Introduction

​

            Teaching is one of the noblest professions in the world. Perhaps, the noblest because without teachers, it would not be possible to have lawyers, doctors, engineers, and many other well recognized professions. Therefore, they are responsible for educating and shaping society and transforming our children into conscientious and productive citizens. Due to globalization, multi international companies and technology advances, (Batstone & Ellis, 2009) some of these individuals decide to learn another or other languages as a hobby, for job advancement, or for personal achievement or even immigrate to another country in search of better opportunities. Thus, they need to learn a second language and this process can be fun, boring, engaging, or creative depending on the language instructor or the method that is being utilized to convey the target language.

 There are many different language teaching methods. These methods have gone through a series of changes throughout the years due to students’ necessities, linguists’ curiosity, and language learning development. From the Grammar Translation Method utilized in the 1940s to facilitate reading proficiency in languages like Greek and Latin, through the revolution of learning how to communicate and the innate ability to learn a language as stated by Noam Chomsky, until the communicative approach and the advances of technology in the twenty-first century, language learning has been through changes, transformations, and interesting discoveries. Therefore, there are many different theories and controversies on which one is the best and most efficient one. However, in order to answer this question, many factors should be taken into consideration such as teachers’ personality, student’s personality, student’s chemistry with other classmates, resources’ availability, class size, student’s age and nationality, and many others. There are many methods and techniques that can be utilized on the instruction of a second language. However, this paper will focus on five of the most common historical methods and a debatable technique, explicit vs. implicit grammar instruction.

​

The Direct Method

​

            The Direct Method was introduced by linguists and language teachers that felt the need to use the target language to communicate instead of translating grammar structures, memorizing extensive lists of new vocabulary words, and verb conjugations. It was developed by taking into account the way children acquired their first language (L1) and applying those concepts into the second or third language (Ln) acquisition. Utilizing skills like listening, trying to speak, making mistakes, self-correcting, getting natural feedback were believed to help students to develop their speaking ability. Therefore, mimicking the way children naturally learn how to speak their mother tongue is the main idea behind this method.

            In this method, only the target language is utilized. In the case of English Language Learners (ELL), the teacher only uses English in the classroom, and there is no translation to the student’s L1. Therefore, students utilize the target language the whole time as if they were in real situations. Because the language is introduced within a context, in real life situations, students have to figure the words and structure out through scenarios presented by the teacher. They learn grammar structure and verb conjugation by the teacher’s examples of distinct subject pronouns and verb tenses within the context that is being taught. According to Larsen (Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011), due to the fact that nothing is translated, the teacher has to be extremely active utilizing visual aids, realia, mimicking, demonstrations, and lots of acting in order to convey new vocabulary and situations without explicitly falling back to the students’ L1. Even though reading and writing are important skills from the beginning of the language learning process of their Ln, speaking and listening are the main focus. However, there are some disadvantages of using this method. Due to the fact that it mainly focuses on speaking, it does not take into consideration all aspects of the target language. Another fact to be considered is that not all children learn the same way. As per Gardner, there are multiple types of intelligences. Taking into consideration the distinct learning styles, according to Lepi, each learning style responds best to a different method of teaching. (Lepi, 2012) Auditory learners would be more inclined to succeed utilizing this method while visual or even kinesthetic learners would have a more difficult time coping with it.

            There are many techniques that can be applied if a teacher decides that this is a good method to be implemented in the classroom. For example, students can read out loud taking turns, and after each section is read, the teacher can explain it using examples, gestures, or any possible visual aids to facilitate understanding. In addition, questions and answer exercises, students’ self-correction, conversation practice, fill-in-the-blanks exercises, dictation, map drawing, and paragraph writing can also be practiced in the classroom in order to achieve the application of this method.

