FINAL ASSIGNMENT 21
TheGrammar Translation Method is Outdated and should not be used in the21st-Century Classroom
Acquiringproficiency in a second language is considered by Aqel (2013) asbeing a global occurrence. On that note, it is important tounderstand that language teaching in the 18thand the 19thcenturies was characterized by methods such as the GrammarTranslation Method (GTM) as confirmed by Howeh (1984). It isimportant to acknowledge that GTM was dominant in the aforementionedcenturies. However, in the 21stcentury, the usage of GTM can be considered to be outdated in thestrictest sense, given the transformations that have been present inthe century. Kong (2011) points out that in the 21stcentury, foreign language teaching has seen some majortransformations, for the most part, and I couldn’t agree more. Kong(2011) affirms that foreign language teaching scene has transformedinto taking a rather instrumentality-centered outlook. In the ‘newoutlook,` there is the placement of on the practical ability to learna particular language, and most importantly, in communicating. Asconfirmed by Chang (2011), GTM may have been widely practiced by dintof its assumed ability to make language learning ‘easy.` The 21stcentury, which is noted as being the era of highly socialindividuals, using GTM, which is non-communicative is a totalinjustice.
Whenlooking at the nitty-gritty of GTM as was applied in the pastcenturies (19thand 20thcenturies), the technique is not quite practical in the presentinstrumental world, given the fact that the method pays littleattention to the oral use of languages (University of Setif, 2013).Also, the use of the mother tongue in the translation process doesnot confer justice to learning in any case, it impairs the processgiven the dependence that is created to the first language (Conti,2016). Additionally, GTM draws from literary works meaning that it isunreal and impractical, a scenario that does not motivate students toeither learn or communicate the target language. GTM can, therefore,be deemed to be a dull approach as mentioned by Bowen (2006),especially when put into application in a ‘wholesale manner.’Also, GTM’s emphasis on accuracy particularly regardingmemorization does not spark the interest of communicating in thetarget language.
Literaturethat has been presented by Esmaeil and Asl (2015) argues that GTM maybe considered to work as a thinking tool in language learning givenits non-communicative abilities.
Inthe 21stcentury where fluency, as well as an outspoken character, isrequired, in plain language, GTM may not be the right tool to conferforeign language learning to students. The ‘GTM teacher` who isseen as being authoritative (University Info Online, 2016), has to beloosened, otherwise the 21st-centurystudent will be rendered tongue-tied, which is not in their true‘audio’ nature.
TheCommunicative Approach is an Easy Way to avoid Lesson Planning
Avital tool that has been employed in the learning process is theCommunicative Approach. The CA as mentioned by Howeh (1984) hasgained popularity in recent times particularly among teachers. TheCommunicative Learning Tools, as confirmed by Howeh (1984), have beenidentified to be appealing to the imagination of educators. The CA isconsidered to be a ‘natural’ means of learning languages (thoughartificial in development) as per Howeh (1984). Pioneers of thecommunicative approach like Sauveur confirm the fact that it made theteaching process, a ‘magical experience’ (Howeh, 1984). Greatteachers like Sauveur placed emphasis on intensive oral work withwritten texts functioning as reminder supplements (Howeh, 1984).Learning, according to the Communicative Approach teachers wascentered on lessons organized in the form of dialogues, whichfacilitates the creation of an impression of a scenario. In suchclasses, students end up garnering communication competence, asconfirmed by Richards (2005). The utilization of the communicativeapproach can facilitate language learning, with the absence of aplanned out lesson.
Therole of a teacher in the CLT, according to Ansarey (2012) is actingas both a communication facilitator and an independent party whofunctions as a guide. In the early lessons of Sauveur according toHoweh (1984), he took his students through intensive oral learningbefore they could commence using his textbook. In the end, heachieved success and what can be drawn from his teaching is thatdisregard to lesson planning was present. Sauveur allowed the‘earnest questions’ that led to other questions, which he askedin his lessons to guide his teaching process.
Inmodern day learning, student interaction is deemed to be a veryinstrumental asset. Teaching has for the most involved pre-planningplus the actual planning exercises (Robertson and Acklam, 2000).Robertson and Acklam, (2000) acknowledge that a lesson plan has tohave properties that foster student engagement, studying andactivation. However, when looking at the techniques in communicativelearning, the use of a lesson plan becomes baseless. In simple terms,and as per Efrizal (2012), the depiction of real situations isimperative in learning a given language, as opposed to grammarpatterns. CLT can engage, instigate studying and activate studentssimilarly to a lesson plan.
Insummary, the students in a class where there is the practice of theCommunicative Approach, have the ability to record fluency, mastery,and confidence of speaking a target language and they also tend toenjoy a class more, which is a mutual win.
