11 FOREING LANGUAGE TEACHING METHODS

- (application of the method and principles)

- How would you explain … using X Methodologie?

https://hlr.byu.edu/methods/content/index.html

The grammar-translation method

What is the historical background of the method, that is, when, why and how did it
emerge?

The Grammar-Translation Method (mid 19th to mid 20th century). It was first
introduced in Latin and ancient Greek classrooms in the early 19th century, replacing
more communicatively-oriented methods as Latin ceased to be a spoken language. As
there was no longer a strong justification for teaching oral skills in the classical
languages (nobody spoke them), the aim of the Grammar-Translation Method was to
develop the ability to read and translate classical texts. By the mid 19th century the
method had been adopted for teaching modern languages and it quickly spread to
classrooms throughout Europe and the United States.

It was mainly criticized for teaching about the languages rather than the language itself.
However, it was the primary method used in U.S. classrooms and around the world. In
the 1930s some practitioners replaced the classical texts used by the method with texts
written specifically for foreign language students based on word frequency studies, and
encouraged students to avoid consciously translating what they were reading. This was
called the "Reading Method".

During World War II, it became evident that neither the Grammar-Translation Method
nor the Reading Method was producing students capable of speaking foreign languages
well enough to communicate with allies or to understand enemy communications.
Governments and practitioners turned to methods that were grounded in the linguistic
and psychological theories of the time. By the 1960s the Audiolingual Method had
replaced the Grammar-Translation Method in most classrooms.

– What language learning theory is the method based on?

It is not based on any language learning theory. The method assumes that languages
consist of structures and lexicon, and that they are learned by studying those elements
and by using them to translate sentences and longer texts.

– What are the goals and principles advocated by the method?

GOALS

– To develop the ability to read literature in the target language.

– To be able to translate each language into the other. If students can translate from
one language into another, they are considered successful language learners.

– To develop “an excellent mental discipline, a fortitude of spirit and a broad humane
understanding of life" (Titone, 1968, p. 26); and

– To improve students’ understanding of their native language through practice in

grammatical analysis.

PRINCIPLES

– VIEW ON LANGUAGE: Literary language is superior to spoken language.

Students’ study of the target culture is limited to its literature and fine arts.

– VIEW ON GRAMMAR: It is important for students to learn about the grammar

or form of the target language.

– TEACHING OF GRAMMAR: Deductive application of an explicit grammar rule

is a useful pedagogical technique. All grammar rules and exceptions should be
memorized.

– INTERACTION: Most of the interaction in the classroom is from the teacher to

the students. There is little student initiation and little student–student interaction.

– ROLE OF THE TEACHER: The teacher is the authority in the classroom. It is

very important that students get the correct answer.

– ROLE OF THE STUDENTS: Students learn from the teacher and model the
teacher. It is very important that they memorize grammar rules and vocabulary and
apply them accurately.
– THE FOUR SKILLS: Vocabulary and grammar are emphasized. Reading and
writing are the primary skills that the students work on. There is much less attention
given to speaking and listening. Pronunciation receives little, if any, attention but in the
case of modern languages, meticulous attention may be given to explaining
phonological rules. The ability to communicate in the target language is not a goal of
language instruction.

– USE OF THE NATIVE LANGUAGE: The meaning of the target language is

made clear by translating it into the students’ native language. The language that is used
in class is mostly the students’ native language.

– EVALUATION: Written tests in which students are asked to translate from their
native language into the target language or vice versa are often used. Questions about
the target culture or questions that ask students to apply grammar rules are also
common.

– ERRORS: Having the students get the correct answer is considered very
important. If students make errors or do not know an answer, the teacher supplies them
with the correct answer.

– What are the types of activities proposed by the method?

Each chapter of a grammar-translation textbook focuses on one or more grammatical

aspects, often accompanied by detailed exceptions to the rules. Each chapter also
contains a list of vocabulary words designed to prepare students to translate specific
sentences or texts; thus, the vocabulary is generally not clustered around any specific
theme.

During each chapter students do different grammar exercises to prepare them for the
final activities: translations from their native language to the target language and
vice-versa. They may involve excerpts of literary texts, or individual sentences designed
to illustrate the grammar points at hand.

Grammar exercises: fill in the gaps with the correct grammatical elements, complete the
sentence using the correct grammar, describe a grammar rule and its exceptions…
Vocabulary exercises: memorize a list of vocabulary and write a sentence that includes
each of them, list antonyms, list synonyms…

Reading comprehension questions

Translation exercises

– What are the strengths of the method? What are the risks?

Students learn about the language, its linguistic features, that is, phonology, morphology
and syntax, and also vocabulary, even if this is rather random and therefore difficult to
memorize. This highly improves their awareness about languages and how they work; it
makes them aware that different languages work differently, that ideas are expressed
differently, and also, that all languages share a number of common elements. Also,
learning about grammar patterns can be beneficial for teenage and adult students who
are not too exposed to the foreign language and do not have the opportunity to
experience it naturally with regularity.

Nevertheless, the lack of practice using the language and the emphasis on the formal
aspects most often results in students who do not develop the ability to communicate in
the foreign language. An added limitation of the method could be that each unit centres
around a specific literary excerpt, which might not be close to the students’ experience
or interests, or revolve around a particular topic. It must be mentioned, however, that
more recent approaches to the grammar-translation method have modified this aspect
selecting/crafting texts to suit specific purposes/topics.

– How does the method relate to other methods?

The Grammar-Translation method is considered to focus excessively on linguistics, that

is, on learning about the language rather than on learning how to use the language for
communication. For that reason, most methods that followed emerged to address the
issue that learners could not communicate in the foreign language even after years of
lessons, even when they did know considerably about the language. As a result, when
compared to other methods, we can say that the Grammar-Translation method is
missing the teaching aspects related to the communicative side of language. Learners
tend to be very capable of describing grammar patterns and know extensive vocabulary
but lack language skills, except for reading.

It is interesting to note that, when they first emerged, communicative-oriented methods

disregarded the explicit and intensive teaching of grammar, in particular. However,
experience showed that a certain degree of awareness of grammar and explicit practice
of it were necessary to speak a foreign language accurately. Consequently,
communicative-oriented methods nowadays promote the use of short “focus on form”
sections during sessions, where learners are made aware of specific grammar patterns,
their meaning, use and form, and exercises are proposed that focus on using the patterns
accurately. Whereas this “focus on form” sections are implemented differently to the GT
method style - the teacher guides the learner to discover patterns from texts/naturally
occurring utterances- they are reminiscent of the Grammar-Translation method and the
importance it assigned to knowing about the language in order to master it.

The audio-lingual method

● Dialogues (including grammar)

● Drills

1. Teacher need the dialogue (A-B part)

2. Teacher reads ns students repeat
3. Teacher reads A an students answers B
(drill other combinations)
4. Students groups 1 acts as A, student group 2 acts as B
8dill the combinations for memorization)
5. Drill previous combination immediately, in pairs
6. Practice
a. Students adopt it to their interests

What is the historical background of the method, that is, when, why and how did it
emerge?
Audiolingualism came about as a result of a number of developments in linguistics,
psychology, and politics. In the 1940s, linguists at the University of Michigan and other
universities were engaged in developing materials for teaching English to foreign
students studying in the U.S. Their approach, based on structural linguistics, relied on a
contrastive analysis of the students' native language and the target language, which they
believed would identify potential problems in language learning. Lessons consisted of
intensive oral drilling of grammatical patterns and pronunciation. The approach became
known variously as the Oral Approach, the Aural-Oral Approach, or the Structural
Approach (Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011).

The United States was drawn into World War II and needed personnel who were fluent
in foreign languages. Upon finding a lack of Americans with sufficient language skills,
in 1942 the U.S. government developed the Army Specialized Training Program, an
oral-based program based on intensive drilling and study. The success of this program
convinced a number of prominent linguists of the value of an intensive oral approach to
language learning. Most American schools and universities, however, continued to
employ the Grammar-Translation Method or the Reading Method well into the 1950s
(Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011).

Later in its development, principles from behavioral psychology (Skinner 1957) were
incorporated. It was thought that the way to acquire the sentence patterns of the target
language was through conditioning - helping learners to respond correctly to stimuli
through shaping and reinforcement, so that the learners could overcome the habits of
their native language and form the new habits required to be target language speakers
(Bateman & Lago).

The Audiolingual Method was widely adopted in the U.S. and Canada and served as the
principal approach to foreign language teaching in the 1960s. The method's decline in
the late 1960s and early 1970s was brought about by two factors. First, linguist Noam
Chomsky questioned the theoretical basis for the method, particularly the assumption
that external conditioning could account for all language learning (Chomsky, 1959).
Second, some language teachers and students experienced frustration with the method's
avoidance of grammar explanations, its heavy emphasis on rote memorization and
drilling, and its failure to produce conversational ability in the foreign language
(Hadley, 2001). These developments led to the eventual abandonment of the method,
although some of its practices, such as dialogue learning and pattern drills, continue to
be used in some foreign language programs (Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011).

What language learning theory is the method based on?

The learning theory underlying the Audiolingual Method is behaviorism, a prominent

school of psychological thought in the first half of the twentieth century. Behaviorism
posits that all learning occurs as humans respond to external stimuli and their response
is either rewarded or punished, which serves to increase or decrease the behavior
(Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011).

What are the goals and principles advocated by the method?

GOALS:

Teachers want their students to be able to use the target language communicative.

Training in listening comprehension, accurate pronunciation, reading comprehension

and production.

To develop in the students the same types of abilities that native speakers have to use it
automatically without stopping to think.

PRINCIPLES (Bateman & Lago):

Teachers want their students to be able to use the target language communicatively. In
order to do this, they believe students need to overlearn the target language, to learn to
use it automatically without stopping to think. Their students achieve this by forming
new habits in the target language and overcoming the old habits of their native
language.

The teacher is like an orchestra leader, directing and controlling the language behavior
of her students. She is also responsible for providing her students with a good model for
imitation.

Students are imitators of the teacher’s model. They follow the teacher’s directions and
respond as accurately and as rapidly as possible.
New vocabulary and structural patterns are presented through dialogues. The dialogues
are learned through imitation and repetition. Drills (such as repetition, backward
build-up, chain, substitution, transformation, and question-and-answer) are conducted
based upon the patterns present in the dialogue. Students’ successful responses are
positively reinforced. Grammar is induced from the examples given; explicit grammar
rules are not provided. Cultural information is contextualized in the dialogues or
presented by the teacher. Students’ reading and written work is based upon the oral
work they did earlier.

There is student-to-student interaction in chain drills or when students take different

roles in dialogues, but this interaction is teacher-directed. Most of the interaction is
between teacher and students and is initiated by the teacher.

Everyday speech is emphasized in the Audio-Lingual Method. The level of complexity

of the speech is graded, however, so that beginning students are presented with only
simple patterns. Culture consists of the everyday behavior and lifestyle of the target
language speakers

Vocabulary is kept to a minimum while the students are mastering the sound system and
grammatical patterns. The natural order of skills presentation is adhered to: listening,
speaking, reading, and writing. The oral/aural skills receive most of the attention

The habits of the students’ native language are thought to interfere with the students’
attempts to master the target language.

Student errors are to be avoided if at all possible, through the teacher’s awareness of
where the students will have difficulty, and restriction of what they are taught to say.

What are the types of activities proposed by the method?

A typical Audio Lingual lesson begins with a dialogue, which is presented either from a
recording or verbally by the teacher, often accompanied by drawings to illustrate the
meaning. Lines from the dialogue are memorized one by one, with students repeating
each line in chorus. When a pair of lines is learned, the teacher asks half of the class to
repeat the first line, and the other half to respond by repeating the second line. The same
procedure is repeated with rows of students and then with individual students
(Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011).
When the dialogue has been memorized, the teacher leads students in adapting it to their
own situation or interests by substituting words or phrases. Students repeat the dialogue
with the new substitutions. (Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011).