​

The Silent Way

​

            Larsen stated that linguist Noam Chomsky argue that language acquisition could not be learned by repetition and memorization only because when ELLs had to have a dialogue without a script and with words or sentences they had not memorized, they could not carry a conversation in the real world (Larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011). He believed that ELLs would acquire a language when they were able to produce their own sentences and use their own structures and thinking based on their own discovery of the rules of the target language. With that idea in mind, many methods emerged. One of these methods was The Silent Way which consists in encouraging ELLs to produce as much language as possible and teachers should be silent most of the time, working as a facilitator instead of having a dominant role in the classroom (Richards & Rodgers, 1987). This method also encourages students to be more independent relying on themselves and not on the teacher and figure out the language by themselves creating ways to self-correct. “The Silent Way views learning as a problem-solving, creative, discovering activity, in which the learner is a principal actor rather than a bench-bound listener” (Richards & Rodgers, 1987). The teacher organize activities and situations where the students have to figure out the rules of the target language.  In the Silent Way, "the teacher's strict avoidance of repetition forces, alertness and concentration on the part ot the learners" (Gattegno, 1972). The Silent Way student is expected to become "independent, autonomous and responsible" (Gattegno, 1976) - in other words, a good problem solver in language. While the Silent Way allow students to figure language out by themselves and encourage problem-solving abilities, it is often criticized of being a dry method. Another point of criticism is that the learner works in isolation and there is not much communication in a Silent Way classroom. Also, with minimum help on the part of the teacher, it may put the learning itself at stake, and he material (the rods and the charts) used in this method will certainly fail to introduce all aspects of language; therefore, other materials will have to be introduced.

            There are many techniques that can be applied if the teacher decides that this is an effective and appropriate method to be utilized with their particular group. One technique is to utilize a sound-color chart that contains blocks where each color represents a sound in the target. Teacher’s silence where the teacher only helps when it is extremely necessary, otherwise, he or she will be silent promoting students’ autonomy.  Peer correction, self-correction gestures, word chart, Fidel charts, and structure feedback are other techniques that can be implemented according to the needs of the group of students being taught.

​

Communicative Language Learning

​

            Communicative Language Learning (CLT) was conceptualized in the 1970s in order to promote a more realistic use of the target language in real life situations. Nowadays, many teachers use the communicative approach in the classroom, however, if they are asked to explain details of their techniques implementing the method, the explanations vary widely. Richards stated that CLT focuses on the way students learn the target language, the types of activities utilized to facilitate learning best, and how teachers and learners interact and what their roles are in the classroom (2006). According to Widdowson, CLT focuses on encouraging ELLs to utilize the language in a communicative manner through activities and real life situations. The materials being utilized in a language program does not have its primary focus on grammar structures or vocabulary, but utilizing those concepts to promote the communicative functions of the target language (1990).

The key role of this method is to help students not only to use the language but to “live it,” not only to learn the language but to “do” language in different situations and contexts. In order to achieve that, every activity should promote natural communication such as language games, scrambled sentences, role-plays, lots of pair/group work activities, and problem-solving tasks. Activities that allow students to negotiate meaning, figure out when to use the appropriate verb tense/word/expression, encourage peer correction, this way students are learning from each other and the teacher promotes an environment conducive to learning by allowing them to discover the intricacies of the language simulating real life communication in class. The teacher’s main role is to facilitate the process of language learning creating engaging, interesting, creative, cooperative activities where every student wants to participate. As every method, the CLT also has some disadvantages such as the fact that it focuses so much on fluency that it sometimes neglects accuracy possibly resulting in fossilization. Another concern that has been raised was that the weaker learners who struggle and cannot use the target language continue to make mistakes and eventually give up. In addition, if there are too many students in the classroom, it is difficult to monitor the pair/group activities closely and provide the proper support for the ELLs. While it might work well for intermediate and advanced learners, it does not offer enough support for beginners and some controlled practice might be needed.

There are many activities, and techniques as Pusuluri has stated that “Functional communication activities are aimed at developing certain language skills and functions, which involve communication. Social interaction activities include conversation and discussion sessions, use of dialogues and role plays” (2012).