TheTask-Based Approach should mainly be taught in Adult Classes
Adultclasses, according to Scrivener (2005), are comprised of students whotend to be restrained and who would not speak openly regarding whatthey want or require. In other words, a teacher in an adult class maynot be aware of the feelings, boredom (if any) or the lack ofengagement in his/ her students. Adult students top the list when itcomes to missing classes, writing feedbacks that are negative as wellstaging complaints to the management of their schools. Additionally,adult learners, according to Spratt, Pulverness, and Williams (n.d)because of their maturity, can maintain stillness for longer periodsof time and can concentrate more. Other features of adult studentsare that they learn in abstract means, can control their pain, havethe ability to plan their behavior, and have experience in the lifethat they have lived. Also, adults are aware of their actions. Giventhe different characteristics of adult students, a solution that canwork for the class is the use of Task-Based Approaches in thelearning process.
TheTBA is centered on the completion of a central task as mentioned bythe British Council (2015). When it comes to learning a languageusing the TBA, the conclusion of the core task by the studentsdetermines how the students learned the said language (BritishCouncil, 2015). The clear advantages of using the TBA is what fosterslearning in adult students and as a result mitigates the hurdles thatare experienced when teaching adult students using other learningapproaches that portray the teacher as an authoritative figure.
Oneadvantage is that the students can exercise control of languagelearning. Secondly, a natural scenario is created during the learningprocess, where the experiences of the students are considered to beof vital importance. Additionally, the adult students learning usingthe TBA can have full exposure during their learning process. Also,the adult students, by TBA, can learn in agreement with their needsas students and not as per the structure laid out in the course bookor by the decision made by the classroom teacher. The students arealso able to learn and display their communicative skills. Finally,in a TBA class, the adult students may find their lessons to be bothenjoyable and motivational.
Withthe above in mind, it is apparent that adult students can benefitfrom the task-based approach to learning when applied in the learningactivities. The use of TBA can reverse the characteristics thatidentify adult students, as mentioned earlier given that they will bein a position to express themselves effectively with communication.
TheUse of Technology in Language Classes all over the World is a must
Thedevelopment of particular interest, according to Warschauer (1996),has been noted in the use of the Computer Assisted Language Learning(CALL). In fact, the development of CALL has taken place in threephases within a span of over three decades as mentioned by Warschauer(1996). Warschauer (1996) confirms that the use and the penetrationof computers in homes and schools have kindled the interest oflanguage teachers who have been determined to incorporate their usein learning. The researcher, therefore, affirms that the usage oftechnology in language classes must be fostered worldwide.
Amaralaand Meurers (2011) acknowledged the use of Intelligent Computer AidedLanguage Learning as being critical in foreign language learning.Golonka et al., (2014) held that technology has been useful in theteaching of FL. Some of the effective techniques that have beenpresented by Golonka et al., (2014) in FL include the usage of socialcomputing devices, mobile tools as well as other portable devices,just to mention a few. Golonka et al., (2014) further held in theirstudies that technology can promote FL pronunciation (particularly inAutomatic Speech Recognition).
Giventhe success that has been recorded with the use of technology in FLlearning as mentioned in the works of Golonka et al., (2014) it isevident that the use of technology in foreign language learning isimperative.
Onthat note, the use of technology must be widespread in the wholeworld to make sure that schools in the world countries benefitequally in learning languages, foreign ones per se, in as far asfluency, proficiency, and accuracy is concerned.
Classesshould always have the same structure so that the students know whatto expect their anxiety levels are thus lowered
AccordingtoBrophy(2013), learning tends to be viewed by students as being both fun andexciting, particularly when it goes hand in hand with their needs.Brophy (2013) further affirms that learning becomes more exhilaratingwhen the teachers in question promote hands-on activities. In otherwords, the role of teachers in motivating students to learn cannot beover emphasized. Teachers have a vital role to play in lowering theanxiety of their students by providing some form of structure in thedaily learning activities. However, the provision of a similarstructure to students` yields monotony meaning that students end upbeing demotivated.
Hattie(2012) adds that routine expertise in teaching where similarstrategies are employed day in and out must be shunned. Adaptiveclassrooms as mentioned by Hattie (2012) allows for the adoption ofadaptive strategies, which fosters the learning process.
Whatis critical and is, in fact, emphasized by Hattie (2012) andRobertson and Acklam (2000) is the need for having adaptive orrather, flexible classes.
Icould not agree more given the understanding that with an adaptiveclassroom, a teacher is better placed to establish whether learningis taking place or not, or whether students are motivated to learn ornot. With the shift from routine classrooms to adaptive ones,teachers can be able to know how to come up with adaptive strategiesthat will allow students to not only learn, but also to ensure thatstudents learning goals or objectives are met.
Theresearcher at this juncture can confirm that learning structure isvital as pointed out by Robertson and Acklam (2000), however,flexibility, adaptability, and variety ought to be incorporated inthe aforementioned structures, in the bid to ensure that learningamong students, happens.
