Good morning, my name is…………………… I have decided to deal with Tepic number

1. “Evolución de la didáctica de las lenguas. Tendencias actuales de la didáctica del inglés

como lengua extranjera. Los enfoques comunicativos.

Many things have been said about language teaching methods by different linguists and
authors, but in order to deal with this Topic I have divided it in the following sections.

1.Introduction

2.Language teaching methodology up to the XX century

3.The “Structural Approach” in language teaching in the XX century

4.The “Communicative Approach”

5.Conclusion

6.Bibliography

Let´s start with...

1.INTRODUCTION

Language teachin has always been an importan practical concern since the need for
establishing communication has always existed.

The purpose of this topic is to give a general overview of the most relevant teachin methods
used up to the present.

We will learn how the changes in language teachin methods have reflected the kind of
proficiency learner nheeds and also the changes in the theories of language and language
learning.

Let´s go back in history then and let´s see how language teaching was carried out until the
XX century.

2.LANGUAGE TEACHING METHODOLOGY UP TO THE XX CENTURY

We know from history that even in ancient times, language teaching was a matter of
concern. Egyptian and Greek kings sent bilingual representatives in their deleations to
foreign countries, and wealthy Romans were taught Greek by slaves.

Teachin on those days was probably done through conversation, grammar learning, reading
and writing.
Today, English is the most widely studied foreign language, but five hundred years ago, it
was Latin, for it was the language of commerce, religion and government in the Western
world.

In The XVI century, French, Italian and English gained in importance as a result of political
change in Europe, and Latin was gradually displaced as a language of spoken and written
communication.

The study of Latin was restricted to the study of its literature, analysis of its texts, grammar
and rhetoric.

Thi teachin model, which was know as the GRAMMAR-TRANSLATION method, became
the model for foreing language study from the seventtenth century to the nineteenth
century.

Texbooks consisted of abstract grammar rules, lists of vocabulary, sentences for translation,
but the oral practice was limited, as speaking was not the goal.

At that time, students had to achieve hegh standards in translating in and out of the target
language, which was a prerequisite for passing theincreasing number of formal written
examintations.

Grammar was taught deductively and the language of insturction was the native language.

Opposition to this method,m by the end of the nineteenth century, developed in many
European countries because the increasing opportunities of communication among
Euroopeans demanded oral proficiency and the old method proved to be inefficient.

New ideas on how tho approach language teaching more efficiently came by the hand of
the REFORM MOVEMENT whose advocators claimed the primacy of language speech
and, so, the importance of phonetic training.

Parallel to this movement, there was a growing interest on how a child learn his native
language ang the Frenchman F, Gouin, prompted the first attempts to develop teaching
principles of langage learning. This lead to what have been termed “ Natural Methods”,
among which, the DIRECT METHOD is the most widely known.

This method was introduced in France and Germany by supporters of the method, and, in
the United State, through its use by Sauveur and Charles Berlitz.

In practice, the following principles and procedures defined it:

-Exclusive use of the target language for instruction.

-Grammar and vocaburlary were inductively learnt through demonstration, objects and
pictures, and more abstract vocabulary was taught by association of ideas, but mother
tongue was not to be used.

-Oral communication skills were developed through question-and-answer exchanges

between students and teacher in small intensive classes.

This method was difficult to implement in public schools (time limitations, very dependent
on techers´skills and proficiency level...), and its use declined by the beginning of the XX
century.

Let´s regard now the STRUCTURAL methods that flourished by the 50´s and 60´s.

3.STRUCTURAL APPROACH IN THE LANGUAGE TEACHIN IN THE XX

CENTURY

The British “Oral or Situational” approach and the American “Audiolingualism” are the
two structural methods that are widely applied in schools until recent years.

They received this name because of their attachment to the “structural” theories of language
of the time.

Both methods developed independently but shared methodology and language teaching
techniques.

The innovations that the British approach introduced were_

-Its attempt to systematise the contents of the course that applied linguists such Harold
Palmer and Hornby proposed,

-and the presentation of structures in situations, which reflects the influence of the
functional trends in British Linguistics.

In America and after World War II, the successful results of the Army Method, encouraged
applied linguists to promote the use of some of its procedures in the teaching of language.
As a result Áudiolingualism, as it was called the new method born from thes new
researches, adopted an intensive oral-based aproach and made use of the new technologies,
such as the tape-recorder, to provide accurate models of speech as well as follow-up
fluency drills on grammar and pronunciation.

