela: ---------------- we all here now?

Ripon: Where ------- Robin? He ------------ here.
Lipi: Oh, he ---------- very well. He --------------- in bed.
Rumi: Oh, dear, Poor Robin. And Sabiha -------------- here.
Sabiha: Oh, yes, I --------------.

Neela: Oh there you--------------, over in the corner. Sorry Sabiha.

Ripon: Shanta-------------- late. Or -------------- she ill too?
Lipi: No, she ----------------not ill.
Neela: Good. Now we----------- ready to start.

Similar kind of grammar based exercise can also be assigned to practice present tense, past tense and
past participle forms of one set of irregular verbs.

Testing and Evaluation

Reading and writing will be tested in the written examination which might include reading
comprehension, writing composition, dialogues, etc. Speaking and listening will be tested during the
viva examination. So naturally there will be equal mark distribution for written exam and viva-voce
respectively.

Conclusion

After all, it is in fact the skilled and trained teachers themselves who best know which particular
grammar or communicative activities are most suitable for their class room situations and
accordingly they may include, in their approach, elements from different methods, which they think
will best fit in their own circumstances. They can often make an eclectic approach incorporating
suitable activities from different approaches or methods just like the one discussed here resulting
from the combination of the principles of GTM and Communicative approach and which is deemed
suitable for tertiary learners in Bangladesh.
Considering the present state of affairs in Bangladeshi teaching and learning, this approach may
prove a success since it provides a sound methodology and a model which takes care of all the
negative forces against CLT in a Bangladeshi classroom. Moreover, it blends the effectiveness of
CLT approach with the age-old acceptability of GTM stimulating the target learners to achieve their
goal. Therefore, this model can be hoped to stand.
References

Richards, J.C. & Rogers, T.S. (2001). Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching. Cambridge
University Press.

Larsen- Freeman, D. (1986). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New York: Oxford
University Press.

Morris, I. (1968). Teaching Foreign Language Skills. London: Macmillan.

Anthony, E.M. (1963). Approach, method and technique. Oxford University Press.

Hymes, D. (1971) ‘On Communicative Competence’ in J.B. Pride J. Holmes, eds Sociolinguistics.
Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books.

Khan, R. (2000). ‘The English Foundation Course at Dhaka University: An Evaluation’ The Dhaka
University Studies. VOl.57, No.1 June issue.

Sinha, B.S. (2004). ‘Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and English For Today: Our Dream
vs. Reality’. The Arts Faculty Journal. Vol.1, June 2004 issue.

Siddique, R. (2004) ‘CLT: Another Assumed Ideal from The West’. The Dhaka University Studies.

Dutta Sujit K. (2006) “Grammar-Translation Method Vs Communicative Language Teaching:

Objectives and Strategies. Stamford Journal of English.

Sample answer 2
Q. Compare and contrast the Grammar-Translation Method and the Direct Method. State the
advantages and limitations of the two methods.

Amongst the major traditional methods in teaching and learning scenario are the two methods called
the Grammar-Translation Method (GTM) and the Direct Method (DM). Whereas Grammar-
Translation Method is a time-honoured and scholarly view to language and a product of German
scholarship, Direct Method came to be popular because Grammar-Translation Method (GTM)
proved unsuccessful in teaching students to use the target language communicatively. However,
GTM is the classical study of language employed to teach classical languages like Latin and Greek at
ancient times (Chastain 1988). In contrast, DM emerged parallel to the ideas of Reform Movement,
out of naturalistic principle of learning language as are seen in the case of first language acquisition.
GTM was dominating the language learning scenario from the1840s to the1940s but later DM was
made popular by its enthusiastic supporters in Germany and France and by Souveur and Maxmilian
Berlitz in commercial language schools in the USA.
The goal in GTM is to help the students to study a foreign language so that they get to read and
appreciate foreign literature and benefit from the mental discipline and the intellectual exercise that
comes through studying foreign language. However, DM intends the students to communicate in the
target language. Its name quite clearly depicts its intention to directly connect the meaning with the
target language through the use of demonstration or visual aids with no recourse to the students’
native language (Diller, 1978). According to Franke (1884), a German scholar, a language could best
be taught by actively using it in the classroom.

Apart from having two different approaches, the two methods in discussion can be compared at
design and procedure or method level. Later their advantages and disadvantages will also be
discussed along with each one of their suitability in the present Bangladeshi teaching-learning
scenario.