Therole of a Teacher in a Language Class is that of a Facilitator inLearning as well as a Role Model
Whileteachers work towards imparting education to their students, theymanage the activities that learners engage in while in the classroom.In the hunt to offer the aforementioned classroom management,teachers take up differential roles (Spratt, Pulverness, andWilliams, n.d). The roles that teachers assume are paramount to thestudent learning process, exemplified by the way they take up variousbehaviors at certain points of the classroom lesson (Spratt,Pulverness, and Williams, n.d). Teachers take up roles of beingfacilitators and role models for students, particularly in languageclassrooms.
Ina language class and while assuming their roles as facilitators, asidentified by Giri (2011), teachers provide authentic languagescenarios, create a learning environment that is not threatening, andthey make sure that students are in a place where they can interact.Also, teachers push their students to make sure that they produce‘good output’ and finally, provide feedback on the said output.The facilitating role of teachers, in short, ensures that studentshave all the tools that they require for them to communicate a givenlanguage (Briggs, 2014).
Whenlooking at the role of teachers as role models, it is apparent thatthis role is important for the learning of languages. Resmovitz(2011) mentioned that students acquire benefit from teachers who theyfeel are just like them. In learning a particular language, forinstance, French, as mentioned by the Government of Canada (2013),language teachers, when acting as role models can give their studentsa lived learning experience. Also, teachers also offer students withthe opportunity to discover learning of the target language.
Itis, therefore, clear that the role that language teachers play asfacilitators and role models helps students learn at certain stagesof a lesson. The question that one ought to seek an answer for iswhat age and level of the students are in do the teachers assumeappropriate aspects of facilitating or role modeling. Whenappropriate roles are taken up by teachers, as earlier mentioned,language learning lessons will tend to run in a smooth and efficientmanner (Spratt, Pulverness, and Williams, n.d).
Teachingspeaking is more important than the teaching of other skills.
Rabbitt(2015) affirms that language teaching, particularly of the Englishlanguage has been broken down into multiple domains of writing,speaking, listening and reading. It is worth to make the statementthat oral communication is the root to gaining literacy, in agreementwith the views brought forward by Fisher, Frey, and Rothenberg(2016). The fact that oral language is critical in achieving literacysheds light that speaking is vital when it comes to learning.Learners, according to NCLRC (2003) consider the ability to speak asbeing critical in the knowledge of a language. Out of the fourdomains, speaking is the most superior skill that ought to be taught.
Learners,according to the NCLRC (2003) affirm that fluency is much moresuperior to abilities of reading, writing or language comprehension.Speaking is, therefore considered to be the most important yetdifficult skill in the communicative learning skills, which learnershave to navigate through (Nombre, Segura and de Junio, 2012).Speaking allows for the assessment of the progress of learning whenit comes to oral communication. With the above information, it can bededuced clearly that teaching speaking is fundamental in the learningof languages.
Additionally,teaching speaking is advantageous to students, while in theirpursuits of learning. The British Council (2005) identifies that thereasons behind teaching language speaking skills are for motivationand simply because human beings are `oral` in nature. The learning ofspeaking in a given language allows students to garner success inlearning and in later life of a student (Kayi, 2012). Provision of anenvironment where students can learn permits the occurrence ofmeaningful communication.
Studentswho are learning languages can develop interactive skills that arefundamental for daily living (Unisa, n.d). Speaking activitiesfacilitate gaining the aforementioned interactive skills. In linewith the standpoint of Kayi (2012), it can be summarized by theresearcher that teaching speaking is paramount in student learning oflanguages.
L1should never be used in a Foreign Language Class
Theuse of mother tongue (commonly termed as L1) in the learning of aforeign language is considered to be a highly debatable subject asidentified by Pan and Pan (2010). Kayaoğlu (2012) confirms the factof the current debate, to the extent that scholars are divided as towhether to shun or praise the usage of L1 in FL learning. The use ofL1, as mentioned by Pan and Pan (2010) has been identified to bemundane in the teaching of FL in a majority of schools. The usage ofL1 in FL learning language, in line with the perspective, offersinterference in acquiring a target language and so should not be usedin an FL class.
TheTL learning interference, by the over-reliance on the L1, has seencriticism from some stakeholders in the education sector. Some of thereasons that have been presented concerning the disregard of theusage of L1 in foreign language learning is that one, a habit maydevelop to use L1 when learning a TL (particularly in the phase ofdifficulty) thus impairing learning progress. Secondly, L1 may createa misleading barrier, while learning a target language (Rhalmi,2009). Thirdly, errors are likely to manifest when L1 is used in theforeign language learning. Finally, L1 hinders the acquisition ofinput that is a fundamental prerequisite for learning a given foreignlanguage.
