Lecture 1: History of foreign language teaching methodology

Introduction

Language teaching/learning has been evolving ever since its appearance in antiquity. Two
major factors affect change in language teaching-namely, developments in applied linguistics
(linguistics, psychology, and sociology) and changes in learners’ needs (the type of language
proficiency needed by the learner). In this lecture, we outline the origins of foreign language teaching
in European countries to pave the way for accounting for the appearance and evolution of English
foreign language (EFL) learning and teaching.

1. The teaching of Latin and Greek

1.1. Ancient Antiquity (300 BC to 400 BC)

During antiquity, Greek was the most known English language throughout Europe and it was
taught as the lingua franca of the Mediterranean world. The methodology of teaching used for
teaching ancient Greek was developed by philosophers like Socrates who used a kind of dialogues
through which the teacher uses probing questions to understand the underlying mind of the learner.
This came to be known as the Socratic Method (i.e., a question and answer dialogue to understand
the self and develop intellectual capacities). Being a dominant language and a carrier of fundamental
philosophical, religious, and scientific texts, Greek was taught as a foreign language. For example, the
Romans used to send their children to Greece to learn this high-status language.

1.2. Medieval Period (5 to the 15th centuries)

After the downfall of the Greek civilization, Latin started to take over. During the Medieval
era, both Greek and Latin were taught to develop eloquence and capacity to read literature; but
starting from the 6th century, Latin became the cult and the dominant language of Europe that
passed down the Greek scientific heritage. It is also to be noted that formal teaching in modern sense
was used for the first time for teaching Latin. From the 4th Century AD onwards, grammar teaching
began to enter school curricula. The most famous Latin grammarian was Priscianus Caesariensis (5
and 6 centuries). Additionally, as Latin became the language of education, religion, scientific and
philosophical inquiry, and international communication and business, the question of how to teach
an added language started to puzzle teachers.

1.3. Renaissance (14th to 17th centuries)

Latin was the dominant language throughout Europe during renaissance and this was
supported by the work of humanists. During the Middle Ages Latin became corrupt because of the
influence of Barbarians who invaded Rome. Consequently, the humanist movement that initiated
renaissance and the reform of the Latin language called for a return to ancient Latin portrayed in
prestigious texts of famous writers like Virgil. The leaders of the humanist movement were
Petrarch and Lorenzo Valla. These humanists used the old texts as models for their writings. They
also added new functions to Latin such as writing poetry and essays, travel accounts, drama and
speeches.
 Generally speaking, Latin was mainly a literary language. Latin learners were given books to
search for the best passages of famous writers for imitation. Conversing in Latin was mainly
restricted to intellectual circles and students at school. During this period, vernacular languages (e.g.,
French and English) developed significantly and they started to develop their writing systems. But,
scholarly Latin had been still dominant till 1700.

The Greek renaissance humanism started with the collapse of Constantinople. The Greek
Byzantines who migrated to other countries after the fall of their capital started to teach their
language to their Europeans counterparts. The forerunners of this movement were Bernardo Massari
and Leonzio Pilato who transmitted the remnants of Greek manuscripts which were not translated to
Latin.

Generally speaking, the renaissance period contributed to the revival of the classics as high
ranking languages and focused mainly on the teaching of humanities such as art, philosophy, poetry,
rhetoric, morality, literature, and grammar. It was a return to the golden ages of these ancient
languages in both their linguistic sophistications and morality of the message. Consequently, there
was a focus on the teaching of grammar and abandoning the aural/oral methods of teaching used
during medieval and antiquity eras (Celce-Murcia, 2013). Additionally, the focus on formal teaching
of old grammar at the expense of everyday grammar, unfortunately, contributed to the demise of
classics as European lingua francas.