For an approach to become a method, designing of an instructional system is essential. At this level
teacher’s role, learner’s role and the materials used are the three important issues of discussion. In
GTM, teacher’s role is traditional. She is the authority in the classroom, students follow whatever she
says since they need to learn what she knows. Students are asked to translate from one language to
the other. Often they are given to translate a literary passage upholding the culture of the people of
the target language community. Students study the grammar deductively i.e. they are given grammar
rules to memorize and later are asked to apply them to other examples. They memorize native
language equivalents for target language vocabulary words. Overall, the interaction is from the
teacher to the student and it happens in the native language by and large.

In Direct Method, although the teacher directs the class activities, students’ role is less passive than
in GTM. Teacher and students work in partnership in this method. In the teaching and learning
process in DM the teacher believes his students will associate meaning with the target language word
and he uses pantomime, pictures or realia in explaining it to students rather than using the native
language straightaway. Students, in fact, are made to interact a great deal in target language. Syllabus
in DM is usually based upon situations consisting of language people use in real situations e.g. at
bank, shopping malls, coffee-shops etc. Grammar is also taught but inductively and unlike GTM an
explicit grammar rule is never given out. Overall, the interaction in a class goes both ways from
teacher to student and vice-versa.

According to Anthony’s model, an approach is axiomatic whereas a method is procedural. Method is

the level at which choices are made about the skills to be taught, contents to be taught and order of
the content. In GTM, literary language is thought superior to spoken language and is therefore the
subject that students study. Culture is considered to be consisting of literature and fine arts. In stark
contrast to GTM, in DM common everyday speech is given an obvious preference. Culture is also
introduced as consisting of history of the people, geography of the country and information about
daily lives of the community belonging to the target language. Moreover, vocabularies and grammar
are given more emphasis. Reading and writing are the target skills in GTM when speaking and
listening are mostly neglected. Pronunciation receives little or no attention. On the other hand, in
DM, vocabulary is prioritized over grammar. Although all the four skills (reading, listening,
speaking and writing) are given importance, oral communication is seen as the basic. Pronunciation
receives attention right from the beginning as well. Whereas in GTM, little use of target language in
the classroom and immediate error correction are practiced by teacher, DM encourages the teacher
and students to interact extensively in the target language and employs techniques to help the
students to self-correct.
Some techniques of giving out lessons in the GTM classroom are reading comprehension question,
antonym/synonym, memorizing vocabularies, teaching grammar rules deductively, use of cognates,
writing paragraph or précis, translation of passage etc. In DM, students also practice reading
comprehension but they are made to answer the questions orally in the target language taking help
from the teacher and later they ask questions among themselves. Students also write passage but it is
written either from memory or from some clues given by the teacher initially. Conversation is also an
important part of the techniques in DM.

Every method has its advantages and disadvantages. GTM has certain advantages. It

 gives the students a solid grounding on grammar

 often makes the classroom environment challenging and quite intriguing
 demands few specialized skills on part of the teacher
 makes it easier to construct questions of vocabularies and grammar which can also be
objectively scored.
 gives learners access to foreign literature.

However, these advantages comprise only one side of the coin. There are some weaknesses of GTM
which were later removed by the Direct Method. They are as follows:
 Students have to spend a lot of time understanding language structure
 Often grammar lessons are not contextualized making it arduous on the part of the learners
 Classes are often boring and uninteresting often leaving the students with utter frustration.
 Target language is used in minimal quantity
 Omaggio points out the drawback of error correction in GTM as he says: “students are clearly
in a defensive learning environment where correct answers are always expected” (Omaggio
91).

With Direct Method extensive use of target language was introduced in the classroom along with
teacher-student and student-student interaction, teaching of grammar inductively through
spontaneous and direct use of the target language by learners to remove the above mentioned
disadvantages and to make the learning process engaging and interesting. However, some of the
more academically based proponents of the Reform Movement criticized Direct Method.

Direct Method requires a teacher who is either a native or has native-like fluency. Not all teachers
are proficient enough to do with the procedures of DM. Harvard Psychologist, Roger Brown (1973)
is against the verbal gymnastics by a teacher who tries to convey the meaning of Japanese words,
when translation would have been more efficient technique. (Brown,1973:5). Thus, it is true that
while trying to teach everything in the target language, situations are at times made complicated for
the teacher in DM. The British Applied Linguist Henry Sweet pointed out that Direct Method offered
innovation at the level of teaching but lacked a methodological basis. In spite of all these arguments,
Direct Method ultimately marked the beginning of the “methods era”.

In the context of a Bangladeshi classroom, it is not possible to carry out a method like DM
extensively due to the shortage of qualified and fluent teachers of a foreign language. Nevertheless, a
mix and match of the two methods, GTM and DM can be proposed. Translation in place of verbal
gymnastics can be accepted as a technique from GTM while the use of target language and student-
student interaction can be derived as techniques from Direct Method.