Sentences containing key linguistic structures are then extracted from the dialogue to
form the basis for pattern drills of different types. The teacher reads a sentence and asks
students to repeat it in unison. The teacher subsequently leads the students in drills
based on the model sentence. Drills may include responding to questions, substituting
new words or grammatical structures, negating affirmative sentences, or making
morphological manipulations such as changing singular to plural, all according to the
teacher's cues. These drills are first practiced in chorus and then individually. Any
grammatical or pronunciation errors are corrected immediately by the teacher. Some
grammatical explanation may be provided, but it is generally kept to a minimum
(Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011).

Follow-up activities may consist of reading, writing, or vocabulary activities, which are
based on the dialogue and sentences that have been practiced in class. If a language
laboratory is available, students may do further drill work on structures and
pronunciation using recordings of the dialogues and sentences (Larsen-Freeman &
Anderson, 2011).

What are the strengths of the method? What are the risks?

Like any other teaching method, the audio-lingual approach has both strengths and
risks.

On one hand we can find the strengths. Among these it is one important feature:
emphasizing aural-oral skills. This means that better listeners and speakers will make
better readers and writers; that's why the emphasis on listening and speaking. This first
advantage leads the teachers to stress the importance of right pronunciation, and
specially focused on intonation. Therefore, students develop a sensitivity to intonation
and they become more acquainted with the functions of intonation such as recognizing
questions or commands. Finally, drills familiarize students with situational
conversations in the target language, which enables them to have a fluent dialogue
(Brooks, 1964).
On the other hand we can find the risks. In Margolis (1982) words, this method can
result in “a lack of student motivation” arising in large part from “pattern drills that
have a tendency to become boring”.” In essence, students are not learning to
communicate spontaneously as native speakers, but they are memorizing set phrases
and structures and repeating them. Besides, Diller (1970) points out that “pattern drills
require the student to think only about the mechanics of manipulating grammatical
structures. He is not required to think in the language when he does a pattern drill”,
which answers Margolis (1982) question about if drills are adequate to develop or not a
spontaneous speech. Another disadvantage could be the close relation between the
audio-lingual method and the use of audio-visual tools. Although these can be beneficial
if they are used correctly, if they are overused the communication between students and
teacher could move into the background and this interaction is essential to learn a
second language effectively. This would make the dialogue practiced stereotyped an
unnatural routine, and wouldn’t help the student develop a realistic and free speech
(Jacobovits and Gordon, 1974).

How does the method relate to other methods?

As we have mentioned before, the Audio-Lingual Method was created to improve the
learning of the second language, so did the Cognitive Approach. However, while
Audiolingualism teaches based on behaviorism the Cognitive Approach follows the
cognitivist psychology. Another method where we can find similarities is the
Desuggestopedia, this is due to the fact that, in both of them students have to repeat
what the teacher says. Lastly, comparing the Audio-Lingual Method with Task-based
Instruction, the focus of the first one is on the sentences and the sound patterns, while
the second one focuses on the meaning of the message. However, in both of these
methods the communication between peers occurs in the target language.

The cognitive approach

● Different communicative situations of real life

 ● Explicit teaching of grammar and vocabulary: inductive or deductive
● Activity sequencing: progression from structured/controlled activities ti
freer/open-ended activities
● New content/skills based on previous knowledge

What is the historical background of the method, that is, when, why and how did it
emerge?

Cognitive-code learning theory was proposed and widely debated in the 1960s. Based
on the foundations of linguistic theories and the findings of psycholinguistic research,
cognitive psychologists and applied linguists, such as John B. Carroll and Kenneth
Chastain, advocated the cognitive code approach to the study of a second language as an
alternative to the audio-lingual method prevalent at the time.

In the late 1950s and the early 1960s the fields of psychology and linguistics were
experiencing a sort of difficult changes. Behaviorism, which had dominated psychology
for several decades, was called into question by cognitive psychologists, who asserted
that stimulus-response conditioning could not account for all the complexities of human
learning. With respect to language learning, a young linguist called Noam Chomsky
questioned B. F. Skinner's assumption that language use was also purely a conditioned
behavior. In 1959 Chomsky wrote a critical review of B. F. Skinner's book Verbal
Behavior (1957), in which he pointed out that humans are constantly producing and
understanding new expressions, a process that cannot be explained by behavioristic
theories.

These developments in psychology and linguistics eventually filtered into foreign

language classrooms. During much of the 1950s and 60s the Audiolingual Method,
which was based on behaviorist psychology and structural linguistics, had dominated
American classrooms. As these theories were called into question, the Audiolingual
Method lost credibility too. In addition to violating the new theories of learning, the
Audiolinguistic method focuses on memorization and drills left little opportunities for
students to use language creatively, and therefore did not foster the ability to
communicate in spontaneous situations. In addition, some students and teachers
expressed frustration with the lack of implicit grammar explanation and the lock-step
pace of the class, which allowed for little variation in learning styles or speeds.
By the 1970s, the behavioristic assumptions of the ALM had been largely replaced, at
least in principle, with a "cognitive code approach" to language learning. Rivers (1981)
affirms that the cognitive code approach "was much discussed but ill defined and
consequently never gained the status of what one might call a method" (p. 49).
Nevertheless, cognitive principles began to play a significant role in foreign language
classrooms and continue to do so.

What language learning theory is the method based on?

Cognitive-code learning theory (Chastain 1971) proposes that learning a second

language requires explicit instruction and a study of the language as a complex and
rule-governed system (Carroll 1964).

What English language teachers need to know about cognitive theory:

In the genes of cognitive theory, there is a great deal of intuitive appeal to the cognitive
approach to teaching. The teachers, no matter native teacher or non-native, are ready to
consider cognitive theory as the foundation for teaching if they apply the following
issues that that distill the theoretical basis of cognitive foreign language learning. It
must be noted that the application of cognitive theory implies a responsibility to teach
both content and process. The learner is at centre stage; the teacher, educator, or
instructor becomes a facilitator of learning, carrying the task of adapting the newly
learned foreign language structures to the needs of learners. Cognitive theory
acknowledges the role of mistakes; therefore, a cognitive-minded foreign language
teacher makes learners aware of the rules and should encourage students to create
correct structures in applying the rules. The theory attaches more importance to the
learner's understanding of the structure of the foreign language than to the facility in
using that structure. Cognitively-minded foreign language teachers pay attention to the
assimilation of what has already been learnt or partly learnt since how new rules are
presented is important. There is a fundamental relationship between language and
culture. Foreign Language is at the heart of language teaching and learning. The way the
teachers teach language reflects the way how much they have mastered and understood
the target language as a profession. In Cognitive Theory, language practice drills are
employed to train learners to talk and to help them master the basic structural patterns of
the target language.

What are the goals and principles advocated by the method?

The cognitive approach has some different principles:

● The learning happens with the cognitive memory structures of the student, that
perceives, processes, stores the short and long term memory and organizes the
information in the brain.
● The perception of the cognitive code on a second language is mainly practical.
● The new language is seen as a complex set of rules.
● Learning should be holistic (to know all the language).
● There must be taken into account and be emphatic with the learner because that
person is thinking, trying to understand and using his or her memory in every
moment.
● The activities designed have the aim to teach inductively the grammar rules.
● Lessons also must be structured around a deductive process (learning the rule of
the day).
● The cognitive control works in a lineal way.
Phonemes-words-phrases-clauses-simple sentences-complex sentences.
● The learner plays processes information actively.

What are the types of activities proposed by the method?

All cognitive learning activities are geared towards pushing students to work through
different problems and stimuli, so they use their knowledge in different situations. The
goal is to get them thinking and applying problem-solving strategies without the use of
preparation or steps that lead to an answer. You want to craft activities that will make
your student apply logic, creativity, and close examination on the spot to produce an
answer. Cognitive learning essentially relies on five principles: remembering,
understanding, applying, evaluating, and creating. Below is a breakdown of each
principle and some activities students can do that correspond to each.

Remembering
Activities that rely on remembering ask for the student to recall previously learned
information to complete the task at hand. This might be a great review for the beginning
of class to see if students are comprehending previous lessons. A couple of activities
might be:

● Creating a timeline of important events from memory

● Make a game of reciting poetry or important writings
● Writing a paragraph or blurb detailing what they remember from last class

Understanding

Understanding activities directly engage students to see how they interpret information.
This is a particularly broad category that draws on students being able to analyze
information from different angles and to recognize, interpret, and classify it. Here are a
few activity ideas:

● Defending a point of view, or debate

● Creating a list of examples
● Classifying types of processes or events

Applying

Part of problem-solving has to do with applying specific skills and knowledge to

produce the proper result. Push your students to rely on what they've learned and figure
out ways to succeed through fun activities:

● Have the students create an effective learning game themselves

● Solve problems or answer questions listed on the board
● Have students demonstrate procedures in front of class

Evaluating

This principle focuses on analyzing information and making judgments based on it.
Students will weigh information based on criteria previously learned. A few activities
for your students can include:

● Constructing a graph to illustrate certain information

● Having students develop a questionnaire to group or gather information at hand
● Creating a pros and cons list
Creating

Cognitive learning is centered on adapting to new stimuli and constructing methods to

solve problems or address needs. Creative activities rely on students to produce original
ideas to address prompts, organize thoughts, and devise a means of their own invention
that will help them answer problems. These are just a few creating activities:

● Write an original poem

● Perform or write a scenario demonstrating themes or illustrating specific ideas
● Write a manual or guidebook demonstrating important information

What are the strengths of the method? What are the risks?

Advantages or strenghts:

Cognitive-code approach refers to a theory of second language teaching and learning as

a ferment of cognitivist psychology, structural applied linguistic, Chomsky’s theories
developed in the 1960s. Cognitive-code approach has some advantages over the other
foreign language learning and teaching theories: First of all, it revived the
re-emergence of grammar in the classroom. Secondly, it puts more emphasis on
guided discovery of the rules: this is the rule-governed nature of language.
Moreover, it rejected the habit formation of Behaviorist theory. There is language
acquisition rather than habit formation. Also, it claims that learning is not a habit
formation but it requires cognitive processing and mental effort because learners
are thinking beings. Besides, it stressed on the learning of the rules via meaningful
practice and creativity. Finally, it liberated the teachers from the straitjackets of
Grammar Translation Approach, Audio- Lingualism and Structural-situational
methods.

Disadvantages or risks:

It placed a great deal of emphasis on the development of a second language as a

combination of skills. At its core, cognitive-code learning represents a theoretical,
rather than a pedagogical approach.
 1. Cognitive-Code Approach is essentially a theoretical proposal because it did
not lead to the development of any teaching method in relation to classroom
procedures and activities.

2. There is little use of examples from authentic material.

3. It never took off in a big way; this theory did not gain support over time.

4. Human thinking is said to be an invisible process, and therefore cognitive

processes are hypothetical constructs.

5. Human information processing is resembled computers, which perhaps

oversimplifies the human mind; human brain is much more sophisticated than
computer systems.

6. As a theory, it often ignores past experiences and culture influence while we

process information.

7. CCA does not consider individual personalities of people and how

personalities are formed; there is too much emphasis on social context.

8. It is a depersonalized theory; in other words, it does not take into

consideration feelings or unconscious actions or reactions.

9. According to Carroll (1966:102), “the theory attaches more importance to the

learner understands of the structure of the foreign language than to the facility in using
that structure.

10. Another disadvantage is that it is extremely time intensive on the part of the
foreign language teacher or educator, who, acts as a facilitator, has to invest a huge
amount of time and effort on a per student basis.

How does the method relate to other methods?

As we have been contrasting along the document, the Cognitive Approach was made up
to improve the learning of the languages, more concretely the learning of second
languages. In this case, we have compared the Cognitive Approach with the
Audiolingual Method.
Basically, in the Audiolingual Method, the one based on the behaviourism, Noam
Chomsky criticises Skinner because the language is also a conditioned behaviour by the
environment and the different situations. So with our method, when people is using the
language, it is also used in different situations, with different aims or objectives, so it is
not only needed to to learn structures and words. For learning properly a language, it is
essential to know the words, their meanings and the different messages they can show
depending on the situation, so the learning process about the language must be deeper to
develop a correct linguistic competence.