​

Task-based Language Learning

​

Task-based Language Teaching (TBLT) is a method where students learn through applying their knowledge within tasks that promote problem-solving negotiation and self-analysis of their own language in order to convey their ideas and feelings. TBLT is a pedagogy premised on the belief that “the most effective way to teach a language is by engaging learners in real language use” through teacher designed tasks that “require learners to use the language for themselves” (Willis & Willis, 2012).

Nunan (2004) defined it as:

A pedagogic task is a piece of classroom work that involves the learner in comprehending, manipulating, producing or interacting in the target language while their attention is focused on mobilizing their grammatical knowledge in order to express meaning, and in which the intention is to convey meaning rather than to manipulate form. The task should also have a sense of completeness, being able to stand alone as a communicative act in its own right with a beginning, middle, and an end. (p. 4)

When utilizing this method, the class starts with a task given by the teacher. This task needs to have a clear function and comprehensible outcome. Depending on the theme of the lesson or the activity at hand, the teacher may point out the type of structure or expressions the students may focus on and utilize while performing the exercise. A few techniques that can be utilized to implement these methods are information-gap, opinion-gap, reasoning-gap, unfocused, input-providing, output-prompting, and focused tasks.

Some advantages of TBL are that students are naturally active, participate enthusiastically, are highly motivated during the tasks and activities in a TBL environment. Also, students cooperate with each other in groups and show natural interaction on the target language and the objective of the structure being covered. However, as any other method, there are some disadvantages as pointed out by Seedhouse that “it could be argued that TBL emphasizes too much on tasks and communicating meaning and this could have an impact on how to use the language with the correct form. In addition to this, it is important to realize that there is a lot more to communication than performing tasks” (1999).

Emerging Uses of Technology in Language Teaching and Learning

            Technology has become more and more part of our lives on a daily basis. Whether at home, work, school, or on the road, it is always there to make our lives easier, more productive and more efficient. Therefore, transferring this concept into the classroom is not a long shot. Blogs, social networking, YouTube videos, and other social media means can be utilized in order to make a lesson more interactive, engaging, and entertaining. It facilitates language learning, and it provides a natural contact with authentic language use. There is also The Computer-Assisted Language Leaning (CALL) program was created to promote individualized learning catering to each students’ needs. Like everything in life; technology can be beneficial or detrimental to the language learning process depending on how and how often it is utilized.

Some of disadvantages of using technology in the classroom are that it can cause confusion when there is a technical problem. In addition, if a teacher has a lesson planned around technology and the system or the internet is down, it can be a problem if there is not alternative plan to ensure the completion of the lesson. Furthermore, if technology is overused or being used for the same types of activities, students might get bored and not be so motivated to using it on a regular basis. Also, students could be distracted by technology, so teachers have to continually monitor their activities in order for them to stay on task. Therefore, if teachers are aware of the advantages and disadvantages, they can be fully prepared to handle unexpected issues that may arise when implementing and integrating technology to the learning environment.

​

Explicit vs. Implicit Grammar Instruction

​

Grammar teaching is still a contentious subject in second language acquisition process. Much attention has been devoted to understanding its effectiveness in developing learners’ grammatical competence and performance.  Linguist, researchers, and teachers have been fascinated by this topic since the beginning of the awareness of language learning process. Particularly with regard to how to teach it and if so how should it be done: explicitly, implicitly, or no instruction at all. Just for clarification, when talking about explicit grammar instruction, researchers reject the traditional grammar teaching pedagogy which only focuses on grammar structure in decontextualized manner. Nassaji and Fotos have noted that if learners receive communicative exposure to grammar points that have already been introduced explicitly, they will have longer-lasting awareness of form and their accuracy will improve (Nassaji & Fotos, 2011).

Some linguists like Krashen believe that language learners should learn naturally emulating the processes involved in the first language acquisition and acquire grammatical knowledge naturally and with comprehensible input that is just beyond their level of cognitive understanding. In addition, they view explicit instruction of grammar as ineffective as students have shown to be capable of acquiring grammatical structures implicitly through repeated exposures to input, without awareness of the rules (Krashen, 2008). On the other hand, some researchers and practitioners like Batstone & Ellis contended that explicit instruction of grammar, which refers to raising awareness of the grammatical rules of the language, is necessary for learners’ linguistic development because it leads to learners’ recognition of their own errors. Consequently, this causes learners to reconstruct their own understanding about grammatical structures (Batstone & Ellis, 2009).