To conclude, a good teacher realizes the good sides of every method and either picks and chooses or
merges the methods to fulfill the demands of his own classroom environment.
References:

Anthony, E.M. (1963). Approach, method and technique. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New York: Oxford
University Press.

Richards, J.C. & Rogers, T.S. (2001). Approaches and Methods on Language Teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Sample answer 3

There is no one correct way of teaching a language. Do you agree with this statement?

A great variety of approaches and methods have sprouted in the field of language teaching in the last
half of the twentieth century. Since the decline of the Grammar Translation method and then the
Direct method in the early and mid-twentieth century, language teachers as well as researchers have
tried to come up with a “more effective” method and this search for “the best method” has resulted in
not the best method but a pool of new as well as not-so-new confusing and often contradictory
approaches and methods each of which was claimed to be able to successfully address the particular
challenges and demands of language teaching. This phenomenon can be attributed as much to the
changing demands of the new rapidly changing world as to the fact that there is no single best or
“correct” method for language teaching. Different methods cater to different learning needs of
different learners in different contexts and teachers, confronted by the uphill task of ensuring that
their learners make the most out of the given language course, pick different principles and
techniques from the methods they are familiar with and combine them in the best possible manner
depending on the learners –their age, background, proficiency level, particular needs, etc. –and the
administrative, cultural and other contextual factors. My argument in this essay is that whether a
method is good or bad is only a relative matter and different methods are good and effective in
different ways for different learners in different contexts. In order to prove this point, I shall consider
a number of approaches and methods, and examine their suitability for i) learners who could be
children, adolescents, adults, ii) learners who are beginners, at intermediate or advanced levels, iii)
learners who want to develop their reading, writing, speaking, or listening skill, and iv) classrooms
which could be large and without facilities for use of audio visual materials, as opposed to those
which are small and well-equipped.

The Grammar Translation method: The GTM can be used with learners of any age, but we do not
probably expect child learners to translate from the target language to their native language. Analysis
of grammatical rules is also something that makes it unsuitable for younger learners. But adolescents
and adult learners with varying proficiency levels may be able to carry out contrastive analysis and
benefit from this. Skillwise, the method will help develop grammar, reading skill and to some extent
writing skill as well, but listening and speaking are neglected so those who wish to improve those
skills will find the method ineffective. However, since this method requires very little use of modern
facilities, it may be used in modified form in large classes, in teaching situations where facilities are
minimal and where communication is not the primary goal.

The Direct method: This method can be used with learners of all ages after they have reached a
certain level of proficiency in English. Beginners with very little knowledge in English are likely to
face difficulties because of the monolingual use of the target language. Since the priority is reading
and speaking, students seeking to improve their writing skill may be at a disadvantage. Also, since
there is no deductive teaching of grammar, beginner-level adult learners will leave with inadequate
knowledge of grammar and consequently produce incorrect utterances in their speech or writing. The
Direct method requires small classes so in places like Bangladesh where large classrooms are a
reality, the method is virtually impracticable. However, in the English medium schools of
Bangladesh where students spend ten to twelve years studying different academic subjects in the
English medium, the direct method in modified form is widely used. Students are not given any
grammatical analysis but they are expected to pick up grammar as they are exposed to the language
for a long period of time.

The Audio-lingual method: The ‘Army method’ may be used with beginner learners of all age-
groups. The most common sentences, general vocabulary items, and the elementary sentence patterns
are effectively taught through repetition drills by the instructor who is the sole authority in the
classroom. However, learners who want to communicate at an advanced level will find the drills
boring and inadequate. Skill wise, this method will leave learners short of practice in reading and
writing, and those who wish to pursue serious academic study will find the classroom practices of
little use. Extensive drilling also makes it unsuitable for large classes.

The Situational Approach: Since language is presented against the backdrop of situations, this
approach is highly unlikely to be useful for children and adolescents who have very limited
knowledge and experience of real-life situations. Adults needing the target language for business or
travel purposes are likely to benefit from classes where this approach is used as all they need is the
limited number of sentences and expressions to “get by”. Skill wise, learners are highly unlikely to
achieve good command in reading and writing skills. Thus situational language teaching will be
inappropriate for advanced language learners for whom language learning is more than acquiring the
basic communicative skill. The use of dialogues and role plays also render it unsuitable for large
classes.

The Total Physical Response: As learners are expected to move a lot and respond physically most
children are going to like it but it is difficult to see how we can expect the same from adolescents
and adults. The method is suitable for beginner level learners, for those who start from zero but
extremely unsuitable for advanced learners. Thus we can expect this method to be used with children
in kindergartens, in nursery and play group classes, but it is hard to imagine this approach being used
beyond this initial stage of learning.