As well as it is said in the previous question, both are different methods of learning
languages and the Cognitive Approach has some advantages and disadvantages. If we
compare them, the Cognitive approach tries to teach and learn language following the
cognitivist psychology, while the AML follows a behaviourist one. Moreover, in the
behaviourist theories, the learning of languages is an habit formation, while in the
cognitivism it requires a cognitive process and amental effort, and the rules are acquired
by the practice and creativity. So with this Approach, we liberate teachers from the
Grammar translation Approach, the Auio-Lingualism and the Structural-situation
Methods.

Desuggestopedia

● Learners create their own new biography

● Teachers provide texts to build the new persona
● Phase 1🡪 receptive phase
o 1st concept: reading matches the music
o 2nd concept: reading is natural

In the meantime learned read the text and its translation

● Phase 2 🡪 active phase

o Activities, songs, role plays….
What is the historical background of the method, that is, when, why and how did it
emerge?
Desuggestopedia was developed in Bulgaria by Georgi Lozanov from the 1960s
to the 1990s. The method was derived from Suggestology, a medical study of
suggestion in human communications and its role in the development of personality.
This teaching method has been developed to help students eliminate the feeling that
they cannot be successful and/or negative association they may have toward studying
and thus to help them overcome the barriers to learning.

It was developed with the aim of establishing creative and highly efficient
learning in accordance with the natural learning style of the brain. In doing so, it
attempts to liberate the learners from limiting social norms that have cumulatively been
created in their personalities by experiencing negative suggestions in their social life.
This method requires a teacher and a learning group. It does not work in a self-learning
environment. It is used in different fields, but mostly in the field of foreign language
learning. Lozanov has claimed that by using this method a teacher’s students can learn a
language approximately three to five times as quickly as through conventional teaching
methods.

What language learning theory is the method based on?

Desuggestopedia focuses more on liberation as Lozanov describes desuggestive
learning as “free, without a mildest pressure, liberation of previously suggested
programs to restrict intelligence and spontaneous acquisition of knowledge, skills and
habits.” The method implements this by working not only on the conscious level of the
human mind but also on the subconscious level, the mind’s reserves.

What are the goals and principles advocated by the method?

GOALS
● Teachers hope to accelerate the process by which students learn to use another
language for everyday communication. In order to do this, more of the students
mental powers must be tapped. This is accomplished by desuggesting the
psychological barriers learners bring with them to the learning situation.
● Increase the communicative ability of students

PRINCIPLES
● VIEW ON LANGUAGE: Language is the first of two planes in the two-plane
process of communication. In the second plane are the factors which influence
the linguistic message. It is believed that students will learn best if their
conscious attention is focused, not on the language forms, but on using the
language.
● VIEW ON GRAMMAR: Grammar is dealt with explicitly but minimally.
Students will learn best if their conscious attention is focused, not on the
language forms, but on using the language.
● TEACHING OF GRAMMAR: Posters displaying grammatical information
about the target about the target language are hung around the class in order to
take advantage of students’ peripheral learning. Moreover, next to their works
there are some notes on grammar.
 ● INTERACTION: The teacher initiates interactions with the whole group of
students and individuals right from the beginning of a language course. Firstly,
students can only respond nonverbally or with a few words. Later, they can
respond appropriately and initiate interaction themselves.
● ROLE OF THE TEACHER: The teacher is the authority in the classroom but
he/she will create an area of confidence. They will also have to speak
confidently and give the students the impression that learning the target
language will be easy and enjoyable.
● ROLE OF THE STUDENTS: Students should trust and respect the teacher.
They must feel secure and once they feel like this they can be more spontaneous
and less inhibited.
● THE FOUR SKILLS: Vocabulary and speaking communicatively is
emphasized. Students also read in the target language and write in it.
Furthermore, when the teachers read and synchronize with intonation, students
pay attention to how the teacher reads and here listening is highlighted.
● USE OF THE NATIVE LANGUAGE: Native language translation is used to
make the meaning of the dialogue. They also use it in class when necessary. As
time goes by, the use of the native language is less.
● EVALUATION: Evaluation usually is conducted on students’ normal in-class
performance and not through formal tests.
● ERRORS: Errors are corrected gently, with the teacher using a soft voice, not
in a direct, confrontational manner.

What are the types of activities proposed by the method?

The types of activities used in this method offer the possibility of altering the
atmosphere of the class. Below, you can find a list of techniques or activities that can be
used and adapted:
● Classroom Set-up: Create a classroom environment that is bright and cheerful.
For example, a classroom where the walls are decorated with scenes from a
country where the target language is spoken. A student can learn from what is
present in the environment even if his attention is not directed to it.
● Peripheral Learning: Is based upon the idea that we perceive much more in our
environment than we consciously notice. Putting posters containing
grammatical information about the target language, students will absorb the
necessary facts effortlessly. The posters are changed time to time to provide
grammatical information about what students are studying.
● Positive Suggestion: It is the teacher’s responsibility to orchestrate the
suggestive factors in a learning situation, thereby helping students break down
the barriers to learning that they bring with them. The teacher can do this by
direct and indirect means.
● Choose a New Identity: The students choose a target language name and a new
occupation. As the course continues, the students have an opportunity to
develop a whole biography, and later on they may be asked to talk or write
about their fictional hometown, childhood, etc.
● Role-play: Students are asked to pretend temporarily to be someone else and to
perform in the target language as if they were that person and introduce
themselves as that person.
● First (passive-receptive) and second (active) concert: Once the teacher has
introduced the story as related in the dialogue and has called students’ attention
to some particular grammatical points that arise in it, the teacher reads the
 dialogue in the target language. The students have copies of the dialogue in the
target language and their native language and refer to it as the teacher is
reading. In the first concert, the music is classic and the teacher's voice rises and
falls with the music. In the second concert, the students put their scripts aside
and they just listen to the teacher read at normal speed. Thus, the content
governs the way the teacher reads the script, not the music.
● Primary activation: The students playfully reread the target language dialogue
out loud, individually or in groups in a particular manner (sadly, angrily,
cheerfully).
● Creative Adaptation: The students engage in various activities designed to help
them learn the new material and use it spontaneously. The activities are varied
and do not allow the students to focus on the form of the linguistic message.

To end up with, the main activities proposed by this method are mainly activities
that involve dialog (question-answers), repetition, reading, discussions, translation,
(competitive) games and life experiences to work on vocabulary over grammar, songs
and role play.

What are the strengths of the method? What are the risks?
Students learn from what is present in the environment, even if their attention is
not directed to it, they use the peripheral learning. This highly improves their awareness
about the real situations that can occur in real life. As the teacher speaks confidently,
the students trust and respect his authority and they will accept the information about
the language better. Also, think highly of students’ feelings and it highlights how
students ' mistakes are treated. Along the method it emphasizes interaction, taking into
account the learning environment, and it arouses students’ interests and potential to
memorize while they are doing the activities mentioned before.

Nevertheless, the lack of trust to teachers often can not be successful and
students won’t retain information. An added limitation of the method could be that
there is absence of tests and in some way students won’t learn so much vocabulary.
Besides, this method hashas a risk when taking into account the students since the
differences characteristics between them aren’t considered while the activities are done
and this could not allow them to have an effective learning. Moreover, the environment
can be limited depending on the number of students each class can have. To end up
with, some students would feel that there is infantilization of learning. In some way,
desuggestopedia can have the appearance of treating students in a childish way and for
this reason, there are some students who might reject the approach despite its
effectiveness.

How does the method relate to other methods?

The desuggestopedia method is considered to focus on vocabulary, for this,
teachers provide students texts to build their own biography. When compared to other
methods, this method has similarities with audiolingual method and TPR (storytelling)
method, because in both of them students have to repeat what teachers have said. In
desuggestopedia, teachers give both texts at the beginning and students read both of
them while the teacher is reading loudly. Moreover, in those texts we have mentioned,
students will find two different columns one with the language they are learning and the
other one with their mother tongue.

However, in TPR storytelling the teacher gives learners the text and learners
have to translate it into their mother tongue. Furthermore, the first time learners listen to
the text in order to understand it, that is, they haven’t got the text in front of them to
read it. It is the second time when they have the text. Taking into account one of the
main activities of Desuggestopedia, that in which students create a new identity, it can
be considered like a “story”. Finally, both methods we have discussed mostly, don’t
focus on grammar because it is not particularly important, they give more importance to
vocabulary since using the text learners will acquire language.

Total physical response (TPR)

Main idea: link between language and movement/gestures

1. Teacher: says the words/ sequences and represents them through

gestures/movements
Learners: imitate the gestures, learners don’t speak (silent period)
2. Teacher: says the words and represents them
Learners: imitate the gestures and the language
3. Learners: can initiate the interaction, they can speak and use gestures and the
teachers follows
4. Learners and teacher interact in more complex scenarios.

What is the historical background of the method, that is, when, why and how did it
emerge?

Total Physical Response (TPR) is a learning strategy developed and promoted

by Professor James Asher of San José State University in California in 1965.

Asher had been doing experiments with different ways of facilitating what he
called first-trial learning, or the internalization of new information by the brain upon the
first exposure to that information. He thought that if a learner was exposed to a lot of
new information before it is internalized, the difficulty of retaining it will be big.
Moreover, he wanted to apply his theories to foreign language learning because in
school he had problems learning Latin, French, Spanish and German, so he was
interested in finding more effective methods of language learning (Glisan, 1993).
According to Asher, the dropout rate of the traditional second language programs was
almost 95%, because of the ineffective methods used. In addition, he observed that
while adults struggled in their second language courses, children had a great facility to
acquire first languages. Therefore, he took the decision of creating a method of teaching
a second language based on the process that children use to learn their first language.

After doing many experiments, Asher, helped by a Japanese graduate students,

discovered that he could internalize quickly Japanese by physically responding to
commands in the language like stand up, sit down, and walk. Therefore, he started
developing the method called Total Physical Response (TPR) and it became widely
known in the United States, Canada and Europe.

Several studies demonstrated this method to be effective in the improvement of

students’ listening comprehension and vocabulary retention over traditional learning
methods (Asher, 1966, 1969, 1972). Furthermore, those positive results of the TPR can
be also transferred to reading, speaking and writing skills (Glisan, 1993).

What language learning theory is the method based on?

According to Richards and Rodgers (2001), the Total Physical Response is a

method that consists of teaching a language with the coordination of speech and action,
which means, teaching a language through activity. This method is based on a language
learning theory called behaviorism.

Behaviorism is a theory that was first developed by B.F. Skinner. According to

his theory, learning is just a result of imitation, practice, reinforcement and habit
formation. Through this theory, B.F. Skinner stated that a student shows a concrete
behavior because of imitation. If that student receives the necessary positive feedback,
this person will continue showing this behavior and will turn it into a habit (Lightbown
and Spada, 2006).

Moreover, according to behaviorism, a student will only need imitation in order

to learn a foreign language, which means, for Second Language Acquisition.
Nevertheless, this student will also have to take into account the feedback he/she
receives. Due to this, the task of the teacher will be to perform and give feedback and
the role of the student will be to imitate and receive that feedback. This language
development will happen through the creation of habits(Lightbown and Spada, 2006).
 Taking into account all this information, it is possible to state that as the Total
Physical Response method consists of using coordination and imitation in order to learn,
it is based on the behaviorism theory, which affirms that learning is a result of imitation.

What are the goals and principles advocated by the method?

How should the lessons run?

1. Prepare: Choose the vocabulary you want to teach in the classroom and collect
all the material needed to illustrate the meaning of the words.

2. Teacher Modeling: Say out loud the new vocabulary you want to teach
students using facial gestures, expressions, body movement… to illustrate the
meaning of the word. The learners just imitate the gestures, do not speak (silent
period).

3. Student Modeling: tell students to copy your facial gestures, expressions etc.
as you say the word.

4. Student Participation: Ask for volunteers and repeat the facial expressions,
body movement modeled by the teacher. Repeat the word as they do the
gestures. Then say the words out loud and make the students do the gestures
themselves.

5. Words mixing: Tell the words in a different order. Learners can initiate an
interaction, they can speak and use gestures and the teacher follows.

6. Writing: Write and stick somewhere in the classroom the words so that
students can see it written and they make the connection between the oral and
written word.

7. Repetition and Practice: Using the same method applied before, teach another
word. To check if they have learnt the word, review and practice it multiple
times. Try to review words that they already know so that they do not forget old
words (TeacherToolKit, n.d.).

