There is no perfect method to teaching a foreign language.
After reading chapter three and analyzing nine different methods, this cannot
be more evident. A lot of the methods are logical on paper, such as the
Audiolingual Method, but are not practical. I believe that not only would it be
difficult for the teacher, but also super frustrating to a student if they were
in a classroom where everything was taught in Spanish and there were no
explanations. Yes, the student would come out of the classroom with paragraphs
upon paragraphs of conversation that they can spew out to you, but do they
actually know enough Spanish to hold a conversation or survive somewhere where
they are surrounded by the target language? I believe that in order to effectively
teach a second language, the teacher needs to be flexible and take guidelines and
principles from a vast number of methods. I think that most methods explained
have something good in them.
Grammar-Translation Method:
Appreciate
literature from the target language and teach culture
Organic
examples of grammar rather than produced
Direct Method:
Learn to
speak by speaking, starting with current situations
Cognitive Code Method:
Meaningful
learning, always understanding what they are being taught
Communicative Language Teaching
Communication
encouraged from the beginning
Syllabus
is based on students’ needs rather than a books order
Total Physical Response
Listening
comprehension is developed fully before intense speech
Natural Approach
For
survival
These are some of the guidelines or principles that I
believe are important in foreign language teaching. I think that the vast
majority of the instruction should be taught in the target language, but no exclusively.
When something needs to be translated or explained, it can be done so in the L1
when it is beneficial for students. I think that speech should be encouraged early
on. Although I also believe that grammar has its importance in becoming
understandable, the basics for survival are what should be taught first, so
common phrases and extensive vocabulary. I definitely believe that students
should have a say in why they are taking the subject and what they intend to
get out of everything. I believe that there would be a great difference in
teaching to someone who wants to carry on the language and eventually become
fluent as opposed to a student who just wants the basic survival knowledge. The
former would need to be taught structure and the latter would need to be taught
mainly vocabulary and common phrases. Curriculum that is tailored to the students’
needs is best, although extraneous for the teacher who would constantly need to
be changing the course of the semester and how/when material is presented.
Student feedback is definitely important to how best a class is going to learn.
No class should really be taught in the same way because there are always going
to be different sets of students with different needs and aspirations.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI really like your thinking about the benefits of each method of teaching. There are benefits, as you have pointed out, of each and every method that should not be overlooked at all. Also, what you said here about usage of the target language in the classroom is a great point. It is important to use the target language as much as possible, but often times, it is even more important to explain concepts and reasoning in the students' first language. It is necessary for them to be able to understand why they are doing something, rather than just going with it without any understanding of the bigger picture.
ReplyDeleteThere definitely are good points to each method of teaching and that the teacher should employ a little of all of them into their lessons. I agree with what you said about student feedback being important - I think that the teacher should continually check in with students to see what methods/types of lessons they prefer and tailor their lesson plans to not only what produces the best results, but what works best for the students
ReplyDeleteI agree with your thought that speech in the target language should be encouraged early on. I know that we have read about some methods where the teacher does not expect the students to speak until they are ready to do so and the speech just "emerges" from them. I definitely understand this way of thinking-you're obviously not going to force a student to speak in front of the class if they feel extremely uncomfortable doing so-but I think it's very important to at least encourage speech like you said. If students get the idea in their heads that speech is a scary thing that they're not yet ready for, I don't think they will be as aware of the time when they ARE actually ready to speak. Speech is so important in learning a language and I think teachers need to encourage practice early on so that it does not seem as intimidating later.
ReplyDeleteI like that you mentioned that foreign language teaching should mostly be taught in the target language, but not exclusively. I couldn't really wrap my mind around the theory that stated that there should be minimal to no explanation of grammar rules and/or vocabulary. I think it's important to build a foundation for your students in order for them to survive in your classroom, like you said.
ReplyDelete