The Desuggestopedia: In case of learning a second or foreign language adults and teenagers face
“high filters” while children are generally unaffected by the “affective variables”. In
desuggestopedia, the mental barriers are removed with the help of soft background music, easy
chairs, and a relaxing environment. However, it would be well-nigh impossible to create such an
environment in most schools and colleges across Bangladesh. If at all, some private language schools
in the mega cities can try adopting this approach. Learners are asked to adopt new names from the
target language culture and create imaginary biographies. Learners are expected to come with some
prior knowledge, making it appropriate only for intermediate and advanced level learners. Thus
instructors can try this approach in small classes with adult learners.

The Communicative Approach: In the 1990s Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) was
introduced in the public schools in Bangladesh. CLT was thought to be the panacea for all language
teaching learning problems, regardless of learners’ age, proficiency level, needs, administrative set
up, etc. Within five years of the introduction of CLT, however, teachers from different institutions
began to voice their dissatisfaction with the new approach. Since school teachers were not given any
training in CLT, many of them struggled to implement the method inside the classroom. Classes are
generally large in mainstream Bangladesh context consisting of 80-120 students where group work
and pair work proves to be impossible! Many teachers were misled into thinking that grammar
teaching should be avoided and the result was an increasing number of mistakes and errors in the
writing of students. Even though the professed objective was to help learners develop all four skills,
learners continued to be evaluated on their abilities in reading and writing. There was therefore a
mismatch between what the learners were supposed to do in class and what they were evaluated on
later in the standardized nationa examinations. Thus CLT does not seem to be very effective with
adolescent learners in the academic setting in Bangladesh. Sinha (2006) observes:

… Communicative Language Teaching has many positive sides but

considering the state of teaching-learning situation and culture of
Bangladesh it can be clearly seen that this innovation is creating some
major difficulties for our teachers and learners. ... to what extent it can be
applicable in a country like Bangladesh is really a vital question.

However, in the private language schools, known as ‘coaching centres’, in typically small classrooms
and with adult and advanced level learners CLT appears to be successful in helping learners develop
speaking and communicative skills. We can therefore conclude that CLT is appropriate in developing
speaking skill in intermediate and advanced level learners in small classes. We cannot expect
beginners and young learners to benefit from CLT. For the large classes in Bangladesh modified
GTM has been claimed to produce better results than CLT.

The Content-Based Language Teaching (CBLT): Recently, CBLT, also known as Content Language
Integrated Learning (CLIL) has been advocated by experts for the mainstream schools and colleges
across Bangladesh as students at the primary and secondary level are expected to prepare themselves
for the tertiary level education which is in English. Students in Bangladesh get their education in
Bangla, the vernacular, before stepping into the more serious university education. Students at school
are supposed to learn English not as much to communicate in English with foreigners but to be able
to handle the rigours of serious advanced level education. They are expected to be able to read the
coursebooks written in English, understand class lectures, and write assignments in English. Since
CBLT proposes to integrate all four skills across academic disciplines, student learners are expected
to benefit from it. For the same reason CBLT may not be the right choice for adult learners
undertaking the language course for reasons other than academic.

Thus it is obvious that there is no one single “correct” method for teaching language. Learners vary
in their needs, proficiency levels, age, background, etc. as much as the teaching situations –in some
cases we find well-equipped classrooms with proper sitting arrangements while in some others really
large classes with no facility other than a chair and some benches. Whereas for children TPR, ALM
and CLIL are effective, for adult learners CLT, Cooperative Language Learning (which is not
discussed above) and Desuggestopedia will be more suitable. Whereas for beginners Direct method,
ALM, TPR can be useful, for intermediate and advanced level learners we should rather opt for CLT.
Then of course we need to distinguish between the academic setting and the more independent
private language schools. Whereas in the private teaching situations Direct method, ALM and CLT
can be implemented with good measures of success, the same methods fail spectacularly in public
schools where English is taught as an academic subject and where the focus is more on reading and
writing skills than on speaking or listening. To conclude, a method which is effective in a given
situation with a given set of learners might easily fail to deliver the goods in a different teaching
learning situation with a different set of learners who vary from the members of the first set in terms
of learning goals, age, proficiency levels, etc.

References

Ellis, R. (1997). Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Richards, J. & T. Rodgers. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (2nd ed.).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sinha, B. S. (2006). “Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), and English for Today (EFT)”. The
Arts Faculty Journal, Vol. 1.

NB. All these sample essays have been written by students and are reproduced here to serve as
guidelines for learners. These are not meant to be memorized for examinations! Students are advised
to prepare their own responses based on critical understanding of theoretical concepts and
contextual issues.