Several studies have been conducted in order to analyze further which approach should be utilized to acquire better language learning and retention. Most “findings from this study conclude that explicit instruction can be effective but that this knowledge must continuously be reinforced through activities such as collaborative output tasks where learners must collectively use the correct target features in order to accomplish the task appropriately” (Nassaji & Fotos, 2011). Also, learners who are exposed to explicit grammar do outperform the ones who got implicit or no instruction at all. However, more research should be conducted in order to obtain more precise data with a view to acquire more knowledge and information about this subject.

Since I am a grammar lover, I decided to include this section as an incentive for further research on this matter, in order to clarify a few questions regarding this issue. I know as teachers and especially students of the language, we tend to want to utilize methods that worked for us and that made us feel comfortable, but mainly that led us to learn the language and to achieve the ultimate goal which it is to speak English fluently. Therefore, I believe that there is no harm in teaching grammar structures explicitly as long as it is not done when grammar translation was introduced to language learning. If it is utilized within the communicative approach, it can help learners to feel more confident, comfortable, and more aware of the rules and consequently facilitate their ability to communicate efficiently and being more conscious about their mistakes, making self-correction more evident and precise. Note that the explicit grammar teaching that this paper is referring to is not, in any shape or form, stating that teachers should fill the board with tons of grammar points and then give students several grammar worksheets. The explicit grammar teaching that this paper is stating is that after showing how the language is used in the real world, after students can perform activities utilizing the new grammar point being taught, and after students can create their own examples of how the new grammar point is utilized in real life situations, then, the teacher could clarify any doubts that some students might have explaining the concept on the board quickly, and not extensively.

​

​

Application of Each/Combined Method(s) in Today’s Classroom

​

            According to Larsen-Freeman, there are fourteen different historical methods and techniques and approaches involved in the language teaching process. Depending on the type of material being utilized, the class size, the length of the class/program, demands of the program, availability of resources, age of the students, and teacher’s personality, one single lesson can contain two, three, or more methods. For example, depending how the material is laid out, having a theme for a particular class/unit/chapter facilitates the use of multiple techniques and approaches in one lesson in order to create an eclectic and interactive class utilizing real life situations to convey the target language.

I work at a language institute that utilizes their own books that were developed specifically to promote a language learning process where students are expected to complete one level in four weeks, believe it or not. It is the most intensive course I have ever used, and I confess that it took me a few months to get used to it. I am not entirely in favor of the method due to the fact that sometimes, some students cannot cope with its rhythm. Moreover, students do not have enough time to assimilate the material and produce the language learned due to the lack of time to acquire the language.

A helpful part of this program is that each lesson has a theme; that makes it easier to apply different methods and techniques. I usually introduce the theme of the lesson eliciting background information about a certain topic with lots of visual aids utilizing The Direct Method mixed with The Silent way. After discussing the topic, making students comfortable, and having proper scaffolding, a model of the conversation is played, so students listen to a CD and get familiar with the type of language that is required using the Audio-Lingual Method. Then, students listen to the dialogue again and then repeat the dialogue as a class.

Next, students practice the model dialogue utilizing The Direct Method where there is no translation, and the new vocabulary is explained using mimic, gestures, synonyms in order to convey understanding. After going over the new vocabulary, students model the conversation in a role-play. Then, they have to create their own dialogues utilizing the same structure of the previous conversation using their own names and creating different scenarios where The Task-based Language Learning is displayed. This whole process always takes Krashen’s principles into consideration using its five-part hypothesis like a comprehensible input i + 1 where the material is one level more difficult than the actual cognitive level of the student making it challenging enough to promote a nice pace of the language learning process; a low affective filter where students experience low anxiety, high motivation due to a comfortable environment; a monitor where students have time to think, analyze, answer, and self-correct; learning in a natural way where students experience the language in real life situations and learn it in a natural order mimicking the first language acquisition natural order of grammatical structures utilizing the Communicative Language Learning.