Role of the teacher and the student

 The role of the teacher in TRP is to choose the material and organize the activity
you want the students to do (Knight, 2001, p. 154). Moreover, another important task of
the teacher is to give instructions and commands to the students. For example “repeat
this word, “stand up” etc. Furthermore, the teacher has to give feedback to students,
which is really important for their learning process. The feedback of the teacher
increases gradually (Richards & Rodgers, 2001, p.76).

The role of the student is to do what the teacher says; to listen and respond
physically to the instructions and commands. When the student has listened for a long
time and feels prepared to participate in class, he/she can begin to speak (Richards &
Rogers, 2001).

What should be emphasized in class?

In TRP the vocabulary and grammar are the areas that are most emphasized. Also this
method emphasizes action, so students take part and develop the process of learning.
The method mainly focuses on meaning, which is what distinguishes this method from
other grammar based methods. The teacher limits the vocabulary taught in the
classrooms, to help students differentiate new words with the ones they previously knew
(Elmanova, 2017).

What are the types of activities proposed by the method?

According to Sánchez (1997), TPR-based activities are activities that encourage

both the use of language and physical action. These activities consist mainly of the
introduction of commands by the teacher or by means of songs or rhymes, requiring
students to respond to these commands, which require physical movements.

The activities to be carried out in the classroom must be attractive to the children
in order to make them feel integrated, while at the same time they enhance their oral
skills, since they have not yet developed their reading and writing skills and do not have
sufficient capacity to read or produce texts in the target language (Fos et al., 1996).

Moreover, the activities should be repeated, with some frequency, at the

beginning of the sessions, to review what has been learned previously, and at the end to
insist on the new concepts/knowledge. In order to establish these routines, Canga (2012)
proposes to review the terms learnt over a period of approximately ten minutes,
following different models: for example, the teacher can lead the class by repeating the
commands or also through the use of songs, rhymes or games, and then the new
commands can be introduced.

A clear example of an effective activity based on this method would be the

famous "Simon says" (Seifert, 2016). Through this game children don’t just listen and
memorize, they also assimilate the language through movement and response. This
game consists of giving some commands and actions after saying “Simon says”. So, for
example, you might say “Simon says touch your nose” and children would then have to
perform that action. It could be used with any topic, such as parts of the body as in this
last example.

Another activity that is very effective when using the TPR method is
storytelling, since according to Krashen (1981), language acquisition occurs
unconsciously. In this way, the language is acquired in a more permanent way and,
therefore, storytelling will greatly stimulate language acquisition in the student. For
example, a story can be told in which body parts are involved. Each time sight is
involved, for instance, related words would be emphasized such as "see", "sight",
"eyes", etc. at the same time that these are performed using gestures and pointing to the
eyes.

What are the strengths of the method? What are the risks?

Strengths

It is an easy method to be used in class. There is no need to use many resources

in TPR, so simplicity is another positive point for using it. It can also be applied with
small and big groups and it is a funny tool for learning vocabulary, being adequate for
students of any age.

The relation between the movements and the language means that the learning
will be effective. Although there are students that respond well to physical activities and
others to visual activities, this method may be appropriate for all those different
personalities, even for introverted students because they do not have to be protagonists
individually and do not have to speak until they are ready for.

This method also makes students use both sides of the brain, the left and the
right. It is great to improve different skills, such as the listening ones.

Risks

Due to the limited materials and time that are needed for applying this method, it can
sometimes be overused by the teacher and monotony is never a good option.

It also depends on the content, not everything is appropriate to be explained by TPR.

So, as it is a limited method, the best option is to combine it with other different types of
activities.

Finally, creativity is not powered with TPR because students do not have the
opportunity to give their own ideas and express their views.

The natural approach

1. Choose a situation or topic

2. TPR focus on comprehension
3. Texts/audio recording (listening and reading) of TV shows/ radio shows
4. Writing: is considered a tool for learning not necessarily for communication
(when learning a language)

Grammar is class should be brief and practice should be done at home.

What is the historical background of the method, that is, when, why and how did it emerge?
In 1977, Tracy Terrel outlined “a proposal for a new philosophy of language
teaching he called the Natural Approach” (Terrell 1977; 1982: 121). This was an
attempt to develop a language teaching proposal that incorporated the “naturalistic”
principles researchers had identified in studies of second language acquisition. The
Natural Approach grew out of Terrell’s experiences teaching Spanish lessons, although
it has also been used in elementary-to advanced-level classes and with other several
languages.
At the same time, he joined forces with Stephen Krashen, an applied linguist at
the University of Southern California, in elaborating a theoretical rationale for the
Natural Approach, drawing on Krashen’s influential theory of second language
acquisition.
Krashen and Terrel, identified the Natural Approach with what they call
“traditional” approaches to language teaching. Traditional approaches are defined as
“based on the use of language in communicative situations without recourse to the
native language” and without any reference to grammatical analysis, drilling or theories
of grammar. Krashen and Terrel pointed out that “approaches have been called natural,
psychological, phonetic, new, reform, direct, analytic, imitative and so forth” (Krashen
and Terrell 1983:9). Due to the fact that these authors relate their approach to the
Natural Method, has led some people to assume that Natural Approach and Natural
Method are the same. Although this is quite a common tradition, the differences
between these two terms are very important (RIchards & Rodgers, 1986).
Krashen and Terrell’s Natural Approach is located within traditional approaches
to language teaching. This Natural Approach joints efforts from two sides:
Pedagogically based, from Tracy Terrell’s point of view and SLA based from Stephen
Krashen’s view. They state that students will have the ability to function in an adequate
way in the target language situation. They will comprehend the speaker of the target
language and will be able to convey their requests and ideas. They do not know every
word in a particular semantic domain, nor is it necessary that the syntax and vocabulary
be flawless - but their production does need to be understood. They should be able to
make the meaning clear but not be accurate in all the details of grammar (Criado &
Sánchez, 2013).
In other words it is one of the original communicative methods of second
language instruction. The model gained prominence in the early 80s and it is still going
strong nowadays. The model received strong support from the proponents of the
proficiency movement in L2 teaching in the US who wanted the focus of classroom
practice to shift from non-communicative grammar-driven activities to communicative
task-driven activities (Achard & Niemeier, 2004).

What language learning theory is the method based on?

As Krashen and Terrel (1983) points out in Ratna (2016), communication is the
primary function of language and for them, the Natural Approach (NA) is an example of
a communicative approach. According to Krashen and Terrel (1983) in Ratna (2016) the
Natural Approach ”is based on an empirically grounded theory of second language
acquisition, which has been supported by a large number of scientific studies in a wide
variety of language acquisition and learning contexts" (p. 11). According to Ratna
(2016) Krashen's five main hypothesis sum up the Natural Approach principles:
● The Acquisition or Learning Hypothesis: Acquisition and learning are two
different ways of developing competence in a language. Acquisition is the
natural way for a child to build language competence, whereas, learning is a
conscious process that focuses on the grammatical features of the language.
● The Monitor Hypothesis: We can use our knowledge in a language to self
correct our errors in the same language. But sometimes it is difficult to use the
monitor correctly due to the complexity of the grammar rule.
 ● The Natural Order Hypothesis: Language learning is always made in a lineal
order that cannot be influenced by direct teaching because the student won’t be
ready to get that learning. That is why some teachers feel frustrated due to the
lack of knowledge they have about the grammar level of their students.
● The Input Hypothesis: This hypothesis belief that a language is best acquired by
the learner when she or he is exposed to a sufficient quantity of comprehensible
input. In other words, a correct input is necessary to learn a language.
● The Affective Filter Hypothesis: According to this hypothesis, learners with low
affective filters acquire language better because they are able to receive more,
interact with others confidently and they have a higher degree of receptivity to
the input. A low-stress environment is a richer source of language acquisition.
Another two language theories where the method is based on are the Direct
Method and the Bertiz Method. On the one hand, the Direct Method is dynamic and
promotes interaction, it is the opposite of Grammar-Traduction Method. Apart from
that, teachers guide the class but not in an autoritarian way and students participate
actively answering the teachers' questions or their schoolmates' ones. Nevertheless, the
teacher continues to be the protagonist of the class. On the other hand, the Bertiz
Method continues along the same lines as the Direct Method, and it denies what
Grammar-Traduction Method says. The main characteristics of the Bertiz Method are
more speaking than writing, negation of traduction, grammar is not taught until
possessing language knowledge, use of oral conversations and questions-answer
techniques and teachers must be natice speakers (Ortiz, 2014).

What are the goals and principles advocated by the method?

The main goal of the Natural Approach is to develop students’ communicative
skills, this is, oral and written skills, from an elementary level to an intermediate level
(Criado & Sánchez, 2013). Particular goals are also specified by Krashen and Terrel
(1983):
● To be able to talk about themselves and their families.

● To communicate messages using the target language.

According to Krashen and Terrell (1983) this method has four principles:
1. Comprehension precedes production
For example, listening or reading comprehension precedes speaking or writing
abilities. This principle is based on Krashen’s input hypothesis that acquisition is the
basis for the ability of production and in order to acquire a language, the learner must
understand messages. The implications of this principles are the following:
● The teacher always uses the target language.
● The communication focuses on an interest topic of the student.
● The teacher will strive at all times to help the pupil understand.
0. Production is allowed to emerge in stages
These stages consist of:
 ● Response by nonverbal communication
● Response with a single word, such as, yes, no, there, Ok, you, me, house, run,
come, on, etc.
● Combinations of two or three words. Paper on table, me no go, where book,
don’t go, etc.
● Phrases. For example, I want to say. Where you going? The boy running, etc.
● Sentences
● More complex discourse.
In the early stages, grammatical accuracy is very low and this increases slowly
while opportunities increase for communicative interaction and acquisition. This is the
main reason why in the Natural Approach the learners are not forced to speak before
they are ready. Besides, speech errors not interfering with communication are not
corrected, indeed, acquired competence comes from comprehensible input.

0. Syllabus consists of communicative goals

Each classroom focuses on activities organized in topics rather than grammatical
structures. For instance, a possible objective according to this principle could be to be
able to order a meal in a restaurant. Additionally, the focus on these activities is not the
practice of specific grammatical structures, indeed, if goals are communicative,
grammar will be effectively acquired. However, if goals are grammatical, little grammar
will be learnt and very little acquired.
0. Activities foster a lowering of the affective filter of the
students
As it has been mentioned in the principle before, activities carried out in class
are focused on specific topics and as for this last principle these topics must be
interesting and relevant for the pupils and encourage them to express their ideas,
opinions, desires, emotions and feelings. Indeed, a conducive environment to
acquisition must be created by the teacher, this is, an environment of low anxiety level,
good relationship with the instructor, friendly relation with peers. Otherwise, acquisition
will be impossible.

What are the types of activities proposed by the method?