Classical Period (18th and 19th centuries)

From the 1700 onwards, Greek and Latin ceased to serve the function of scholarly sciences
and their teaching took an unusual function to justify their presence at schools. The development of
European vernaculars such as French, German, and English substituted the classics in almost all
spheres of life, except in ecclesiastical services. According to Richards and Rodgers (2018), modern
languages started to enter school curricula between the 17th to the 19th centuries. As these languages
grew in popularity, the teaching of Latin and Greek continued to be conducted in parallel assuming
the absurd function of mental development, that is, the learning of the classics strengthens the mind
as opposed to the learning of modern languages (soft languages).

With regard to teaching methodology, the teaching of modern languages followed the
pathway of classics and this is why this period is named the classical period. The methodology used
for teaching the dead languages is as follows:

- Grammar forms are presented in systematic logic order

- Vocabulary lists are presented for memorization
- Focus on reading to gain knowledge of vocabulary and grammar
- Use of the mother tongue (Howatt & Smith, 2014)
Lecture 2: Grammar-Translation Method

Introduction

GTM is an old method that dominated foreign language teaching for about an entire
century (i.e., from 1840-1940), though it is still used in different forms in certain parts of the
world such as Japan. This instructional method could be considered as the oldest method to
foreign language teaching/learning for the reason that it was used in a nearly similar manner
to teaching dead languages in Europe (i.e. Latin and Greek), and this is why it is sometimes
called the Classic Method (Larsen-Freeman, 2000). It is equally labeled as the traditional
method since it was implemented for teaching modern European languages such as German,
English, and Spanish, which started to gain prominence in European curricula in the 18 th
Century. Another original and important name of this instructional method used in Germany
was the ‘Prusian Method’, which marked the beginning of the use of grammar and translation
in German secondary schools for teaching foreign languages (Howatt, 1984, p. 151). One of
the things that should be mentioned here is that this method was not meant for elementary
teaching. Rather, it was used by adults and in secondary school throughout Europe.

However, the designers of this traditional method did not name it GTM. According to
Howatt (1984), critics of the method (especially in the 19th century) created the name to
emphasize their aversion to abstract teaching of grammatical rules and excessive use of
translation. Actually, the method attempted to regulate teaching by presenting grammar in
small portions to respond to individual initiatives of the scholars and learners who tried to
master foreign languages through the memorization of grammatical rules and use of
dictionaries for translation.

1. Teaching Content of Grammar-Translation Method

GMT teaches about language rather than language itself. In other words, it takes a
descriptive and comprehensive approach to the choice of teaching content. The learner is
taught extensively about the fundamental components of language-namely, grammar and
lexis. Thus, mastering a foreign language means getting into grips with grammar rules and
memorizing as much as possible of vocabulary words.
2. Principles of Grammar-Translation Method

GTM has its distinctive features and principles. The following are the most important
precepts of this instructional method.

- A foreign language is taught to develop the reading and writing skills

- Translation isan indispensible means of instruction
- Accuracy is underscored at the expense of fluency in the target language
- Grammar is presented deductively
- The sentence is the basic unit of study

3. Teaching Procedures of Grammar-Translation Method

GMT focuses teaching on the comprehensive explanation and application of

grammatical and morphological rules of language, notably through the medium of translation.
For reading, for example, the teacher gives students a text in the target language and reads it
aloud. Subsequently, the students read the passage with a firm focus on accuracy. Then, the
teacher suggests questions of comprehensions in the target language and explains their
content in L1 if the students do not manage to understand them. The students answer in the
target language or in their L1. In the after reading, the teacher could supply words from the
text and ask the learners to give their equivalents in their home language.

4. The Teaching Techniques used in Grammar-Translation Method

Larsen-Freeman (2000) summarizes the major techniques used in grammar translation

method in the following list.