After being familiarized with the structure, expressions, and target language for that particular lesson, students utilize the use of technology to absorb the language and facilitate and promote acquisition of the target language instead of only learning and memorizing certain structures. After students are comfortable with the vocabulary and the grammar structure of the objective of the lesson, I always like to write the grammar rules on the board, contrary to some people’s belief, utilizing explicit grammar instruction to clarify and emphasize understanding. Now, after this research, I have learned that after all, explaining the grammar points explicitly is not such a bad technique if implementing in conjunction with the communicative approach and not in the old traditional grammar teaching methodology giving students the confidence to try creating their own sentences knowing that the grammar that was the focal point of the lesson was explicitly introduced and learned properly without any doubt that their assumption of the rules was correct or no.

​

Conclusion

​

In the midst of the various methods utilized to convey the target language in the language learning acquisition process, it is very difficult to adopt only one method in order to have a creative, exciting, cooperative, and engaging class. Being an eclectic teacher able to adopt different techniques to attend the needs of ELLs, being able to mixed them up accordingly in order to provide a varied and balanced teaching methodology is the best approach. It is extremely difficult to point out one particular method as being the best or the most effective one.

I have been utilizing many of these methods in the classroom an instinctive way. I had no idea that there was a method, a logic, and a name behind for each activity that I implemented in the classroom, and that it constituted on an eclectic method utilizing distinct techniques and methods in order to promote a creative, cooperative, interactive, and engaging application to an eclectic teaching style. I also believe that most good teachers do the same whether they do it instinctively or by previous explicit training. Therefore, ESL instructors need to study and analyze how each method could benefit them and could be combined in order to help them create their own method that best fits their students’ abilities, student’s needs, materials utilized, teachers’ personalities, students’ personalities, and the logistics of implementing them together.

​

References

​

Arnold, F. (1981). The Silent Way Approach. Nara: Japan: Dawn Press.

Batstone, R., & Ellis, R. (2009). Principled Grammar Teaching. An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 194-204.

British Council. (2008, 06 20). Retrieved 10 29, 2016, from BBC Teaching English: https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/article/direct-method

Gattegno, C. (1972). Teaching Foreign Languages in Schools: The Silent Way. New York: Educational Solutions.

Gattegno, C. (1976). The Common Sense of Teaching Foreign Languages . New York: Educational Solutions.

Larsen-Freeman, D., & Anderson, M. (2011). Techniques & Principles in Language Teaching. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lepi, K. (2012, November 27). Edudemic. Retrieved from The 7 Styles Of Learning: Which Works For You?: http://www.edudemic.com/styles-of-learning/

Nabizadeh, A., Taghinezhad, A., & Azizi, M. (2016). The Effect of Implicit/Explicit Instruction on Learning English Grammar. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods (MJLTM).

Nassaji, H., & Fotos, S. (2011). Teaching Grammar in Second Language Classrooms. New York: Routledge.

Nastaran, N. (2012). The effect of implicit and explicit grammar instruction on learners achievements in receptive and productive modes. Sciverse ScienceDirect, 156-162.

Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pusuluri, S. (2012, October 19). Communicative Language Teaching: Possibilities and Problems. English Language Teaching, 5(12), 87-93. doi:10.5539/elt.v5n12p87

Richards, J. (2006). Communicative Language Learning Today. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. S. (1987). The Silent Way.

Robertson, M. (2014). Task-Based Language Teaching and Expansive Learning Theory. TESL CANADA JOURNAL/REVUE TESL DU CANADA, 31(8), 187-198. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1052111.pdf

Seedhouse, P. (1999). Task-based Instruction. ELT Journal, 149-156.

Widdowson, H. G. (1990). Aspects of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Williams, K. (2013). A Case for Explicit Grammar Instruction in English as Second/Foreign Language Classrooms. Academic Leadership Journal, 1-10.

Willis, D., & Willis, J. (2012). Doing task-based teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press .