As for practical ways of implementing these principles, this will depend on the
level of the class and each classroom acitivity is organized by topic and not grammatical
structure (Krashen & Terrel, 1983). At beginner levels, lots of Total Physical Response
(TPR), where learners simply respond to instructions by performing physical actions;
for example, pointing at things, handing each other objects, standing, walking, sitting
down, writing and drawing. Then, at higher levels, the focus is still on providing
comprehensible input, in the form of listening or reading activities, where learners for
example, order pictures, fill in gaps, follow maps, etc. (Thornbury, 2020).
 All this activities can be combined with communicative speaking tasks, such as
“describe-and draw” or “spot-the-difference”, where learners work in pairs to exchange
information about pictures. The main thing here is that there is no grammar “agenda”;
so the learners perfom the tasks to the best of their avility. The new input comes from
watching the teacher or a more proficient speaker perform the same tasks. In this sense,
the Natural Approach is not much different from task-based learning, but it emphases
more on comprehension than on production (Thornbury, 2020).
Some examples of the activities can be:
● Listening comprehension activities: Students receive comprehensible input.
They must be able to participate in a language activity without having to respond
in the target language. For example; watch and listen, listen and repeat, listen
and point, listen and check…
● Early production: Target language production starts with single words
utterances or short phrases. The shift from answers with gestures, names or with
yes-no to producing words in the target language usually comes naturally and
spontaneously after several hours of input.
● Extending production: It is possible to expand the answer and many students
do so and produce short phrases after several hours of comprehension activities.
For example; filling the gaps, open dialog and open-ended sentences… (Krashen
& Terrel, 1983)

What are the strengths of the method? What are the risks?
Strong points:
● This method emphasizes on comprehension and on the communicative nature of
L2 acquisition (Criado & Sánchez, 2013).
● It emphasizes on comprehensible and meaningful activities rather than
mechanical practice (Criado & Sánchez, 2013).
● Speech production comes slowly and is never forced (Krashen & Terrel, 1983).
● Students feel comfortable when learning the foreign language (Krashen &
Terrel, 1983).
● The communication focuses on an interesting topic of the student (Krashen &
Terrel, 1983).
Risks:
● The teaching of grammar in NA is problematic (Achard & Niemeier, 2004).
● It does not develop the 4 skills (Krashen & Terrel, 1983).
● It focuses a lot on comprehensible input and output is also necessary (Criado &
Sánchez, 2013).
How does the method relate to other methods?
 The Natural Approach sometimes is related to the Natural Method by some
experts and that is why it is believed to be the same method. However, there are some
differences between them.
Related to Direct Method, the term natural is used to fulfill the principles of
naturalistic language learning in young learners while in the Natural Approach is used
to follow the target in naturalistic principles with successful second language
acquisition. Moreover, the direct method focuses on teachers' speeches, direct repetition
and questions and answers and does not focus on the target language while the Natural
Approach makes emphasis on input rather than practice and central lore of
comprehension. This makes links to other comprehension-based approaches in
language teaching as TPR or Audio Lingual Method (Richards & Rodgers, 1986).
Furthermore, The Natural Approach Method takes different techniques from
other methods and can be seen as innovative but only if they follow their purpose and
are used as they might be used. Some of those activities are taken from Situational
Language Teaching, Communicative Language Teaching and TPR (Total Physical
Response) (Richards & Rodgers, 1986).
Finally, methods such as Silent Way, Counseling-Learning, the Natural
Approach and TPR start with a theory of learning instead of language content. Each is
the result and application of a particular learning theory for language acquisition in
which the content remains in the background (Richards & Rodgers, 1986).
Since the class begins on the Natural Approach, emphasis is on presenting an
understable input in the target language. Teacher focuses his/her talk on class objects
and on the content of pictures as it is done in the Direct Method. Also, students do not
have to answer anything until they do not see they are ready but are demanded to reply
to teacher commands and questions in other ways (Richards & Rodgers, 1986) .

The communicative language teaching (CLT)

A set of principles

● communication
● meaningful situation
● teaching inductive
● Authenticity of text/materials
● Its OK to make mistakes
● Pre-activities

What is the historical background of the method, that is, when, why and how did it
emerge?
In the early 1970s the term communicative competence emerged as an important
theoretical construct in explorations of the relationship of language to society and
culture. Communicative Language Teaching grew out of the work of a number of
scholars in Great Britain and the United States.

With sponsorship of the Council of Europe, a team of experts began to investigate the
possibility of a new type of syllabus based on a functional or communicative definition
of language. Their work evolved into proposals by linguist D. A. Wilkins (1972, 1976)
to organize language teaching according to linguistic functions and notions. Wilkins's
work became known as the Notional-Functional Approach.

Other British linguists such as Brumfit, Candlin, and Widdowson made similar
proposals for communicative or functional approaches to language teaching. Their work
quickly spread through Europe and became known collectively as Communicative
Language Teaching or CLT (Richards & Rodgers, 2001; Savignon, 2005).

What language learning theory is the method based on?

Although there are many forms of constructivism from radical constructivism to social
constructivism, this paper will focus briefly on the theory of social constructivism that
informs communicative language teaching rather than other forms of more radical
constructivism (Schwandt, 1998). Social constructivism is a variety of cognitive
constructivism that emphasizes the collaborative nature of much learning. Social
constructivism was developed by post-revolutionary Soviet psychologist Lev Vygotsky.

With increasing recognition of the benefits of interactive and collaborative learning,

constructivism has influenced communicative language teaching by emphasizing
learner-centered teaching strategies and the importance of using the language to
communicate and make meaning (Hymes, 1971, 1972). Social constructivist learning
emphasizes the process of learning, self-inquiry, as well as social and communicative
skills (Brown, 2000; Buchberger, 2001; De Corte et al., 2003; Gerjets & Hesse, 2005;
Lowyck, Lehtinen, & Elen, 2004). Thus with constructivist thinking, the learner’s
perceptions and experiences are the beginning of an active learning process.
Some innovative teaching responses are based on constructivist principles but do not
specifically require the use of technology (Reciprocal Teaching, the researches,
cooperative learning, etc.). Both of these innovative teaching responses demonstrate
constructivist teaching principles which underpin communicative language teaching and
powerful learning environments.

Communicative language teaching incorporates these same characteristics. There is an

emphasis on the learner and the learning process is central. The main aim of
communicative language teaching is for the capacity of communication (Breen, 1984;
Breen & Candlin, 2001), for the learner to use the language to create meaning and
practice with the language so that familiarity and fluency in use are the result. The aim
is for the learner to apply and transfer the language skills to other contexts of language
use. In this way, communicative language teaching, underpinned by social constructivist
principles, expands the horizons of language learners, enables them to benefit from
collaborative practice, and builds on their existing knowledge to create meaning. With
active learners, cumulative and constructive goal-directed learning with diagnostic
feedback and opportunities for reflection, educators can create their own powerful
learning environments.

What are the goals and principles advocated by the method?

Although a wide variety of theories have been associated with communicative language
learning, all of them seem to be based on some principles:

● Language is a tool for communication → communication is the center (what we

should promote as teachers). Main objective: learn language by using it to
communicate.
● Meaningful situations are needed. Real communication, simulations in the
classroom.
● Inductive teaching method.
● Use of authentic materials (texts, etc.).
 ● Mistakes can be made, it is a sign of improvement. Mistakes are made by
practicing. Teachers can tolerate that students made mistakes, it is a sign that
they are trying it.
● Students are the center: autonomous learning, …
● The 4 skills must be balanced and integrated.
● There are two main types of activities: the ones focused on fluency and the ones
focused on accuracy. Necessity of pre-activities before the main activities.

Considering those principles, it must be said that there is no specific sequence of

activities that the teacher must follow, it is up to him/her.

Role of students

Learners now had to participate in classroom activities that were based on a cooperative
rather than individualistic approach to learning. Students had to become comfortable
with listening to their peers in group work or pair work tasks, rather than relying on the
teacher for a model.

Role of teachers

Teachers now had to assume the role of facilitator and monitor. Rather than being a
model for correct speech and writing and one with the primary responsibility of making
students produce plenty of error-free sentences, the teacher had to develop a different
view of learners’ errors and of her/his own role in facilitating language learning.

What are the types of activities proposed by the method?

Teachers and material writers are finding ways of developing classroom activities that
reflect the principles of a communicative methodology.

Types of practice:
 ● Mechanical practice refers to a controlled practice activity which students can
successfully carry out without necessarily understanding the language they are
using. Examples of this kind of activity would be repetition drills and
substitution drills designed to practice use of particular grammatical or other
items.
● Meaningful practice refers to an activity where language control is still provided
but where students are required to make meaningful choices when carrying out
practice. For example, in order to practice the use of prepositions to describe
locations of places, students might be given a street map with various buildings
identified in different locations. They are also given a list of prepositions such as
across from, on the corner of, near, on, next to. They then have to answer
questions such as “Where is the book shop? Where is the café?” etc. The
practice is now meaningful because they have to respond according to the
location of places on the map.
● Communicative practice refers to activities where practice in using language
within a real communicative context is the focus, where real information is
exchanged, and where the language used is not totally predictable. For example,
students might have to draw a map of their neighborhood and answer questions
about the location of different places, such as the nearest bus stop, the nearest
café.

Some types of activities are:

● Information-Gap Activities: more authentic communication is likely to occur in

the classroom if students go beyond practice of language forms for their own
sake and use their linguistic and communicative resources in order to obtain
information. In doing so, they will draw available vocabulary, grammar, and
communication strategies to complete a task.
● Jigsaw activities: the teacher plays a recording in which three people with
different points of view discuss their opinions on a topic of interest. The teacher
prepares three different listening tasks, one focusing on each of the three
speaker’s points of view. Students are divided into three groups and each group
listens and takes notes on one of the three speaker’s opinions. Students are then
 rearranged into groups containing a student from groups A, B, and C. They now
role-play the discussion using the information they obtained.
● Other Activity Types in CLT:
o Task-completion activities: puzzles, games, map-reading, and other
kinds of classroom tasks in which the focus is on using one’s language
resources to complete a task.
o Information-gathering activities: student-conducted surveys,
interviews, and searches in which students are required to use their
linguistic resources to collect information.
o Opinion-sharing activities: activities in which students compare values,
opinions, or beliefs, such as a ranking task in which students list six
qualities in order of importance that they might consider in choosing a
date or spouse.
o Information-transfer activities: These require learners to take
information that is presented in one form, and represent it in a different
form. For example, they may read instructions on how to get from A to
B, and then draw a map showing the sequence, or they may read
information about a subject and then represent it as a graph.
o Reasoning-gap activities: These involve deriving some new information
from given information through the process of inference, practical
reasoning, etc. For example, working out a teacher’s timetable on the
basis of given class timetables.
o Role plays: activities in which students are assigned roles and improvise
a scene or exchange based on given information or clues.

It is essential to mention that all the activity types mentioned above can be considered
as information-gap activities, as there is a need to communicatie.

Most of the activities discussed above reflect an important aspect of classroom tasks in
CLT, namely that they are designed to be carried out in pairs or small groups. Through
completing activities in this way, it is argued, learners will obtain several benefits: they
can learn from hearing the language used by other members of the group. They will
produce a greater amount of language than they would use in teacher-fronted activities.
Their motivational level is likely to increase. They will have the chance to develop
fluency. Teaching and classroom materials today consequently make use of a wide
variety of small-group activities.

What are the strengths of the method? What are the risks?

Strengths:

Firstly, unlike the Grammar-Translation Method and the Direct Method the CLT
approach tends to be a student-centred and situation-oriented language teaching
practice. Within the situation practices, teachers tend to develop some related activities
within student living communities and societies, creating familiar backgrounds and
with understanding of the vocabulary and application of the sentences. This
speaking may not have a strong focus on grammar and sentence translation accuracy.
However, students may increase their understanding and knowledge of language
use.

Secondly, other significant advantages of the CLT approach is the interaction between
teachers, students and peers. For the CLT approach, the relationships between
both peers and teachers are significantly increased and highly considered. The
CLT approach allows both teachers and students to transfer their traditional
teaching and learning beliefs into an innovative teaching and learning approach.

Thirdly, the CLT approach usually increases the overall teaching and learning
interests of students. When students are allowed to participate in some real-life stories
and exercises, this develops the interests of the students beyond the classroom
environment. Also, the related stories, exercises, problem-based materials and case
studies are more closely related to daily activities. In other words, students became
the protagonists instead of the audiences. Moreover, related activities do not only work
in the classroom but also allow students to bring classroom activities into applications
and the workplace after completion of the lessons.
Disadvantages:

Firstly, lack of language proficiency. In fact, some teachers may be unable to answer
detailed questions about the target language, sociolinguistics or culture as they arise
from interactions in the classroom. The CLT approach encourages teachers to employ
related teaching and learning materials and tools. However, the range of these related
materials could be large, therefore, even if teachers prepared the lessons, some
questions and challenges could be missed.

Secondly, for a large number of students, traditionally, learning a new language is about
memorising vocabulary and intensive reading of materials after completing each
lecture. Therefore, many students are unwilling to fully accept the CLT approach due to
their traditional views of language learning techniques.

Tirthly, learner behaviour would be highly influenced by the practice of the CLT
approach in a classroom environment. Therefore, based on learner behaviour, the
CLT approach may have potential limitations to some groups of learners due to social
and cultural backgrounds and perspectives.

