Theories of language-learning and teaching

This session aims to give you a theoretical background to the work you do daily with students who are attempting to learn a foreign language, or at least some ideas as to what such a theoretical background might consist of and how you could find out more, should you so choose.

Introduction

Before you receive any input from the trainer, work with a partner or in a small group to share your ideas on these topics:

• Why do some students choose to do “conversation” and others “grammar”?
• Is a teacher necessary? Why? Why not?
• What characteristics does a successful learner have?
• What can impede language-learning?
• Is there a perfect age to learn a language?
• What should happen in the classroom?
• How do we define WHAT should be taught/learnt and WHEN?
• What’s hard to teach, and why? What’s hard to learn, and why?
• How does a learner’s first language affect language learning?
• What are “learning strategies” and what role do they play?
• What is “motivation” and how important is it?
• What role do correction and praise play?
• Is learning a second language similar to learning your first language?
• Does your first language affect your second language?

For an outline of the issues surrounding these questions, a good starting point is the article on “Second language acquisition” in Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org)

Theories of language learning

There are many. In this session you’re going to learn about the views of Skinner, Chomsky, and Krashen.

“Behaviourism” is a school of psychology which teaches that behaviour (and language is considered by behaviourists as a type of “learned behaviour”) is learned. B.F.Skinner believed that correct grammar is formed over time by a process of stimulus-reinforcement: correct utterances receive “positive stimulus” (i.e. praise, receiving the thing you asked for) and are therefore reinforced and repeated, whereas incorrect utterances receive “negative stimulus” (frowns, electric shocks!) and are negatively reinforced and not repeated. Behaviourist ideas approximate to many people’s ideas of how learning happens (think of the common ideas about training a dog, or bringing up a child, for example), but they have one big drawback, particularly when applied to language: there is little or no evidence of this process existing or leading to actual language learning. Language (particularly your first language) is learnt rapidly, its nature is complex, and it is used creatively. Studies of behavioural stimulus-response have not evidenced clear relationships between utterance/response/reinforcement (the opposite in fact, as parents of young children seem mainly interested in their child’s meaning, not in correct grammar). Moreover, the language that learners do come out with is often unrelated to anything they might have “learnt” via a behaviourist process: a common example is the way children (and adults) over-generalise using grammar rules (i.e. I goed, you sayed).

In 1959 N.Chomsky challenged Skinner’s view of language learning, arguing that a child has an innate ability to learn language, which he termed a “language acquisition device”. The theory is complex but basically outlines how a learner can “generate” grammatical sentences using basic “rules” which are pre-programmed into our brain and which are common to all languages (i.e. the use of nouns, verbs, pronouns, etc.). This theory allows us to explain the creative use and rapid learning of language, and learner errors such as the over-generalisations mentioned above (common in children and adult learners) can be viewed as evidence of  learning, rather that as “errors” which need to be corrected.

Many people would recognise elements of common sense in both of these views of language learning. A pure behaviourist might have great difficulty in explaining the creative range of “learned” language, but a disciple of Chomsky would equally scratch his/her head when faced with the widespread and respected use of teaching/learning methods based on behaviourist views.

Perhaps the most well-regarded modern theorist of “second language acquisition” is S.Krashen, whose views strike an immediately practical and common sense note in the way they appear to give a role both to behaviourist “learning” and Chomskyian “acquisition”. Your trainer will give you a handout to read which describes Krashen’s theory. (click here to see the text used)

Teaching “methods” and “approaches”

There are many. Often a given method is associated with a particular period of history, with a theory of learning (see above) such as behaviourism, or with a reaction to the perceived limitations of an existing method.

Grammar-Translation Approach: the way people learned Latin and Greek in public schools in the distant past. Translate the classic, study the grammar, learn to conjugate the verbs, speaking and listening largely irrelevant.

Direct Approach: a reaction to the above. Only the target language is used, grammar rules are learnt inductively. Use of the language and appreciation of its associated culture is a priority.

Reading Approach: for people such as academics who need to read a language, but little else. Reading ability and knowledge of the country where the language is spoken are prioritised. Grammar is learnt only as necessary. Pronunciation is irrelevant.

Audiolingual Method: grammar taught inductively without explanation. Sentences are modelled, mimicked and then memorised. Use of technology such as language labs. Listening first, then speaking, reading and writing. Vocabulary is limited, as are opportunities for free expression. Because this method is based on behaviourist principles, errors must be avoided (uncorrected errors may result in “learning” the incorrect forms).

Community Language Learning: based on client: counsellor relationship, where the teacher acts to support the learner who participates in a group discussion with other learners (the teacher translates, models the phrases the learner wishes to say, helping less as the student develops language ability and confidence).

Silent Way: eliminates the teacher’s voice via a system of gestures and symbols, encourages student speech and attention to pronunciation

Functional-notional Approach: an element of the Communicative Approach, whereby the syllabus is based around language “functions” (i.e. requesting/apologising) and “notions”. Clearly the language is being learnt in order to meet future communicative needs.

Total Physical Response: movement aids learning. Understanding comes before speaking. The teacher gives instructions (“Get the book from the table. Give it to John.”) and the student resonds. Eventually the roles are reversed.

The abouve survey of teaching approaches was summarised from the text by Jill Kerper Mora at http://coe.sdsu.edu/people/jmora/ALMMethods.htm

Professional teachers may prefer to pick and choose elements from various methods depending on their students needs. In fact, in British Council teaching centres around the world this “eclectic approach” is officially used (teachers are expected and trusted to use whatever teaching method or methods seem most appropriate in any given situation). It may be worth making this point to students, who may have seen advertisements for “method” schools and might like to know about YOUR method or approach.

Implications for teaching

Theories of teaching and learning should inform the work we do, but not dominate it; they should help us define our objectives and choose our methods, but they should also help us empathize with our clients/students as they struggle with the psychological, intellectual and practical difficulties of learning a foreign language.

We should always try to consider both the short term (individual lessons and activities within them) and the long term(“learning” or “acquisition” over a period of months or even years) by planning lessons which meet the students’ needs and which foster a sense of progress. As all students are individuals, and all individuals are by definition different, this will involve considerable flexibility, creativity and effort!

Final comments

Motivation is ALL. Encourage, stimulate, interact, make it fun, don’t be BORING. When motivation fails, students quit and your income drys up.

Don’t worry if students don’t seem to learn the grammar you teach them. In fact, expect it.

Don’t get too confident if they DO seem to have learnt what you have taught. It’s probably a short-term effect. In any case, learning and acquisition are likely to be different processes, right?

Don’t just focus on grammar. Develop skills work, vocabulary and pronunciation too, particularly in the medium and longer term.

A clever teacher can deliver what might seem like a grammar lesson (what the students probably expect and want to do) while actually focusing on skills development: reading, listening, speaking, etc.

Be willing to discuss your methodology with your students. It gives a very positive impression and helps underline your professionalism, as well as helping students understand learning processes which may be a mystery to them.

Build communication and learning strategies. Successful learners use them effectively.