I,therefore, second that L1 should never be used in class where aforeign language is being taught. Students that are learning aparticular FL must be exposed to the input related to a specific TLfor them to move towards the development of proficiency in thelanguage. When students use their L1 in the learning of an FL, theyend up being deprived of their learning capacities, because of theinput that is offered to them. Well, some studies have sought toidentify that the bilingual approach in FL learning is advantageousto learning, as identified by Mirza, Mahmud, and Jabbar (2012). Thecatch, however, that the proponents who support the usage of L2 inlearning L1 mention are the ‘moderation aspect.` The question thatlingers is how ‘moderation` of L1 usage can, in fact, beascertained.
Inconclusion, not unless a sound measure of L1 moderation in L2learning is identified by scholars, risking the proficiency in the L2student learning should neither be present nor debated. With theabove information, I deduce that L1 should be eliminated in L2learning.
AllErrors should be corrected On the Spot to avoid Fossilization
Theattitude that is presented towards errors in language learning hasbeen identified to be rather contradictory, as determined by Nozadze(2012). Before proceeding, it is essential to note that man is toerr, with full knowledge of the above, it can thus be put forwardthat errors will always exist in the language learning process andthat the attitude that manifests towards the error occurrencedetermines the success in the language proficiency of the learners.On that note, the researcher seeks to rest the case that on-the-spotcorrection of all language errors should not be employed as a meansfor avoiding fossilization. The researcher takes note of criticalinformation by taking the aforementioned side, as presented below.
Correctinglanguage errors, which if not addressed transform into beingfossilized ought to be done in a strategic manner. By strategy, theauthor means that the correction must be done in such manner that thelearner feels encouraged and motivated to proceed with the learningprocess. As mentioned by Scott (2015), if a student makes a languageerror while speaking, on the point correction by interruption may notbe a good idea. The use of other means that allow the students toacknowledge their language errors can be employed when languageerrors are made. The use of methods like drills, songs, writing,recordings and peer correction can be used to correct language errorswhile taking note of the ‘interest group’ of students.
Whensome of the techniques pointed out as above are utilized, languagestudents are likely to find corrections and learning to be somewhatexhilarating and fun. Language correction should be done in such amanner where students discover the errors that they make and as aresult, correct them by themselves. What the instructors ought toknow is that corrections should not be done in an on-the-point manner(similarly to a cop stopping a car). Errors should be treated as anatural occurrence, going by the earlier mentioned adage of a manbeing prone to error, and only attitudes that are positive in natureshould be employed to correct the said errors. When languageinstructors understand the need of positivity in correcting students,then self-confidence will be built on the learners, and they will,therefore, understand that errors are not sins, rather a commonhappening in the learning process.
Creatinga classroom that is stress-free (avoiding on-the-spot interruptingerror correction) is important, and as mentioned by Constantinides(2011), life is rather too short for being uptight and seekingperfection in language learning. Instead, teaching students to becritical and allowing them to identify their language errors forthemselves is much worthwhile.
FormalTesting is an Indispensable part of a Language Course
Sah(2012) affirms that teaching and learning function in a complementarymanner, in the sense that both processes appear in a way that can besaid to simultaneous. In the bid to ensure that the aforementionedcomplementarity exists, the adoption of measures that confirm thesame must be in place. One such measure is the use of formal testing,which is at times referred to as examinations, assessment, evaluationor even measurement, as mentioned by Sah (2012). Green (2013) definestesting as being a critical tool in the eliciting of performance thataids the judgment of the instructor concerning the knowledge,abilities, and skills of a learner, or a candidate for that matter.Formal testing is, therefore, an indispensable part of learning alanguage.
Thelanguage candidate provides a response to the prompt presented in anexam, which is later on gauged by the use of a scale given in amarking scheme (Green, 2013). The outcome of the instructor`sjudgment is referred to as a score, which is then recorded, in aformal manner.
Inaddition to showing a newfound or a learned skill to others throughexplanations, judging a learner’s understanding and mastery ofskill, through testing is imperative. In fact, Bransford,Brown, and Cocking(2000) mentioned that formal testing allows for the learner to makehis/her thinking visible not only to themselves but their teachersand peers as well. Formal testing, according to the views of Green(2013) is a form of allowing a student to display the skills thatthey have garnered over a particular period, from the classroom.
Ina given testing or assessment in a language course, it is critical tonote that the main aim is the identification of two crucial goals, asestablished by Green (2013). One such agenda is the determination ofthe progress towards achieving a particular educational or learninggoal and occurs in a given language program. The other goal is theidentification of the extent of proficiency, where in this case, thedetermination of whether or not the skills and abilities of a learnertally with those of a given standard. As mentioned by Ketabi, andKetabi (2014), formal assessments are planned in a systematic mannerand are designed for the purpose of collecting data concerning agiven learner’s achievement, within a predetermined time frame.