Fourthly, classroom size and student enrolment numbers for each individual classroom
significantly influence the outcomes and performances of the CLT approach. Large
sized lectures offer no opportunities for students to interact and communicate with their
peers, as in a silent and concentrated environment. Also, teachers can usually not handle
additional questions, corrections... for each individual student.

Fifthly, psycho-linguists and social-linguists advocate that regardless of the age, gender,
nationality or background of language learners, awareness of grammar acquisition
and understanding of the language grammar. When teaching grammar with the CLT
approach, teachers tend to create a situation which outlines ideas in a specific context in
order to seek communicative functions. Under this direction, the syntax of the
systematic and progressive is subject to a certain degree of neglect, and can give people
a disorderly understanding.
Teaching proficiency and reading through storytelling (TPR storytelling)

● Teachers presents they key vocabulary: target language + mother tongue

● Teachers tell the story: exaggerate, using gestures, sounds…
● Teacher gives learners a text
Learners: translate ir into their mother tongue
● circling technique🡪 Interact with the learner when you take the text you are
reading as guide line and you ask questions about it and ask for they interest,
likes, god points, thoughts… about the text

What is the historical background of the method, that is, when, why and how did it
emerge?

In the early 1990s, a high school Spanish teacher from California called Blaine Ray was
disappointed with the below average learning process of his learners. Because of that,
he began to use Total Physical Response (TPR) techniques, complementing them with
the textbooks and grammar lessons. Surprisingly, thanks to the use of TPR, students'
motivation increased (Alley & Overfield, 2008).

So, Ray continued to experiment using different variations of the TPR. At first, the TPR
worked great; however, before the first month, that success ended. Despite this fact, he
wanted to know how it could be possible to move students from hearing and responding
to the language to making them speak, creating their own sentences. He noticed that
using TPR, students learned the vocabulary much quicker and internalized it in a more
meaningful way, than working on the workbook (Alley & Overfield, 2008).

Finally, Ray hit upon the idea of storytelling as the basis for adding new language
structures in context. This approach called storytelling has been perfectioned by many
followers in a multitude of conferences, publications and Internet discussions (Alley &
Overfield, 2008).

What language learning theory is the method based on?

We can find three methodologies that are most closely related to TPRS: Total Physical
Response (TPR), the Natural Approach and Self Determination Theory (SDT).

Firstly, we are going to work on the relation among TPRS and TPR methods. It is
essential to mention that the TPRS method is based on TPR. This technique was
developed by James Asher in 1960, and it is very useful in order to teach a foreign
language (Beal, 2011).

On the one hand, when using the TPR method, the storyteller (the teacher) is the
instructor. He or she has 3 essential roles: organizing the tasks, facilitating or promoting
an action model and to supervise students´ actions (Usero, 2014). On the other hand, the
storyteller's pronunciation might be clear. Furthermore, grammar structures must be
simple and the teacher should use gestures, mimicry or voice changes to make it easier
for students to understand the content (Larsen-Freeman & Long, 1994; mentioned in
Usero, 2014).

Moreover, apart from TPR, TPRS method is grounded in the Natural Approach of
Stephen Krashen and Tracy Terrel. Based on this method, Krashen developed his
Language Acquisition Hypotheses, which are formed by five different ones: the
acquisition learning hypothesis, the input hypothesis, the affective filter hypothesis, the
monitor hypothesis and the natural order hypothesis (Krashen, 1981; mentioned in Beal,
2011). Even so, the TPRS method only takes into account the first three (Beal, 2011).

Finally, Self Determination Theory which provides L2 motivation is related to TPRS.

This theory considers that the intrinsic motivation of participating in a task for pleasure
and interest increases when learning activities supply three basic psychological needs of
autonomy, relatedness and competence. (Ryan & Deci, 2000; mentioned in Printer,
2018). These three basic needs are satisfied by TPRS since it is a motivating and
engaging method for students who are learning a foreign language (Printer, 2018).

What are the goals and principles advocated by the method?

It can be said that teachers and curriculum designers who use TPRS lessons are based
on at least two VanPatten’s (2004) processing principles. On the one hand, it is
important for learners to process grammatical forms that are meaningful or not
meaningful for them. On the other hand, students might rely on event possibilities
instead of word order to interpret sentences (VanPatten, 2004; mentioned in Foster,
2011).

Normally, before starting with storytelling, teachers prepare their students with classical
TPR at least during three weeks. After that, they make a transition into storytelling but
they still continue using TPR for new vocabulary and grammar (Alley & Overfield,
2008).

In order to implement storytelling with TPRS principles in the classroom, three steps
must be followed (Kara, 2019):

1. The first step involves establishing meaning. This step includes the introduction
and the pre-teaching of basic vocabulary and structures, which will be beneficial
to students. It is very important to remark that this must be done before the
storytelling exercise. That is, teachers use phrases that students know, limiting
the vocabulary they use in the input.

2. The second step includes asking for a story. That is, as the story progresses,
learners are usually asked questions to check their comprehension, using a
technique named “circling”. This method includes yes/no, either/or and wh-
questions. In this step, students have the opportunity to create the story.
 3. Finally, students will read, discuss and translate the story. Then, they will
complete follow-up activities, which they may include writing activities, quizzes
and relating the text with the grammar.

What are the types of activities proposed by the method?

According to Alley & Overfield (2008), in this method, as its name says, the type of
activity that is used is to tell a story.

In addition, the teacher monitors students’ comprehension using questions and oral
fill-in-the-blank exercises in order to determine if students fully comprehend the new
material. Later, he or she narrates the story and selects some students to act out the
mini-situation. After doing it, selected students take over the narration while others
perform it. Finally, the whole class retells the story in pairs (Alley & Overfield, 2008).

However, before teaching the main story, the teacher reviews the mini-situations and
provides a translation or a gesture to each word. Once this is done, it is time to teach the
main story, which has at least one character that has at least one problem (Alley &
Overfield, 2008).

Moreover, according to Ray and Seely (1998), in language learning multiple repetitions
are crucial. TPRS defenders say that a student must hear a word 75 times before it is
attached to long-term memory and this methodology achieves these multiple repetitions
through a technique called circling.

Thanks to this circling technique, students hear the key words of the story multiple
times and some details are added to make the story more interesting. Once those details
have been established, they form groups with the same number of people as there are
characters in the story; then, the teacher retells the story while the students in each
group act it out.

Later, some students take the teacher’s role as narrator, and the acting process is
repeated. Finally, smaller groups are formed, and students represent the story in cartoon
panels.

Finally, TPRS incorporates reading through different versions of the stories told in class
and to certify that the input is comprehensible, the first step in the reading process is to
translate the story (Ray & Seely, 1998; mentioned in Alley & Overfield, 2008).

What are the strengths of the method? What are the risks?

Like any other method, TPRS has its own strengths and risks. On the one hand,
according to Ray and Seely (1998), repetitions are one of the keys to develop a
successful language learning and TPRS method uses those. It achieves that with a
technique called circling.
Moreover, stories are another strong point in this method, since they help to establish
connections in the content, organizing the information in a way where it does not get
lost. In addition, the emotional component allows students to understand the meaning of
the message in a more meaningful way (Hamilton & Weiss, 2005).

Apart from that, storytelling has multiple benefits, such as creating connections between
oral and written comprehension, developing oral expression while strengthening
self-esteem, improving written ability, developing literary sensitivity among students,
increasing vocabulary and having fun at the same time they learn (Hamilton & Weiss,
2005).

On the other hand, this method has various risks. One of the risks is that an overuse of
the same can develop into a disinterest in the learners, which is why it is advised to be
used in combination with other methods (Bowen, 2009).

In addition, as Lee (2012) concludes, this technique has some limits due to the fact that
students might get distracted. That might occur because the story is not attractive. It also
could be that the teacher does not apply the method correctly.

Finally, using this method in every learning area is not beneficial for students, since this
technique could not address each one of them. Apart from that, it may happen that every
story is not adequate to the critical reading (Lee, 2012).

How does the method relate to other methods?

As many other teaching methods, the Teaching Proficiency and Reading Through
Storytelling (TPRS) is related with other techniques. Firstly, we have to take into
account that TPRS is grounded in Total Physical Response (TPR) and Language
Acquisition Hypothesis of Stephen Krashen (Beal, 2011).

Even so, compared to methods like Grammar Translation, the Direct Method or the
Audiolingual Method, TPRS represent a radically different approach (Brown, 1994;
mentioned in Alley & Overfield, 2008). However, closer examination reveals
similarities between TPRS and these methodologies.

Furthermore, Ray and Seely (2003) compared TPRS to Natural Approach and it was
found that both advocate comprehension through pre-production of language.They
agree that all input should be in the target language and comprehensible to the students,
but TPRS focuses more on personalized questions to increase attention and interest.
They also differ in that Krashen finds pre-teaching vocabulary unnecessary. Finally,
they both advocate a silent period which allows students to speak when they feel
comfortable (Beal, 2011).

When compared to the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach, Brown

(2007) claims that both methods have a focus on communicative competence and not on
grammar. Both methods have the goal of getting students to use the language
productively in unrehearsed situations, but the TPRS focuses more on retelling,
rewriting and reading stories. Furthermore, CLT remarks the use of authentic materials
and focuses on meaningful language functions. (Beal, 2011).

TPRS support language acquisition before learning grammar rules, so it is safe to say
that this method shares little with the Grammar-Translation Method, which is based on
the teaching of grammar above any other goal (Beal, 2011).

As we have mentioned, the TPRS develops habits through the circling technique and
repetition of stories, which is similar to the Audio-Lingual Method (ALM). This method
also focuses on the development of habits of conversation for future real-life
conversations (Shrum & Glisan, 2005). Nevertheless, they disagree on the use of
textbook dialogues and the requirement of immediate production of language (Beal,
2011).

Finally, The Direct method must be mentioned. In this technique, like TPRS, input is
comprehensible and varied. In both methods, grammar is not taught in an explicit way
(Omaggio, 1986). In the Direct method, grammar is taught inductively with questions,
modeling and students working out the grammar rules (Shrum & Glisam, 2005).
Questions must be interesting and meaningful, and it must be focused on accuracy.

Content-based instruction (CLIL)

● receptive to productive
● 3 pilars: content - language – culture 🡪 important to focus the same way on
them at to work them at the same level
● You start from receptive activities and you move to productive activities. There
are 3 main focuses: content, language and culture. Its similar to content based
language, but on that one the focus is in the language but here the focus in on
both language and content.
● 5 stages
1. Give some input about the content, usually using a text but not necessarily
2. Work on language, we understand better what we have read
3. Extra work to work the content
4. Language learning strategies (LLS). Especially important to the students
to learn about a foreign language. you sure explicitly work on language
using one of these strategies of learning
5. Produce
What is the historical background of the method, that is, when, why and how did it
emerge?
The publication of Bernard Mohan’s work in the mid-1980s was the first
appearance of what is known today as CBI. Mohan’s Language and Content explored
the different ways in which the subject matter and the learning of a language can be
achieved (Brinton, 2003, in Bula, 2013, p.72). Other authors who made an important
contribution in order to launch this approach were Cantoni-Harvey and Crandall
(Brinton, 2003, in Bula, 2013, p.72). References on the foundations of the paradigm
trace back to the late 1980s with, among others, the pioneering works by Mohan (1986),
Cantoni-Harvey (1987), Crandall (1987), Benesch (1988), and Brinton, Snow and
Wesche (1989) (Dueñas, 2004, p.86).
A major source of support for CBI derives from the work of some researchers in
the area of SLA, particularly from the postulates of Krashen and Swain. Briefly, the
theories of Krashen (1982, 1984, 1895) claim that second language acquisition occurs
when the learner receives comprehensible input, not when he or she is forced to
memorize vocabulary or manipulate language by lots of grammar exercises.
According to these premises, those methodological practices which provide
students with more comprehensible input are bound to be more successful in achieving
the desired goals. Since learners understand the content in that new linguistic code, they
are more likely to progress in their command of the new language (Krashen, 1984,
p.62). CBI principles are closely linked to those assumptions, as the focus of instruction
is on the subject, and not on the form. In Krashen's (1984, p.62) words, it is on "what is
being said rather than how".
Thus, as some other authors have pointed out, high levels of competence can be
reached in classrooms where the target language is a medium of communication rather
than an object of analysis (Genesee, 1991, in Larsen-Freeman & Long, 1991).
In addition, researchers such as Swain (1985, 1993) support that, in order for
learners to develop communicative competence, they must also have the opportunity to
use the new language productively, both orally and in writing. Due to that, CBI offers
the opportunity to develop communicative competence appropriately.
According to Met (1999, p.7), content-based instruction models differ in design
and implementation depending on the educational level and the instruction aim they are
set. To analyze the different models’, Met (1999, p.7) proposes to divide them according
to where they put emphasis on (see Figure 1). By doing that, (Met 1999, p.7) generates
a continuum which places "content-driven" models at one end and "language-driven
models" at the other.
What language learning theory is the method based on?
Content Based Instruction is based on Socio-Cultural language learning theory
(Aravena et al., 2015, p.38). This theory was originally presented by Vygotsky and it
says that language development arises as a result of social interactions (Aravena et al.,
2015, p.45).
Moreover, According to Aravena et al. (2015, p. 46), the theory puts emphasis
on social interactions and conversations. However, both individual and social factors are
important and due to that, they must be taken into account parallelly.
Thus, Content-Based Instruction is a method based on the information students
get more than on linguistic knowledge. It claims that students language more
successfully when they use the language as a tool to acquire information, rather than as
the goal (Richard & Rodgers, 2001 in Aravena et al., 2015, p.50).