 Translation of literary texts

 Reading comprehension questions
 Antonyms and synonyms
 Cognates
 Deductive application of rules
 Fill in the blanks
 Memorization
 Use of words in sentences
 Composition (Larsen-Feeman, 2000, pp. 19-20)
5. Evaluation of Grammar-Translation Method

GTM is criticized on many grounds. First, it focused merely on reading and writing
skills, ignoring the other indispensable language skills of listening and speaking. Language
development, be it in the classroom or in natural settings, requires the development of the four
basic skills in synergy. Second, overreliance on the translation technique as almost the sole
technique for teaching foreign language deprives the learner from making a direct connection
with the concepts of the target language, and the assumption of the existence a one-to-one
equivalence between the target and home language is erroneous. Third, the method is
enormously boring for the learner as it relies on rote learning of unusable grammar rules and
lexical items. Last but not the least, the focus on grammar and lexis is not a sound strategy for
language acquisition. People learn a foreign language through the practice and use of that
language, not merely through getting acquainted with the rules of its internal system.

However, this teaching model is not as bad as its critics describe it. It started as an
orderly way of grammar teaching through an exemplified rule, a bilingual list of words, and
translation exercises. Howatt (1984) believes that the situation in which the method
intervened (such as national exam requirements) and amateur teachers distorted this method.
In fact, its popular writers (such as Ollendorff) devised practical and appealing courses in
GTM (Howatt, 1984, p.156).

Conclusion

GMT taught mainly the written proficiency of foreign languages through a focus on the
memorization and application of the grammatical and lexical rules. It replaced the target
language and used translation to convey the meaning of foreign language to the learner.
Contemporary writers’ subjective beliefs about the nature of language and the types of
language abilities that the students who regularly take foreign language classes needed
dictated a more direct approach to teaching.
Lecture 3:

Reform Period

1. 19th Century pre-reform movement (1860-1880)

The second half of the 19th century was marked by a change in the teaching of foreign
languages. Additionally, foreign language teaching established itself as a profession with the
rise of both public and private schools. The need for foreign language teaching blossomed
with the process of industrialization and the process of colonization. For example, in England,
there was a growing need for learning French and German languages. Consequently, some
enlightened teachers looked at the way foreign languages could be better taught and at making
this tremendous endeavor easier and successful. Among these luminaries were Thomas
pendergast (English man), Francois Gouin (French man), and Marcel (French man).

1.1. Thomas Pendergast (1807- 1986)

Pendergast was a distinguished and earliest British applied linguist who influenced
later applied linguists such Henry Sweet. He is famous for his book “The Mastery of
Languages” (1964). Among, the principles of foreign language teaching outlined by this
mindful thinker are the following:

- Learning words in context

- Using isolated sentences in a form of chunks and pre-fabs
- Inductive study of grammar
- Oral repetition
- Power of memory, not logic.
- Using contextual clues to understand messages (gestures and facial expressions)
- Learning phrases via repetition
- Learning the most frequent phrases in real communication
- Translation is allowed

As can be seen above, these principles stand in opposition to the practices of GTM, which
taught grammar rules explicitly, arranged grammatical sequencing according to logic,
presented words in isolation, and focused on written mode of language.

In his teaching methodology, he tried to present as many grammatical rules as possible

in very compact and short sentences. And, on the basis of these illustrative sentences, the
learner is invited to reconstruct similar models using different vocabulary items (substitution).
Here is an example of the types of sentences that he used to learn language idiomatically.

Why didn’t you ask him to come, with two or three of his friends to see my brother’s garden?

It seems that Pendergast misinterpreted the meaning of idiomatic expressions

(language chunks) because they are not sentences as he considered them. Actually, they are
part of sentences that could assist the learner to easily construct sentences. Thus, learning
chunks will not spare the learner from constructing ill-formed sentences that he wanted to
eradicate.

1.2. Claude Marcel (1793- 1886)

Claude Marcel is another forerunner of applied linguistics. One of his works was
“Language as a Means for Mental Culture and International Communication” . As can be
noted from this title, unlike GTM, his method of teaching is meant for developing reading as
well as oral communication. Marcel is actually credited for significant insights about language
teaching. For example, he was the first writer to distinguish between receptive and productive
language skills that he named respectively at that time as impression and expression.

Among the foreign language teaching principles advocated by Marcel are the
following.

