Module 2: Teaching methods and styles
Please Login to read the rest of this content.
This entry was posted
on Monday, January 19th, 2009 at 2:08 pm and is filed under Manage Course and Thread(Reply).
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
The first method that I like is total physical response. I think that total physical response is a fun and effective way of teaching young learners. I have used this method in the past in some of my classes and have had a lot of success. I found that it was most helpful when teaching learners who are both young and brand new to english, for example pre school students. I also found it useful when the class was getting bored or tired. Suddenly telling them to stand up and sit down and walk would usually help me regain their attention and settle the class.
Another method that I support is the communicative language method. This method is most useful for older students or those who have some background in English. I feel that being only able to read and write is not completely understanding English. Communication is needed to complete learning. I believe that lessons should be useful and serve a purpose. Memorizing rare and infrequent vocabulary is less productive than learning daily vocabulary that can soon be put to use. I personally have used this method while learning Chinese, so I have faith that it works. I rarely studied grammar alone but instead learned it naturally by learning natural sentences spoken in daily life. While some focus on grammar is important in class, students can also learn it naturally.
Finally, when teaching English I will often avoid forcing my students to simply memorize vocabulary lists and sentences. Although I think memorization may be helpful when all material that is memorized is also understood, I don’t think that this method should be used alone. Memorizing poems and tongue twisters may be fun and impressive, but memorizing simple sentences that build upon the student’s vocabulary and grammar is more useful.
I believe that depending on the age of the student, different methods of teaching are more effective than others. If I was to teach primary students, I would indeed use more of a total physical response approach. This style works well throughout the classroom in talking about verbs and adjectives as the actions can be shown to the pupil. If I was teaching a secondary class then I would probably use less TPR and more of the direct method style of teaching, as the more able students begins to understand the grammar and vocabulary in context. The older students also are not as engaged by the “big actions” associated with the TPR method.
A method I would probably refuse right away would most likely be the classical method. Especially for younger students, as this style of teaching is in no way enjoyable and therefore interesting and would shut the pupils off to the idea of learning a second language entirely. The classical method of teachings is also not very helpful because students are not learning the vocabulary and grammar in a practical context. If a student wants to go out into the world and be fluent in English, then the classical method will not help him or her to gain that confidence in the language. That is why I would not prefer to use the classical method of teaching.
I particularly like the direct method because I know that is how I best learn languages. I am bilingual and additionally I used to speak another 2 european languages fluently when I was a teenager. This was achieved mostly due to time spent in the relevant countries and therefore being totally immersed in the spoken language and the culture, often with nobody to turn to for a translation.
A language is “alive” and therefore needs to be experienced with all the senses. Therefore there is a need to recreate as many tangible elements as possible in a class room setting.
This also reflects how most people learn: through the ears to a point, it is also the visual element which is extremely important. It is worthy of note that in marketing and sales environments, talking about products to customers is useful. However the use of visual aids is considered critical and most appropriate for memorability. Touching and handling products (where appropriate) also add to customers “buying” into what is being offered.
I would apply the same principles to teaching a language.
This brings me to my other favorite teaching method: TPR.
I can see why the TPR method works so well with young children who love to act and be imaginative. Through physical movements, memory triggers are set up. Associations are part of the trigger process. Besides, it is a lot of fun, and laughter allows for “happy” chemicals to be released in the body.
In the right context, adults too can be taught with TPR. I did see a video of TPR in action in an adult class, the theme was household cleaning: the teacher provided a broom, vacuum cleaner head, scrubbing brushes, dust cloths and so on. Within minutes all the students were acting out “cleaning well”, “vacuuming slowly”, “polishing energetically” and so on!
The classical method is by far the most boring for most people and therefore not particularly user friendly. However, a student with a particularly “analytical” mind may still benefit from having detailed, complex grammatical questions answered. Sometimes it is useful to memorize a few hard and fast rules. Therefore, although a little old fashioned, there are elements of this method that I would not rule out completely.
The one method that strikes me as not useful is the silent way. I see it more as a tool that allows communication through body language. However it is an interesting concept (and a contradiction) to teach a language through non verbal communication and possibly a strategy worth exploring further!
Ideally I would like to teach using a range of different methods to suit the learning styles of the individual students. Therefore it is important to be able to be conversant and have the ability to switch between all of the above.
Teaching methods! Too start with you have to know whom you are teaching,meaning age groups,then use the methods most practical and efficient for that class.
Any of the teaching methods we have read up on work,yes some bore you to death and others suck the life out of you after doing it for a long period.We have to remember we are teaching and we want our students to learn,absorb,remember and be able to use in their life.
AudioVideo-Lingual i found is a great way to teach.Student can hear and see what they are being taught.If you can see something and hear something that is being taught to you,you intend to remember it easier.
Direct method; I find this a enjoyable way of teaching.The students seem to accept this way of teaching more then drilling and telling them what to do without you as the teacher getting involved.If you get involved and interact with your students as much as possible,they will absorb and learn.