What are the goals and principles advocated by the method?

Content Based Instruction method has different goals. According to Richards &
Rodgers (2001, p. 204), the main goal of the CBI is to prepare students to acquire the
language. This is done by introducing the students into a known context so that they
learn the language by using it within that specific context.
Moreover, another important goal of Content Based Instruction is to keep
students interested and motivated in language learning by using stimulating content and
appealing materials (Hidi, Renninger & Krapp, 1992).
Regarding the different principles of the method, Richards and Rodgers (2001,
p. 204) say that people learn a second language more successfully when they use the
language as a tool for acquiring information, rather than as the objective.
Bula (2013), for his part, proposes other additional principles. Firstly, CBI is
based on content rather than on language. Secondly, this method has integrated skills.
Thirdly, it involves actively students in all the phases of their learning process by
creating opportunities for students to participate in the construction of their knowledge.
That is to say, this method is learner-centred and teachers do not control student
learning experience. Additionally, the content used is relevant and closely related to
students. Those contents take into account students' interest and their academic skills.
Finally, the materials and tasks used are real and they help students to develop their
language skills in a natural way.

What are the types of activities proposed by the method?

Peachey (n.d.) proposes a way to create a Content Based Instruction lesson. First
of all, there must be a preparation in which the teacher chooses a subject of interest to
students. Additionally, the teacher has to find three or four appropriate information
sources to investigate the different aspects of the subject. Those sources can be
websites, reference books, audio or video of lectures, etc., but all those references need
to be real.
 During the lesson, the class will be divided into small groups and each of them
will have assigned a small research task. Students will have to research in the sources
provided by the teacher the information needed to fulfil the task. Once they find the
needed information they will form new groups and they will share their information
with the other peers, comparing it. Finally, with all the information they have collected,
they will do a report or a presentation that explains the subject matter in an extended
way.
Taking into account Peachey’s (n.d.) proposal, we suggest an example of
Content Based Instruction activity. Firstly, students share their ideas in brainstorming
and the teacher evaluates their previous knowledge about the subject of French cooking,
that is to say, about different food, cooking techniques and famous chefs. Then the
teacher gives a French cooking book and a video of a French cooking lesson that
describes different cooking techniques. Students, in small groups, will read, see and
understand the information. By doing that, the teacher will introduce some new words
such as ‘farine’ (flavour), 'fromage' (cheese) and 'pain' (bread), that presented within the
context of the content will be understandable and interiorized by students. After that,
groups will be asked to invent a French cooking recipe by using the information they
have collected. Finally, students will share their recipes with the whole class by doing a
performance.

What are the strengths of the method? What are the risks?
This method has some strengths and some weaknesses to be taken into account
when putting into practice (Bolaños, 2013, p.32). Regarding the strengths, Bolaños
(2013, p.32) says that the most significant one is the real use of language, that is to say,
language is not more seen as distant grammar because it has the purpose of content
teaching. This led students to develop their comprehension abilities by giving
authenticity to the language.
Another important strength is that this method makes learning a language more
interesting and motivating. As the language is used with a real purpose students gain
independence because they understand the aim of the activities rather than solving
isolated problems (Bolaños, 2013, p.32).
Moreover, Content Based Instruction helps students to develop some valuable
study skills. When students work with authentic materials they have to manipulate it in
a natural way and that implies some note-taking, summarizing and key information
extraction as they would do in their everyday life (Bolaños, 2013, p.33).
Additionally, Bolaño (201, p.33) claims that this teaching method helps to
develop collaborative skills among students as the inclusion of the group is enhanced.
This happens because the language learning process involves all the students in the
activities and communication is promoted as the main working tool.
On the other hand, the method also has some weaknesses. The main one is the
fact that, as Content Based learning method is not explicitly focused on language
learning, it can confuse students. Students can feel that they are not improving any
language skills due to the way content is presented and that feeling can lead to a
motivation loss (Bolaños, 2013, p.34).
 Furthermore, Bolaño (2013, p.35) explains that the content will be developed in
a language that will not usually be students native language so some students might get
lost and change to their mother tongue. That can turn to a problem if it happens because
of the lack of abilities for understanding the second language
Finally, it is important to highlight that it can be hard to find information sources
and texts of low level because those materials need to be real. Due to that, this can be an
obstacle when developing this method in a primary classroom (Bolaños, 2013, p.35).

How does the method relate to other methods?

After looking at other methods and understanding their goal and where their
background, the most noticeable fact is that almost every theory we have seen comes as
a development of another theory. That occurs as a result of the developments and the
improvements these methods, for teaching and learning, have come through during their
use time.
While teaching children, all the methods agree that the teacher is to the students’
service. That is to say, the teacher acts as a helper for the students and guides their
development and progress, having teachers’ support whenever they need it. This way
students can succeed without being afraid to fail as they learn through their own
mistakes.
Moreover, the activities proposed in these methods are often oral-based
activities. Those activities allow students to interact with each other simulating
authentic and real conversation, which is the main objective of the methods. In addition,
activities must be done with authentic material to make the communicative situation
real, promoting students to develop oral comprehension and expression. Directly related
to this, the main problem that the methods can have is the difficulty of finding real and
authentic material adapted to the level students have. However, it is the teacher's role to
accommodate those materials in order to be used in the classroom.

Task based instruction (TBI)

Procedure:

Pretask- Presentation Task Post-task

Prepare it ● The learning really ● The apply the
happens here learning
● Learn to adress the ● Assessments
task ● Show what they have
learn
What is the historical background of the method, that is, when, why and how did it
emerge?
Prabhu (1987) first established Task-based learning (TBL) in Bangalore,
Southern India. Prabhu believed that people could learn more efficiently a language
when they focused on the task, rather than on the language. The emergence of the TBA
is connected to the 'Bangalore Project' initiated in 1979 and completed in 1984
(Richards, 2006). This method arose in response to some limitations of the traditional
Presentation, Practice, Performance (PPP) approach (Long and Crookes, 1991; Ellis,
2003 in Sánchez, 2004).
According to Brumfit & Johnson (1979) in Skehan (2003) during the 1970s
there were moves that embraced the communicative approach . As a result, it became
more obvious that it was not enough to focus on a language structure when learning a
language, it was also needed to be concerned about developing the capacity to express
meanings (Widdowson, 1978; Skehan, 2003). The implications of these pedagogic
developments widespread and influenced syllabus design, methodology, assessment,
and an early and influential proposal for the use of task-based approaches (Prabhu,
1987; Skehan 2003).

What language learning theory is the method based on?

Task-based Instruction (TBI) is based on the constructivist theory of learning
and the communicative language teaching methodology.
According to Bereiter (1994) in Bada (2015), constructivism states that people
construct their own understanding and knowledge of the world, through experiencing
and reflecting on them. In relation Oliver (2000) in Bada (2015) When encountering
new knowledge, learners have to accommodate that knowledge with their previous
ideas and experiences, sometimes modifying their beliefs, or discarding the new
information as irrelevant. In order to do this, they must ask questions, explore, and
assess what we know.

The communicative language teaching focuses on the acquisition of grammar

and vocabulary and its aim is to develop the learner’s competence to communicate in
the target language. Unlike traditional approaches, CLT is learner centered. And, the
teacher's role is the facilitator’s. Activities involve real communication, they need to be
meaningful and used in an authentic manner. Task-based instruction is a part of CLT and
its importance remains in the fact that it brings CLT to class (Richards & Rodgers,
1999).

What are the goals and principles advocated by the method?

GOALS (Richards, 2006)
Communicative competence includes the following aspects of language knowledge:
● Knowing how to use language for different purposes and functions.
● Knowing to vary the use of language depending on the setting and the
participants (e.g., distinguishing when to use formal and informal speech or
 when to use language appropriately for written as opposed to spoken
communication).
● Knowing how to produce and understand different types of texts (e.g.,
narratives, reports, interviews, conversations).
● Knowing how to maintain communication despite having limitations in one’s
language knowledge (e.g., through using different kinds of communication
strategies).
PRINCIPLES
In TBI, students carry out tasks. Tasks are activities in which (Richards, 2006):
● The existing language resources are used.
● The outcome is not just to learn a language, but language acquisition may
happen as learners carry out it.
● The focus is on the meaning
● The use of communication strategies and interactional skills are required in the
tasks that involve two or more learners.

The principles of the TBL are the next ones (Huang, 2010):
● The focus is on the completion of the task.
● Tasks must be content-oriented meaningful activities.
● Tasks are usually carried out in pairs or small groups. This way, they are
provided with opportunities for interaction and for the learners’ active use of the
language.
● To complete the task successfully, the focus has to be on understanding and
communicating meanings.
● All tasks must have a measurable outcome. An intrinsically engaging outcome is
more likely to maintain learners’ intrinsic motivation .
● The task needs to ensure that learners focus on form through a closer study of
some of the specific language features at the end of the task.

What are the types of activities proposed by the method?

Two kinds of tasks can usefully be distinguished (Richards, 2006):
- Pedagogical tasks. These tasks are specially designed for the classroom and
they intend to require the use of specific interactional strategies, also they may require
the use of specific types of language (skills, grammar or vocabulary). For example:
trying to find the differences between two pictures, even though it would not happen in
the real world, the interactional processes provide useful input to language
development.
- Real-world tasks. The objective of these tasks is to reflect real-world situations
in which the use of language is needed, and may be considered a training for real-world
tasks. For example: a role play where students practice a job interview.
There was a change in the sequence, which was the main difference among other
traditional language teaching approaches, such as the PPP approach. TBL activities are
usually developed according to this sequence (Skehan, 2003):
 ● Pre-task activities: Introduction to the topic and the task.
● Task cycle: Task planning, doing the task, preparation to report on the task and
presenting the task report.
● Language focus: Analysis and practice.

Willis (1996) in Richards (2006) proposes six types of tasks as the basis for TBI:
1. Listing tasks: Make up a list of things they would pack if they were going on a winter
vacation.
2. Sorting and ordering: Make up a list of the main characteristics of the four seasons.
3. Comparing: Students compare posters of the four seasons.
4. Problem-solving: Students have to read a letter and give advice to the writer.
5. Sharing personal experience: Students debate about an ethical or moral issue.
6. Creative tasks: Students design the decoration of a house.

What are the strengths of the method? What are the risks?
STRENGTHS (Ganta, 2015):
● Helps learners to interact spontaneously: Learners can use the vocabulary and
grammar they already know while they benefit from others' expressions.
● Automaticity: Automaticity is achieved by using language rules in a creative
manner in authentic situations, is more efficient, accurate and stable
performance.
● Opportunity to learn vocabulary: Words inferred through active processing are
learnt better than in glossaries. An interactive glossary where learners interact
gets better results.
● Provides essential conditions for language learning: In order to learn a language
motivation, exposure and opportunities are needed. This way, students are able
to use language purposefully, in cooperation and they try different
communicative strategies.
● Maximises scope for communication: Tasks let learners acquire and assimilate
language items that they already know, and this way they can transfer their
previously acquired knowledge to new contexts of communication in a creative
way.
● Experiential learning: It is learner centered. In order to involve learners, their
immediate personal experience is used as a starting point.