- Natural language teaching should be the model method

- Distinction between receptive and productive language skills
- Reading should be taught first
- Demonstration of language expressions through tone, gestures, and translation
- Immediate contact with the object of study
- Attention to rules of language

Marcel’s weak point at that time was his focus on reading which many reformists wanted
to wipe out as it was associated with GTM. The trend of change was more in favor of the
teaching oral skills.

1.3. Frank Gouin (1831-1896)

Gouin is known for his series method. He tried to learn the German language to enroll
in philosophy course at Berlin University. According to his personal account, he tried many
methods for learning German including the use of contemporary methods (i.e., GTM),
learning all the German grammar rules, memorizing by heart a German dictionary, and
conversing with his host hair-dresser during his stay in Germany. After doing all this, he
failed to understand reasonably his philosophy course at the Germanic university. During his
vacations back in his native town-Normandy, he took his nephew for a tour to a corn mill.
Once, back home at the end of the day, he noticed his nephew was using toys to reconstruct
the events of the day (the mill) sequentially and in a form of actions. From this experience, he
held that the best way to teach and learn a foreign language is through well-sequenced series
of actions.

One of his famous examples for teaching a foreign language is the use of the following
series of actions to describe door opening: I move towards the door, I hold the handle, I turn
the handle, I push the door open, etc. Using this methodology, he devised teaching materials
and held that it was very successful as it allowed him to understand perfectly well his
philosophy courses and converse with his peers at university.
 The principles of foreign language teaching outlined by Gouin are the following.

- The teacher explains the general context of teaching in the native language
- He enacts the events describing the process
- The acts are divided, repeated, and enacted orally then in writing
- Emphasis is on verbs

Gouin uses sequences to teach language as if all the language functions are structured
sequentially. When dealing with processes, it is logical to use sequencers and actions, but
when dealing with other language functions such as talking about one’s feelings, it is rarely
useful to use sequencers and actions to talk about this topic.

The pre-reform movement did not succeed to have a significant echo on language
teaching profession at that time and their ideas did not resonate in the work of their
successors. According to Richards and Rodgers (1914), this is mainly due to the fact that they
were individual thinkers who worked in isolation and did not have academic journals to
disseminate their work to their peer teachers and other intellectuals of the profession.
Consequently, their insights had little effect at that time on the practices of foreign language
teaching in general.

2. 19th Century Reform Movement (1882-1904)

The 19th century reform movement consisted of eminent applied linguists of different
modern languages. These teachers and phoneticians included Paul Passy (French), Otto
Jespersen (Danish), Wilhem Vietor (German), and Henry Sweet (English). Unlike the pre-
reform movement, this time these teachers worked collaboratively and established a journal to
disseminate their work. Additionally, they involved other teachers in their project.

The reformists contributed significantly to the development of foreign language

teaching practices. In 1889, they created their journal called “IPA’s (International Phonetic
Association) Maitre Phonétique”. This culminated in the foundation of the International
Phonetic Association (IPA). The pioneer of phonetic work is credited to Paul Passy who was
joined by the other reformists. Passy was also the first to use the word of direct teaching as
testified in his book, “De la Méthode Directe dans l’Enseignement des Langues Vivantes”.

Additionally, the reformists published very famous books. For example, Vietor
published a pamphlet entitled “Language Teaching should Start Afresh” (1886) and this
marked the beginning of movement. Sweet published “Practical Study of Language (1889)
and Jespersen published “How to Teach Foreign Languages?” (1904).

The major principles of this movement can be summed up as follows.

- Primacy of speech over writing

- The centrality of connected texts
- Absolute priority of oral classroom methodology
Among the major principles put forward by Henry Sweet who is considered the leader of
the reform movement are the following:

- Teaching oral texts

- Ensuring good pronunciation through repetition and use of transcriptions
- Using strings of sounds, rather than isolated sentences
- Avoiding translation
Lecture 4:

Direct Method

Because of the disillusionment with the grammar translation method and the influence
of the reform movement, the end of the 19th century was marked by an attempt to teach
foreign languages in a natural way, that is, the way children learn their first language. In this
lecture which constitutes the background of the direct method, we shall deal with two known
forms of the direct method, one is the natural method and the other is the Bertiz method. Each
one of them is considered as a Direct Method.