TPR; Again a method i have used and will always use.yes this method is more practical and works better on young students ie primary School,but i have found it very usefull and fun with older student.You can use this by giving a student a story(written on paper) that he/she acts out in class.The other students then have to observe and say out loud what they think it is.Hence they use their brain to find the words and speak them so that way they automatically learn speaking and sentence making.
Again you do what you think is the best and most practical.We have to teach and the students have to learn,otherwise we are not teachers.Unfortunately not always will the way you teach be fun and exciting for the students,but all we can do is try for them.
The method I use in the classroom is fun and games. No, it doesn’t mean that I sit in the classroom and watch my students turn the classroom into a zoo. As I remember way back during my student days, I loathe boring teachers and was always thinking of ways on how to keep awake in class (Such as propping my lids open with toothpicks, or cutting myself then squeezing some lemon juice on the wound, which sounds gory) I adored teachers who always made jokes and made us laugh, it kept us awake and energized during class discussions.
So, during class, I morph into a clown. I’m not afraid to make a fool out of myself just to make students laugh. And I love doing it, even at the risk of my reputaion and dignity (Haha). I always try to make my lessons fun and entertaing. But certainly not to the point of slacking then making the kids go home without learning anything. That’s when authority comes in. I make sure that the kids learn sentences we need to learn. I make sure that they recognize the pictures we have studied. And in the classroom, everyone should speak in English. Time spent in the classroom is the most opportune moment for them to practice speaking in English.
The Direct Method and the Audio lingual methods appeal to me as compatible & effective methods to be used in ESL teaching. The use of pictures and objects is a key element of teaching language to young children, steering away from classical/structured teaching of grammar and sentence composition. The focus on everyday language and context is an aspect, particularly in the direct method, that helps to engage students, allows them to relate to the material and for the language learned to subsequently be used and practiced more easily. The audio lingual also method emphasizes the memorizing or drilling of vocabulary. Although tedious, this way of building language knowledge/base is very effective in the classroom. Particularly in China, where mainstream schooling has a heavy focus on repetitive drilling of facts and content, this method can be easily incorporated into a lesson plan.
The Grammar Translation method is one I would struggle to incorporate into teaching young children. The primary focus on grammar, in my opinion, makes the language abstract and difficult to relate to. It is hard to make learning fun, interactive and practical if learned through this method.
The direct method stood out for me because of its dedication to immersion programs that mimic what students would face if they were to study abroad. I think this method suits younger students because they are able to acquire a native tongue and inherently understand the structure of language without memorizing rules of grammar. For older students, however, this method might frustrate them as they cannot understand their teacher and have already lost their natural ability to learn languages.
Another method that stood out for me is the audio-lingual method. It presents itself as a simplistic way for older students to learn English relevant to what’s needed for business application. It makes sense for adults such as CPAs and CFAs to learn vocabulary only necessary for their day-to-day interactions with their counterparts in an English-speaking country if the goal of their language learning is to apply what they use, rather than to enjoy a different culture.
One method that I would not use is the classical method that teaches English as a science. I think it really loses the fun of language learning and in the long run, deters the student from learning on his own.
Grammar Translation or Classical method.
The traditional and formal teaching method that most of us were taught in our school and universities. Its grammar focused, the emphasis on academic retention, but does not really address the communication of the subject, which really is summary is a subject to be learned not an ability to communicate
Perhaps useful in some adult, topic specif types of contexts but not helpful in communication
Direct Method:
“In this light, there should be lots of oral interaction, spontaneous use of the language, no translation, and little if any analysis of grammatical rules and syntactic structures. In short, the principles of the Direct Method were as follows:
• Classroom instruction was conducted in the target language
• There was an inductive approach to grammar
• Only everyday vocabulary was taught
• Concrete vocabulary was taught through pictures and objects, while abstract vocabulary was taught by association of ideas.” Orient Now
This is a move to total immersion, the emphasis is on the target language, no translation, or very little, the approach is more along the lines of how we learned to communicate as children, our first language was caught first and taught by examples, by demonstration. Involving repetition.
Audio lingual .. Setting the scene, teaching in context to the topic. Focus on contextual. Not always practical but use of multimedia, relevant grammar, conducive, comfortable setting. Emphasis on communication. not always practically possible.
The direct method is particularly important because it fosters the need for a student to absorb the language…in fact, in an immersion environment they have no other choice. The only problem could be that much that is spoken goes over the students’ heads…however, they will gradually absorb more and more over time.
The audiolingual method is effective as it gets the students accustomed to english sounds, and improves their ability to pronounce them. however, some semantic meaning might get lost in the repetition. The audiolingual method must be combined with other techniques to bring in the communicative aspect of the language.
Another effective approach, I believe, is the communicative language technique. This gets students accustomed to really utilizing the language in the way which it is most important for them: for the purpose of communicating with other people. This is the most practical, useful technique.
Keep in mind that no one technique is best; some aspects of all of them must be used…I do believe that all need to be geared towards motivating the students to speak the language on their own accord, and become comfortable communicating in English.