Giventhe above information, and with the input from ETS (n.d) in thestatement that classroom assessments are critical educational tools,when properly developed and interpreted, which function to monitorthe learning process, it is perceptible that formal testing/assessments are indeed indispensable in a language class. Given thefact that the outcome of formal testing is intended for the greatergood of the student, in as far as mapping out of teaching andlearning strategies by a given instructor, for improvement purposesis concerned.
StudentsLearn what they are taught
Studentsdo not necessarily learn what they are taught. A distinction ought tobe drawn between learning and teaching because there is a differencethat rests between the two. It is worrying when there is the thoughtthat learning takes place during teaching, when in fact, that may notbe close to happening. In other words, teaching does not alwaysequate to learning, however much the two processes ‘appear’ toexist in a simultaneous manner.
Teachingaccording to Koshal (2015), is defined as the passing of knowledgeregarding a particular subject, to students in a given class.Teaching is mainly centered on instructing or rather showing studentswhat they are supposed to do. Learning, on the other hand, as definedby Koshal (2015) refers to the gaining of knowledge, by dint ofstudying. Additionally, learning does not only relate to theacquisition of information but the garnering of skills, attitudes,values, and behavior as well.
Withthe above definitions, it is apparent that learning is dependent onself-effort and not by just being taught. Learning, in fact, requirestotal concentration and the attention of the student. No one can‘plant understanding` into the brains of a learner. Knowing theabove, it then becomes clear that there are those instances whereteachers put in too much effort when teaching their students, and yetno learning takes place. In other scenarios, a teacher may not evenhave the perfect teaching skills, yet his/her students learn a greatdeal.
Thereis the misconception that rests among the major stakeholders in theeducation sector, with a bias to the parents, where they believe thatwhen a student is attentive in class and assumes a somewhat passiverole, is enough to precipitate the learning process. Well, I willleave the aforementioned reasoning as simply being ‘fallacy,` giventhe lack of accuracy that the view holds, however much the view isbelieved by many to be very true. The position that is taken at thispoint, therefore, is that students do not learn what they taught,rather they learn from what they set out to discover or explore by ontheir own.
Insummary ‘learning` positions the student at the center stage asopposed to teaching, which acknowledges the place of the teacher.During learning, students portray personal effort, grasp knowledge,which further propels the grasping a concept.
Studentscan learn both Language and Academic content (for example science andhistory) simultaneously in a Class where the Subject Matter is taughtin their Second Language
Classroominstruction, as per Hernandez (2003) is characterized by being rathercomplex, given the demands that manifest in the curricula as well asthe diversity in the linguistic abilities of the student population.One such aspect that is considered to be somewhat complicated is thecontent-based instruction. Content-based instruction, as noted byCambridgeInternational Examinations(2014) defines the development of a given subject content knowledge,by the use of a second language. Content-based instruction refers tothe teaching of an academic subject, in concurrence with the secondlanguage skills and abilities. Students have the capacity to learnlanguages as well as content from other subjects, when they aretaught using L2.
Shang(2006) argues that because of the use of collaborative contentcentered literature teachings in an FL class e.g. English, thelearners can grasp critical abilities to communicate using theEnglish language. Ward and Karet (n.d) confirm that the content-basedinstructional learning (for second language learning), is consideredto be very well developed, particularly among instructors that dealwith teaching languages. According to Ward and Karet (n.d), the kindof learning that boosts language proficiency while a learner takescontent course in another academic subject has been noted to work.
Theprinciple that distinguishes learning, which is content-based, isthat the learning process does not revolve around ‘the L2language,’ rather it leans towards grasping the content subject(Ward and Karet, n.d). The benefit of content-based learning, asbeing a vital tool in teaching languages dates back to almost fivedecades ago (given that it was first described in 1986), asidentified by Ward and Karet (n.d). It is of critical importance tonote that certain terms related to content learning such as CLIL(content and language integrated learning) have been described sincethe 90s era. The practice of CLIL has, however, been noted to havebeen presented for quite a long while, with the root being traced tothe present day Iraq. One language that has seen the application ofCLIL includes the vast usage of Latin, which was imminent in thelearning institutions in Europe. It can thus be deduced thatglobalization promoted the essence of CLIL.
CLILis an old practice that has seen evolution since its introduction tothe learning world. The fact that content learning in an L2 class isin the application in the current world, it is evident that CLIL is aproduct of evolution. Instructors and students alike have utilized inthe past, and they continue to use CLIL in learning. Students, in thelong run, are exposed to an environment where they can learn bothlanguage and content, by going the CLIL path.
Thepersonal reflection section below will address the points of view ofthe author regarding certain aspects that are vital in the languagecourse. The highlights of the course will be highlighted as well asthe most interesting bit, evident throughout the course. The authorwill then summarize by looking at the area of further study that maybe considered in the future.