1. Natural teaching (Lambert Sauveur and Gottlieb Heness)

Lambert Sauveur was a French teacher who tried to teach French in the United States
in a natural way. For him, natural teaching means the provision of classroom conditions of
learning that would appeal for the capacity of language acquisition. His teaching was based
on oral methodology and one of his famous books is entitled “Causerie (conversation) avec
les élèves” (1923). He was famous for the method of object-lesson, that is, basing a lesson on
exchanges about an object (e.g., “What is this?”, “This is a bag”, “Are all bags like this?”,
“What is its colour?”, etc. ). Among the principles he proposed are the following.

- Appeal to the ear

- Relate words to their referents in the natural world
- Work as hard as possible to keep interest

Sauveur met with Heness, a native German teacher, in Yale University and founded a
school in Boston. His teaching methodology was outlined as follows.

Start with an oral text

Leave writing to the end of the course
Use chains of questions and answers.
This method of teaching was criticized for two main weaknesses. The dialogues used
for teaching were trivial and did not reflect real conversations and the students simply answer
questions without initiating the chat.

2. Bertliz Method (Maximilian Berlitz and Nicholas Joly)

Maximilian Berlitz started teaching German as a foreign language in the United States.
He founded his own method of teaching based mainly oral methodology in Rhode Island. This
school was so successful that he hired Nicholas Joly to add French teaching to his syllabus.
Additionally, he opened more and more private schools both inside the United States and in
Europe (e.g., New York and England). As the number of his schools expanded, he devised a
guiding textbook that teachers could follow to apply his method.

The fundamental tenets of the Berlitz method are as follows.

 - Preclusion of translation
- Question and answer methodology of teaching
- Grammar left to the end of the course
- Teachers should be native speakers of the target language
- Use of textbooks

As for his course organization, it is outlined sequentially as follows:

- Start with objects

- The verb to be
- The most common adjectives (e.g., big, small, thin)
- Parts of the body
- Prepositional relationships
- Lexical verbs
- Alphabet
- Simple texts (Question and answer methodology)

As can be seen above, Berlitz course and teaching methodology is simple, structured,
organized and replicable while Sauveur’s is largely intuitive.

From these two major embodiments of direct teaching, the principles of the Direct Method
can be summed up as follows:

- Classroom instruction is conducted exclusively in the target language

- Only everyday vocabulary and sentences are taught
- Oral communication skills are built upon carefully graded sequences of questions and
answers between the teacher and students in small classes
- Grammar is taught inductively
- New teaching points are introduced orally
- Concrete vocabulary is taught through demonstrations (objects and pictures) and
abstract vocabulary is taught through associations
- Correct pronunciation and grammar are emphasized

The Direct Method is criticized for the following reasons:

- Difficulty of implementing it in public schools

- Mixing first language teaching with second language teaching
- Requiring native speaking teachers
- Depending on the teacher’s skills
- Ruling out translation
- Superficiality of the method
- Neglect of reading and writing (Coleman report, 1929)
 Lecture 5

Scientific Period (1920-1960)

1. Background to Structural Oral Teaching

The direct method could be considered as an amateurish method in that its supporters
enthusiastically espoused natural teaching without taking into consideration the nature and
realities of foreign language teaching. After falling into disfavor during the 1920s, a number
of enlightened teachers and researchers reconsidered the natural approach and introduced new
reforms. Amongst these teachers were Harold Palmer, S. A. Horby, Michael West, and Daniel
Jones on the British side and Bloomfield, Coleman, and Fries on the other side of the Atlantic.
1.1. The British Oral Structuralism