Besides, the interest of the American “structuralism” in Contrastive Analysis, affected the
presentation of contents in the syllabus, which aimed to address problems due to language
interference.
Structural Methodologies followed the behaviouirest habit learning theory, accoding to
which, the learning process was understood as the habitualization of the main language
structures through imitative and repetitive drills and so, acquire correct speech habits.

Finally, These new approaches to language teaching, followed naturalistic learning

theories, and the was reflected in the way grammar and meaning were inductively taught.
They were presented in situations through the use of object, actions...or dialogues.

These Structural Teaching Methods weere strongly criticised. The reasons were:

-Its effectiveness was questioned since students folowing these methods couldn´t transfer
the skills acquired in the class, in real communication.

-Studying through this method, which involved so many oral repetition activities, was
considered boring and unsatisfying.

-Structuralism and Behaviourism were criticesed by nex theories in language and

language and language teaching.

Let´s have a look now to the main factors that have contributed to the current panorama in
language teaching.

4.CONTRIBUTIONS TO CURRENT LANGUAGE TEACHING TRENDS

In 1957, Chomsky attacked Structuralism and Behaviourism by claiming that humans

used language not by imitating sentences, but by creating new and unique sentences and
this could only happen when thelearner knows the rules of grammar. His Transformational
Grammar aimed to provide ways of acquiring this grammar competence through re-writing
activities.

Applied Linguists such as Halliday or Widdowson emphasised the functonal and social
values of language, which has so much influenced current texbook designs and the
development of courses for special purposes.

Hymes claimed the communicative purpose of language and highlghted the importance of
acquiring communicative competence as much as grammar competence, underlying
appropriateness as much as accuracy.

Finally, nex researches on theory of learning, such as that proposed by Krashen and Terrell,
suggest that factors such as motivation, interatiion in meaningful situation, low-affective
filter... promote learning and so are advisable bo be considered in syllabus design.

Although inductive learning is still present in many teaching procedures, cognitivism seems
to be the most influential current theory of learning.
Among the most competing approaches that are derived from contemporary theories of
language and language learning, the Natural Approach and the Communicative Approach
are the most remarkable.

The originality of the Natural Approach relies on its emphasis on comprehensible and
meaningful practice activities rather than on production of grammatically perfect utterances
and sentences.

However, the Communicative Approach is the mos widely adopted in schools mowadays
and for this reason, the next part is devoted to give a more detailed analysis of the elements
that give form to this approach..

5.THE COMMUNICATIVE APPROACH

The Communicative Approach has a rich, if somewhat eclectic theoretical base.

Some of its view of language are:

-Language is a system for the expression of meaning

-Interaction and Communication are the primary functions of language

-Structure is not the primary unit of language, but any elemente that acquires a functional or
communicative meaning in discourse.

At the level of language learning theory, there is still more interest in creating the
appropriate conditions to promote second language learning than in th processes involved
in language acquistion

Motivation and low-affective filter promotes language learning acquistion and this obtained
throughthe engagement of the learner in real communicative tasks which meet their
communicative needs and interests.

There isn´t a consensus on which syllabus design best meets these needs of the learner, but
a Structural-functional-notional model is being most widely supported with a tendency to
introduce interactional descriptions and tasks specifications.

Procedures are also very varied. Traditional procedures have not been rejected but
reinterpreted. Although units have an ostensible functional focus, new teaching points are
introduced by dialogues, followed by controlled practice of main grammar patterns,
contextualized through situatiioal practice and the, free activities such as role-plays are
introduced.

Finally, teaching techniques are also suggested to help the learner build their own strategies
for reaking, writing, listening and speaking successfully.
6.CONCLUSION

From this analysis of the different language teaching methodologies used throughout
history, we learn that the decline of a method and the implementation of another does not
mean the total abandon of previous teaching procedures, but an enrichment with new ones
that aim to make the teaching task more efficient and effective.

Since no teaching method has proved to be more effective in all circumstances, the present
proliferation fo new teaching approaches and materials permit us to have a wider variety of
methokological potions from which to choose according to the particular needs of the
learners, preference of the teacher and school or educational settings.

7.BIBLIOGRAPHY

I have mainly used the following books:

Linguistic Theory, Linguistic Description and Language Teaching. Roulet, E.

Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Jack C. Richards and Theodore S. Rogers