Learningpoints of the Course
Thereis no objection that the course has been very enlightening to me. Ihave been able to learn a lot in as far as concepts in learninglanguages, names, history, terminologies and even practical advice.Firstly, I have learned a great deal on offering practical advice inas far as language learning is concerned. I believe that I can advisethe stakeholders in education concerning certain key areas oflanguage learning. The first advice that I feel is important to me isthe one that deals with distinguishing between learning and teaching.I am of the view the fact that a majority of parents and teachersthink that teaching and learning occur hand in hand. I will refer toholding the view that when learning has taken place teaching musthave been done prior, as being ‘ fallacy.` The misconception has tobe changed because it is in fact not always true. With knowledge onthe above, I can advise instructors to understand how their studentsare learning languages. In addition, I believe that I can advise onthe importance and the role that technology plays in learninglanguages. I also believe that I can offer enlightenment on how tohandle different classes of students and the method of teaching thataugur well with the particular category of students. I also believethat I can advise on the element of content-based learning given themuch that I have grasped regarding its role in learning.
Inaddition to learning how to offer practical advice, I have learnedabout new terms, with the most important one being fossilization.Fossilization defines the phenomenon of language error making in alanguage class, which is different from both the mother tongue andthe target language. With the knowledge of the terminology andknowing what it takes for fossilization to take place, I think that Iam well armed in handling correction of language errors and how thecorrection ought to be done in a reasonable manner to ensure that thelearner understands his/her mistakes and work towards correctingthem.
Thepoints as mentioned above were critical learning areas for methroughout the course.
MostInteresting Concept of the Course
Iwas captivated by the history of language learning. The history of L2learning has offered me with the enlightenment that I deem as vitalfor any student taking a linguistics course. I understand that thehistory of something is powerful in making identification of thestrides that have been taken to reach the present and what can bedone to better the future. I believe that the rich history oflanguage learning is setting the pace for the introduction of new andintelligent concepts that aid language learning. One such conceptthat has been introduced in language learning is the useincorporation of technology, which is being exploited and widelystudied by researchers of late.
Oneaspect of the history that made me appreciate the history of languagelearning is the transition that defines what the grammar-translationapproach and the communicative approach. The most interesting part ofthe course was looking at the evolution of language learning,particularly when looking at the approaches as above mentioned.Understanding the principles that define both methods as noted inscholarly books and journals made me appreciate language learningthat is evident in presently.
Iwould say at this juncture that the evolution of language learninghas some elements of evolution on the part of learning and learnersalike. For instance, the 18thand 19th-centurylearning were centered on the teacher being the ultimate instructoror in other words ‘the dictator` of the learning process, where theteachers took center stage of the language classroom. Theseclassrooms were mainly authoritative and were based on the transferof rules from the teacher to the learner. The students in theseclasses were portrayed as being passive, by simply taking the outputprovided by the teacher. This kind of language teaching valuedaccuracy and mastery of the writing skills. The deficiencies thatwere noted when using the GT approach were the inspiration for theevolution that led to the CA of language learning.
Aspart of the history of language learning, I have understood that theera that the learners are in, defines the shape that the learningprocess will take place. When looking at the 21st-centurylearners, they are somewhat audio-lingual to the extent that usingthe written approach in teaching language does not quite augur wellwith them. What I am trying to point out is that the 21st-centurylearning has evolved to having ‘ voice.` The CA of languagelearning is vital for the present day highly social learners. I havelearned from the history of language teaching that what the CA buildson revolves around the transfer of communicative skills, whichfurther kindles language fluency and proficiency on the part of thelearner.
Additionally,and still under the CA, I was able to appreciate that the languagelearning approach is based on the epistemology of the theory ofskill. By this, I mean that the CA prepares the learner for the realworld by providing him/ her with the necessary skills that will allowcommunicative survival in reality. The CA also acknowledges the placeof the learner, which is a total shift from the GT approach. Theroles of the teacher are defined rather differently in CA, a majorrole being head of facilitation, as opposed to dictating the learningprocess.
Stillon the history of language learning, and aside from the learningapproaches that have been employed, I have identified that languagelearning incorporates other concepts. Some of the critical conceptsthat define language learning include content-learning that is vitalto the learning process. The bottom line is that language learninghas a rich history and it continues to make history in the present,which will be studied in the future. The knowledge of this fact isjust amazing.
Areaof Further Study
Ifound most parts of the course to be very informative andenlightening. However, narrowing down to the one aspect that was ofvital importance to me was the study on the incorporation oftechnology to the learning process of language. This part of thecourse intrigued me, and I would wish to study more in-depth, afterthe completion of the class.
Inthe present fast paced world where technology advancements arechurned to the market every given minute, I find the subjectimportant to the education sector, particularly in language learning.Presently, it is quite hard to find a class that does not make use oftechnology in the classroom. The instructors in language classes, inparticular, are coming out strongly to tap the benefits of usingtechnology in the learning process.