Harold Palmer was an English language teacher in Belgium and worked under the
principles of the Berlitz method before the First World War, but he noticed the limitations of
the method and established his own school. With the outbreak of World War I, he came back
to England and met Daniel Jones (an expert phonetician) who offered him a job at the
University College of London.
During his stay in London and thanks to the influence of Daniel Jones who learned
much of phonetics from Paul Passy and Otto Jespersen, he established a new teaching method
called the oral method. This method combined linguistic rigor (i.e., attention to phonetics and
controlled vocabulary) and the principles of natural learning (oral methodology). He
published many book in which he tried to set up the foundations of his innovative method.
These books include “Scientific Study and Teaching Languages” (1917), “Principles of
Language study” (1921), and “The Oral Method of Teaching Languages” (1921).
Palmer’s departure to Japan as a linguistic adviser on English language teaching ended
his early career in applied linguistics; however, his stay in Japan brought him worldwide
recognition and entered him in contact with Leonard Bloomfield, Edward Sapir, and Michael
West. He worked collaboratively with the English language teacher A. S. Hornby, who was
already there in Japan, and came up with a principled way for foreign language teaching in his
attempt to control both the vocabulary and grammar taught to foreigners.

1.1.1. Vocabulary control

Both Palmer and Michael West, a teacher of English in Bengal-India, noticed that
vocabulary taught to foreigners should be controlled or limited. Michael West noticed that the
use of direct teaching and equating foreign language teaching to mother tongue teaching
results in poor school results. He argued that foreign language learners in India need to focus
on basic vocabulary instead of intuitive direct teaching.
Frequency counts showed that a core of 2000 words constituted the key to foreign
language competency. Consequently, Palmer, West, and others produced a list of the
commonest words needed to read and understand English acceptably. These efforts were
culminated in the publication of the General Service List of English Language (1953) by
West. This document was considered as a syllabus document that could be used to design
English language teaching materials.

1.1.2. Grammar control

Another effort of Palmer and Hornby in applied linguistics is the control of grammar
taught. Palmer considered grammar as language patterns that can be learnt orally. He and his
colleague (Michael West) organized English grammar into linguistic patterns (e.g., there/there
are). Palmer’s books are clear indications of the new trend in foreign language teaching,
which is mainly based on teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL) through an oral
methodology; One of his famous books was “A Grammar of Spoken English on a Strictly
Phonetic Basis” (Palmer and Blandford, 1939). As the title indicates, the grammar is to be
taught orally and for oral use.
1.1.3. Oral and reading methods

Palmer’s method was based oral methodology, though he did not preclude translation.
Basically, he advocated structural and graded teaching of English grammar and vocabulary
through oral practice and repetition. His collaborator in India (Michael West), however,
emphasized the teaching of reading as the most important skill for second language learners in
India. He argued that graded and informative reading with an emphasis on the most common
vocabulary items was more useful for learners in India as it could assist them significantly in
their university studies.

1.1.4. Limitations of Palmer’s oral method

The Japanese English foreign language teachers who tried to apply Palmer’s oral
method were quick to notice that it was mostly impractical for them as it required acting skills
and absolute foreign language proficiency. Consequently, Palmer tried to include later in his
career more reading in his teaching courses.
1.1.5. Concept of context of situation

Other British applied linguistics like J. R. Firth and M.A.K. Halliday contributed
significantly to the development of the oral approach to language teaching. Halliday
developed Malinowski’s concept of context of situation, that is, language structures have their
functions that can be understood only in their context of utterance. The notion of context
includes the physical environment and the participants. In other words, language structures
are not abstract forms with specific meanings; rather, they are attempts to convey meanings
that can be interpreted only in their specific context.

1.1.6. Sum up

The British applied linguists (Palmer, Hornby, West, and others) viewed language as a
set of grammatical categories (patterns) to be learned trough oral practice. Additionally, they
advocated the selection and gradation of both grammar and content. This work that started in
the 1920s, gradually laid the foundation of the oral situational language teaching in the 1960s.