RISKS: (Richards, 2006)

● It is supposed to replace the P-P-P approach, but there is little evidence of being
more effective than it.
● As the focus is on classroom processes, it can be too vague in courses that have
specific instructional outcomes to attain (e.g.,examination targets).
● Taking part as a beginner can be hard with no linguistic resource. Also, some
tasks may require vocabulary or structures the learners did not know.
● Some tasks are unlikely to occur in real life situations.
● The criteria used for selecting and sequencing tasks is problematic.
● As the main focus is on the language fluency, there may be problems with the
accuracy.
 ● A successful outcome of a task can be achieved without achieving the real aim
of the task.

How does the method relate to other methods?

Comparing TBI with the Audio Lingual Method (ALM), the focus of the first
one is on the meaning of the message, while the second one focuses on the sentences
and the sound patterns. While in TBI language input happens while students generate
language, in the ALM the input is given by inductive analogy. When it comes to the
learning content, students’ needs drive the content in TBI, but the teacher directs the
learning content in ALM. In TBI, the use of natural language is encouraged, but in
ALM the vocabulary is strictly limited and learned in the context. Finally, a similarity
between these two methods is that the communication between students happens in the
target language (Alemi, 2016).
If we compare TBI with Content Based Instruction (CBI), we find out that the
basis of CBI is that a content that wants to be worked is selected and, after this, the
possible grammar or vocabulary aspects that can be worked on are selected. However,
in TBI language acquisition is not the main goal, as it is something that may occur while
students develop the tasks. In addition, students in CBI use the language as a way of
acquiring information, while TBI students use the language for everyday situations
(Richards, 2006).

The lexical approach

● Interested in sequences- words (noun, adjectives,….), fluency (in sequences of

words) , colocations ( how the word is collocate will help you to really know
how to use the language, not needed to really know the grammar)
● 3 steps
1. Read the text, analyse, observe (how is the text, the word there, how it is
produced)
2. Identify colocation, what goes one before the other and after
3. Experiment, start using collocation by identifying

What is the historical background of the method, that is, when, why and how
did it emerge?

Before defining the first steps of the lexical approach, it is necessary to take
a look at the background and see how the idea developed into Michael Lewis
approach. The first guise was Corders (1973) Holoprases, which explained the use
of some words which are used by children when they are learning to talk and it
takes the place of what would be a full sentence in an older person's speech. For
example, use “go” when they want to mean “I want to leave now”. In 1974, Hakuta
made a research about the “prefabricated patterns” to show that with the teaching
method used at that time, the learners used syntactic structures that they didn’t
really understand.

Afterwards, in 1979 Keller tried to enrich speaking fluency through

“gambits”, which means formulaic expressions whose primary role is strategic to
facilitate conversations, such as, May I interrupt for a moment?. Related to this
guise, in 1983 multimorphemic phrases or sentences, either social or individual
evolution, became available to a speaker as a single prefabricated item in her or his
lexicon. The lexical syllabus which is focused on vocabulary as a primary objective
rather than on sentence structure, emerged in 1990. David Willies argued that the
lexical syllabus identifies the commonest words of the language and focuses on the
commonest patterns.

Finally, before reaching the lexical approach, Nattinger and DeCarrico

proposed “lexical phrases and language teaching”. They have been defined in
different ways depending on the requirements of each author, but it could be said
that lexical phrases are sequences of words that collocate, are often idiomatic, have
a high-frequency of occurrence, and perform specific rhetorical functions that can
be applied across multiple disciplines and discourse types. The lexical phrase is
seen as an ideal unit which can be exploited for language teaching (Nattinger &
DeCarrico, 1992).
The Lexical Approach began to take shape during the 1990s when Michael
Lewis (1993) proposed that name and defined the most important guidelines of
the approach. Lewis claimed that lexis is the most important element and
organising principle in syllabus design, as words are the main carriers of meaning,
which is essential for effective communication. That is why lexis is considered as
the center of language structure, learning and teaching, because “language is
grammaticalized lexis, not lexicalized grammar”, thus, Lewis suggested (1993) that
command of grammar is not a requirement for effective communication.

Moreover, The Lexical Approach is just an approach, not a syllabus or

method. It advocates a total re-evaluation of the language which is offered to
learners and how that language is analysed. It also suggests that a great deal of
traditional activities that are carried out at classrooms are not productive and
indeed, we should stop using them.

What language learning theory is the method based on?

It is not based on any language learning theory. The method assumes that
for acquiring language in order to communicate effectively, we should mainly focus
on lexicon rather than on grammar.

What are the goals and principles advocated by the method?

Goals

According to Lewis (1997), these are the goals to achieve with Lexical Approach:
 ● To develop communicative competence by learning prefabricated language.
● Understand and consolidate learning materials based on lexical rather than
grammatical principles.
● Comprehending the most common lexical words together with lexical
patterns and accesses.
● Emphasize lexico-semantic knowledge in teaching and achieve successful
communication over grammatical drilling and the ambiguous notion of
correctness
● Achieve fluency

Principles

The main principle of the lexical approach is to allow learners to experience

language items in natural contexts and to learn from their experience. It focuses on
developing learners' proficiency with words and word combinations. It is based on
the idea that an important part of language acquisition is the ability to produce
lexical phrases as chunks and that these chunks become the raw data by which
learners perceive patterns of language traditionally thought of as grammar (Lewis,
1993).

● VIEW ON LANGUAGE: Holistic view of language learning: instead of trying

to break things into smaller pieces, there is a conscious effort to see things
in larger, more holistic, ways. According to Lewis (1997) language consists
of grammaticalized lexis, not lexicalized grammar. However, they make a
distinction between vocabulary and lexis: vocabulary is seen as traditional
isolated content words and lexis as single words plus multiword units
(chunks). Furthermore, language is learnt in a great extent as chunks:
words, polywords (e.g., by the way, upside down), collocations (e.g.,
absolutely convinced), institutionalized utterances (e.g., If I were you…)
and sentence or text frames (firstly, the fact was). To learn it, different
options are proposed:
o High exposure to input (especially through reading)
o Explore contents of lexical chunks
o Contrastive approach
● VIEW ON LEXI: It is important for students to learn about the lexi or chunks
of the target language and these lexical chunks should be contextualised.
● TEACHING OF LEXI: Inductive learning and teaching: Awareness raising
activities.
● INTERACTION: Observe-Hypothesise-Experiment activity sequencing
model. There is student initiation and interaction through the
experimentation. Sociolinguistic competence is meant to be developed and
enhanced: communication between individuals is what stands out and not
the grammatical competence.
● ROLE OF THE TEACHER: Teachers must encourage, prepare and structure
in a proper way the exposure or acquisition of lexical chunks, since she/he
is the major input source for students.
● ROLE OF THE STUDENTS: Students learn from the input and he/she is the
analyst of the discourse.
 ● THE FOUR SKILLS: Vocabulary is emphasized. Reading and listening are
the primary skills that the students work on. There is much less attention
given to speaking and writing.Pronunciation receives a great deal of
attention. The ability to communicate effectively in the target language is
the goal; however, the aim is not to have a perfect language performance,
indeed, the purpose is to understand each other. That is why they claim that
if we make grammatical errors, we hardly get what others are trying to say,
yet if we commit lexical errors, we usually understand the overall message.
● USE OF THE NATIVE LANGUAGE: the native language is useful for
contrastive analysis of lexical chunks. Nonetheless, the language that is used
in class mostly is the Second Language.
● ERRORS: error correction is highly important (implicit procedures).
Students' self-correction is enhanced through the teaching activities of this
approach

What are the types of activities proposed by the method?

Communicative activities (Lewis, 1997):
● Listening to stories
● Information gap activities
● Group work
● Pictures and games
● On the intermediate level: small groups are given task work, simplified
reading and many activities

Collocation activities: More importance is given to vocabulary than grammar. One

way to apply the lexical approach in the classroom is to focus on collocations
(Boonyasaquan, 2009). These are activities to incorporate teaching collocation into
lessons. Three themes dominate this section: teaching-learning dichotomy, learner
independence, and noticing. Collocation should be highlighted when teaching any
English skill such as listening,speaking, reading, writing and translating. Some
ideas:

● Make students understand what collocations are

● Materials for target collocations
● Incorporate the learnt collocations in tasks
● Repeat and recycle the collocations already learnt
● Peer correction
● Read a text: list of collocations
● Use the learnt collocations in writing
● Give lists of suggested collocations

What are the strengths of the method? What are the risks?
According to Sofia Serrani (2015,) these are mostly the strengths and risks of the
Lexical Approach.

Strengths:
 ● Consciousness raising. It encourages the process of noticing the lexical item,
which is a preliminary and fundamental step when dealing with new
vocabulary.
● Students feel more encouraged with the learning materials
● It's helpful for students to have a step-by-step learning process.
● Teachers feel more confident with a clearly defined, progressive course.
● Brings fluency on the Second Language Acquisition
● It is highly practical.

Risks and disadvantages

● Language cannot be divided into different units in real life.

● It lacks full characterization of an approach.
● Lack of theory of learning.
● Teachers and students need to have access to computers and know how to
search information on the databases.
● It remains to be convincingly demonstrated how a lexically based theory of
language and language learning can be applied at the levels of design and
procedure in language teaching, suggesting that it is still an idea in search of
an approach and a methodology. (Richards & Rodgers, 2001: 138).
● While the lexical approach can be a quick way for students to pick up
phrases, it doesn't foster much creativity. It can have the negative side effect
of limiting people's responses to safe fixed phrases.

How does the method relate to other methods?

After having seen the videos and summaries of the different approaches of our
classmates we have concluded that it might be appropriate to link the lexical
approach with the following methods:

Task-based approach
We could relate it to the task-based approach, because by doing tasks we could
apply the lexical approach. The main focus of these two approaches revolves
around the major function of language (communication) rather than forms of
grammatical patterns. In other words, both of them regard communicative
competence as more important than the production of grammatically accurate
sentences, whether in speech or writing (Ilyas, 2013).

CLT

In relation to Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), in both methods the

teaching is inductive, this involves the learners detecting, or noticing, patterns and
working out a 'rule' for themselves before they practice the language.

According to CLT, learners are more focused towards learning the concepts.
In this case, the emphasis is not towards understanding the language structures
and lexical collocations. The main aim of the CLT is to make individuals competent
in communication and this purpose could also be applied to the lexical approach.
 However, communication is not sufficient for learning a language (from the
CLT view). Teachers need to focus on grammar rules in class and to correct
learners’ form-related errors, especially the crucial ones related to interpretation,
expression, and negotiation of meaning. In this aspect, it is the opposite of the
lexical approach because as we have already repeated throughout the work the
lexical approach focuses more on vocabulary and lexis. Hence, we could conclude
by saying that grammar is also important for this method but to a lesser extent, as
in L. After all, the overall objective of both is to make learners competent in
communication , although they disagree on some ideas.

TPR Storytelling
In relation to the TPR storytelling, both methods are based on vocabulary and not
so much on grammar, as they think they will achieve this through reading. As Rose
(1985) states, “a story is, in fact, a good mnemonic or memory aide. A story links
words to be remembered and it causes you to build up scenes that have visual,
aural and sensory actions for you. If you can create a powerful visual image
between two words, remembering one will trigger recall for the other” (p. 45). In
other words, the students have to make word connections and link images with
words in order to understand the story. By doing these connections, students will
expand their vocabulary and learn the new lexicon without giving so much
importance to grammar, as the Lexical Approach does.

Besides, we have also come to two conclusions. The first one is that all
approaches that focus on grammar seem to be the opposite of the lexical approach
(grammar vs lexis/vocabulary). And the second one, is that the lexical approach is
different from those methods that aim to focus on grammar and translation, such
as, the Grammar-translation method.