Inlanguage classes, technology has been employed to not only enhancelearning but to assist the process. Technology in a language class isnecessary for offering support to teaching, engaging learners,providing examples that pertain to the target language that is beinglearned, and simply, providing a connection to the students to theculture that is a characteristic of the target language culture.Knowing that the above mentioned are the roles that technology playin language classes, taking an in-depth look at the subject is ofvital importance. In so doing, I would be able to understand theessence of FL learning and how technology advancements can instigateimprovement in the process. I would want to research more ontechnology application in education, while keeping in mind on whatmust be done to foster language learning in schools in the future, inthe global perspective.
Additionally,it is imperative that technology utilization in the education sectorcan spark changes to the instruction of language. With the shifts inthe instruction, language learning experiences are likely to beenhanced. Language education can be expanded to vast pools ofstudents, by dint of programs like the long distance learning.Lastly, I would also look at the level of technology tools expertisethat is necessary, on the part of the learner and the instructor, foreffective language instruction.
Havingresearched on the above topics, I would then be in a position toshare with the rest of the world as well as enlighten others using myfindings. As a result, I hope to spread the message that languagelearning has got a long way to go, and with the incorporation oftechnology, learning can be better, enlightening, fun andexhilarating.
Insummary, it is imperative that the concept of learning languages issomething that will stick with humanity for quite a while. The richhistory of language learning alongside other vital attributesfunction to propel language education towards becoming better andeffective.
Amaral,L. A., & Meurers, D. (2011). On using intelligentcomputer-assisted language learning in real-life foreign languageteaching and learning. ReCALL, 23(01), 4-24.
Ansarey,D. (2012). Communicative language teaching in EFL contexts: Teachersattitude and perception in Bangladesh. ASA University Review, 6(1),61-78.
Aqel,I. M. (2013). The effect of using Grammar Translation Method onacquiring English as a foreign language. International Journal ofAsian Social Science, 3(12), 2469-2476.
Bowen,T. (2006). Teaching approaches the grammar-translation method.Retrieved December 27, 2016, fromhttp://www.onestopenglish.com/methodology/methodology/teaching-approaches/teaching-approaches-the-grammar-translation-method/146493.article
Bransford,J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn.
Briggs,M. (2014). Second Language Teaching and Learning: the Roles ofTeachers, Students, and the Classroom Environment.
BritishCouncil. (2005). Teaching speaking skills 2 – overcoming classroomproblems. Retrieved January 01, 2017, fromhttps://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/teaching-speaking-skills-2-overcoming-classroom-problems
BritishCouncil. (2015). A Task-based approach. Retrieved December 24, 2016,fromhttp://esol.britishcouncil.org/content/teachers/staff-room/teaching-articles/task-based-approach
Brophy,J. E. (2013). Motivatingstudents to learn.Routledge.
CambridgeInternational Examinations. (2014).Getting started: supportingbilingual learners Cambridge programs for multilingual contexts.RetrievedJanuary 01, 2017, fromhttp://www.cie.org.uk/images/172144-supporting-bilingual-learners.pdf
Chang,S. C. (2011). A contrastive study of grammar translation method andcommunicative approach in teaching English grammar. English LanguageTeaching, 4(2), 13.
Constantinides,M. (2011). How do you deal with fossilized errors and help studentsimprove their accuracy? Retrieved January 01, 2017, fromhttp://eltchat.org/wordpress/summary/how-do-you-deal-with-fossilized-errors-and-help-students-improve-their-accuracy-eltchat-summary-23022011/
Conti,G. (2016). Listening instruction (PART 1)–How the brain processesaural input, instructional challenges, and implications for theL2-classroom.
Efrizal,D. (2012). Improving Students` Speaking through CommunicativeLanguage Teaching Method at Mts Ja-Shaq, Sentot Ali Basa IslamicBoarding School of Bengkulu, Indonesia. International Journal ofHumanities and Social Science, 2(20), 127-134.
Esmaeil,A., & Asl, H. (2015). Comparative Study of Grammar TranslationMethod (GTM) and Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) in LanguageTeaching Methodology.
ETS.(n.d). Linking Classroom Assessment with Student Learning. RetrievedJanuary 05, 2017, fromhttps://www.ets.org/Media/Tests/TOEFL_Institutional_Testing_Program/ELLM2002.pdf
Fisher,D., Frey, N., & Rothenberg, C. (2016). Chapter 1. Why Talk IsImportant in Classrooms. Retrieved January 01, 2017, fromhttp://www.ascd.org/publications/books/108035/chapters/Why-Talk-Is-Important-in-Classrooms.aspx
Giri,K, M. (2011). Teachers as a facilitator. Retrieved January 01, 2017,from https://neltachoutari.wordpress.com/2011/02/01/1389/
Golonka,E. M., Bowles, A. R., Frank, V. M., Richardson, D. L., & Freynik,S. (2014). Technologies for foreign language learning: a review oftechnology types and their effectiveness. Computer Assisted LanguageLearning, 27(1), 70-105.