1.2. American oral approach

The American foreign language teaching that flourished after the downfall of the
direct method (1920s onwards) gave more attention to reading comprehension, structural
teaching, and cultural component. The leading applied linguists of this era were Leonard
Bloomfield, Charles Fries, and Thorndike. Among the teaching models proposed were
reading method and oral method.

1.2.1. Reading method

In the 1920s, the Americans tried to implement cautiously the direct method in
different schools and colleges, the results showed that there is no good or “perfect” method. In
fact, the findings demonstrated that natural methods have their limitations especially with
regards to the restricted classroom time, the limited skills of teachers, and the irrelevance of
conversational methods for the average American school boys. This study that started in 1923
culminated in the publication of the Coleman report in 1929. The report advocated a reading
method with a gradual introduction of lexis and grammar. As a result of this report, the
reading method dominated American foreign language teaching classes till the outbreak of the
Second World War. The reading method was text-based. The teacher presents and reads a text
to the students; then, the learners are asked to read the text silently to develop their reading
comprehension; after that, lexical items and grammatical forms are studied and practiced;
finally, a discussion is held around the content of the text.

1.2.2. Charles Fries’ aural-oral approach

Charles Fries (1887-1967) tried (like Palmer) to establish a scientific approach to

foreign language teaching. He developed an aural/oral approach that is erroneously
considered as an Audio-lingual method. In fact, he called for pattern practice rather than oral
drills in a behavioristic way and he focused on meaning rather than simply on mechanical
practice. Additionally, his linguistic data was derived from everyday authentic use of
language.

Generally speaking, Fries rejected the principle of the direct method that principally
exposed learners to language without any organized attention to grammar. Instead, he argued
that structural learning is the solution to language mastery. Furthermore, he held that language
should be learned through a systematic attention to pronunciation and oral practice of
language structures.

1.2.3. Leonard Bloomfield and the informant method

Leonard Bloomfield is the American linguists who led to the development of

structuralism in the United States during the 1930s and 1940s. He set up a comprehensive
description of the American structural linguistics. Besides being a structuralist, he was an
adherent of behaviorism. His work on syntax was used by Charles Fries and Robert Lado to
devise teaching materials. More importantly, when the American Army wanted a quick-fix
method for teaching foreign languages, it turned to the work of Bloomfield at Yale University
to set what came to be known as Audiolingualism.

Before being approached by the army, Bloomfield had already developed a program to
train anthropologists to learn American Indian languages. The method employed by
Bloomfield was called the “informant method”; that is, as Amerindian languages had no
written forms, Bloomfield used native speakers as sources of linguistic data. These informants
provided language structures that were imitated by the learners under the supervision of the
linguists who selects intuitively the basic structures of target language. It is also to be noted
that his program was highly intensive and it allowed reaching with highly motivated learners
acceptable capacities to speak and understand a foreign language in a couple of weeks.