Green,A. (2013). Exploring language assessment and testing: Language inaction. Routledge.
Hattie,J. (2012). Visiblelearning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning.Routledge.
Hernandez,A. (2003). Making content instruction accessible for English languagelearners. Englishlearners: Reaching the highest level of English literacy,125-149.
Howeh,A. P. R. (1984). A History of English Language Teaching. OxfordUniversity Press. Print.
Kayaoğlu,M. N. (2012). The use of mother tongue in foreign language teachingfrom teachers‟ practice and perspective. Pamukkale ÜniversitesiEğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32(2).
Kayi,H. (2012). Teaching Speaking: Activities to promote speaking in asecond language. Новейшие научные достижения,12(2012).
Ketabi,S., & Ketabi, S. (2014). Classroom and formative assessment insecond/foreign language teaching and learning. Theory and Practice inLanguage Studies, 4(2), 435.
Kong,N. (2011). Establishing a comprehensive English teaching patterncombining the communicative teaching method and thegrammar-translation method. English Language Teaching, 4(1), 76
Koshal.(2015). Difference Between Teaching and Learning. Retrieved January05, 2017, fromhttp://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-teaching-and-vs-learning/
Mirza,M. G. H., Mahmud, K., & Jabbar, J. (2012). Use of other languagesin English language teaching at Tertiary Level: A case study onBangladesh. English Language Teaching, 5(9), 71.
NCLRC.(2003). Teaching Speaking. Retrieved January 01, 2017, fromhttp://www.nclrc.org/essentials/speaking/spindex.htm
NOMBRE,A. Y., Segura Alonso, R., & de Junio, C. (2012). The importanceof teaching listening and speaking skills.
Nozadze,A. (2012). Dealing with Fossilized Errors while Teaching Grammar.Journal of Education, 1(1), 41-46.
Nunan,D. (2000). Language teaching methodology: A textbook for teachers.New York: Prentice Hall.
Pan,Y. & Pan, Y. (2010). The Use of L1 in the Foreign LanguageClassroom. Retrieved January 01, 2017, fromhttp://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0123-46412010000200007
Rabbitt,T. (2015). Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening? Which is mostimportant and why? Retrieved January 01, 2017, fromhttp://www.tis.edu.mo/vision/reading-writing-speaking-and-listening-which-is-most-important-and-why/
Resmovitz,J. (2011). LATINO VOICES: Latino Teachers Needed For Classroom RoleModels. Retrieved January 01, 2017, fromhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/12/latino-teacher-shortage_n_925440.html
Rhalmi,M. (2009). Should L1 be used in EFL classes? Retrieved January 01,2017, from http://www.myenglishpages.com/blog/l1-efl-classes/
Richards,J. C. (2005). Communicative language teaching today. SEAMEO RegionalLanguage Centre.
Robertson,C. & Acklam, R. (2000). Action Plan for Teachers – a guide toteaching English.
Sah,K. P. (2013). Assessment and Test in Teaching and Learning. AcademicVoices: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 2(1), 28-32.
Scott,J. (2015). Fossilized Errors in TEFL. Retrieved January 01, 2017,from http://www.icaltefl.com/fossilized-errors-in-tefl
Scrivener,J. (2005). Learning teaching: A guidebook for English languageteachers. Ismaning: Hueber.
Shang,H. F. (2006). Content-based instruction in the EFL literaturecurriculum. The Internet TESL Journal, 12(11).
Spratt,M., Pulverness, A., & Williams, M. (n.d). The Teaching KnowledgeTest Course.
TheGovernment of Canada. (2013). Building identity: the teacher`s role.Retrieved January 01, 2017, fromhttps://www.noslangues-ourlanguages.gc.ca/collaborateurs-contributors/articles/acel-eng.html.
TheUniversity of Setif. (2013). Teaching English as a Foreign Language:Grammar Translation Method Retrieved January 01, 2017, fromhttp://cte.univ-setif.dz/coursenligne/TEFLCOURSE/ressources/Grammar%20Translation.html
Unisa.(n.d). Language, Culture, and Learning. Retrieved January 01, 2017,from http://www.tllg.unisa.edu.au/lib_guide/gllt_ch2.pdf
UniversityInfo Online. (2016). The Drawbacks of Grammar-translation Method(gtm) for a Developing Country Like Bangladesh at Present and ItsSolution. Retrieved December 27, 2016, fromhttp://www.universityinfoonline.com/?p=455
Ward,D. & Karet, K. (n.d). The Content-Based Approach To InternetLiteracy. Retrieved January 01, 2017, fromhttp://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/dward/c-binternetlit.html
Warschauer,M. (1996). Computer-assisted language learning: An introduction.Multimedia language teaching, 3-20.