1.2.4. Sum up

After the demise of the Direct Method in the United States, the reading method
dominated foreign language teaching until the outbreak of the World War II. However, during
this period, the work of Charles Fries in Michigan University and Leonard Bloomfield in Yale
University (1930s) laid the foundation of a structural behavioral approach. The American
structuralism described language in a form of systematized structures (language patterns) that
could be learned through continual practice or drills. Behaviorism was used to acquire foreign
language habits, that is, the learning of new language behaviors was carried out through
intensive repetitions and drills. Nevertheless, it should be noted that Fries stood out against
the practices of behaviorism and held that his oral method proposed oral practice of language
patterns, rather than mechanical drilling of language structures. In brief, the American
structural and behavioral movements of the 1930s paved the way for the set up of the army
method, commonly called Audio-lingual method (ALM).
Lecture 6: Audio-Lingual Method
At least, two factors contributed to the advent of ALM. First, the United States
adopted the DM cautiously because of its excessive requirements at the level of materials and
teacher training. Coleman’s 1929 report showed that its implementation in public schools was
nearly impossible. Hence, the reading/oral method became the immediate and more practical
version of the DM (Richards & Rodgers, 2001). Second, the entry of the US to World War II
and its subsequent need for trained personnel in foreign languages (like German, Italian,
French, and Malay) urged the US government to find a quick solution to train military staff in
foreign languages. As contemporary conventional teaching practices in foreign language were
inappropriate for the new societal requirements, the US educational authorities opted for the
teaching practices of Yale University and hired Charles Fries to develop programs for
teaching foreign languages at Michigan University. Ultimately, the combination of
reading/oral, structural linguistic and behavioral psychology led to the establishment of ALM.
1. Background of Audio-Lingual Method
Based on the principles of Yale and Michigan Universities, The US educational
authorities began searching for a more effective foreign language teaching method in the
1950s. Consequently, ALM appeared as an alternative to the DM. The leading linguists of
Yale and Michigan Universities (i.e., Bloomfield and Fries, respectively) promoted a
structural and behavioral approach for ALM, and rejected the practices of the DM, which
delayed the teaching of grammar. According to Fries, language structure is the starting point
(Richards & Rodgers, 2001). The teacher/syllabus designer identifies the structural properties
of the language at the sentence level and then drills them systematically; additionally, he/she
notes systematically the pronunciation of the new language items. As for the teaching
procedures, Bloomfield advocated imitation and intensive drilling teaching techniques
(Larsen-Freeman, 2000).
2. Theory of Language
Language is a set of structures for encoding meaning; it involves a hierarchical system
of elements (i.e., morphemes, phonemes, and syntax). These components of the system follow
interrelated rules, which can be described in detail by linguists. Thus, learning a language
involves learning the rules of the building blocks of the system from phonemes to
morphemes, and from morphemes to syntax.
3. Theory of Learning
According to behavioral psychology, three elements govern our behavior, and language
learning is no exception. These elements are stimulus, response, and reinforcement. Stimulus
elicits behaviors; response follows stimulus; and reinforcement marks responses as
appropriate for future reproduction or inappropriate for repetition (Skinner, 1957). Positive
reinforcement leads to habit formation. Accordingly, in language learning/ teaching, the
learner is the organism, the stimulus is the teaching content, the response is the learner’s
reaction to stimulus, and the reinforcement is the extrinsic praise of the teacher or the intrinsic
self-satisfaction. In addition, language instruction is an appropriate set of connections of this
stimulus/response/reinforcement system.
4. Principles of Audio-Lingual Method
- Learning is a process of mechanical habits
- Language skills are ordered as follows: listening, speaking, reading, and writing
- Grammar is taught inductively
- Meaning of words is embedded in cultural context, not in isolation (Larsen-Freeman, 2000,
pp. 42-45; Richards& Rodgers, 2001, p.57)
4. Learning Activities
ALM teachers use dialogues and drills for classroom practice. They embed structures
and patterns in dialogues, which are also used for memorization by students. After studying a
dialogue, ALM learners drill on the target structures and memorize them. Activities include
pattern practice and substitution exercises. Most of the language activities we use today in
language classes were produced by ALM.

5. Learner Role
Learners are organisms. They react to external stimulus, and they abstain from initiation
and interaction because it can lead to making mistakes.
6. Teacher Role
The teacher has an active and central role. The teacher models the target language,
directs the education process, and corrects the students’ mistakes.
7. Procedure
The following techniques are used in the classroom;

- Students listen to a dialogue on a tape or modeled by the teacher

- The dialogue is broken into parts and students repeat exchanges until they learn the
whole dialogue
- The dialogue is acted out by the teacher and a student, then by students in pairs.
- Some structures are selected from the dialogue and drilled
 - Some grammar explanation is provided
- Students may refer to the printed dialogue (Larsen-Feeman, 2000, pp. 42-45; Richards
& Rodgers, 2001, pp. 65-66)

8. Evaluation of Audio-Lingual Method

ALM was so popular during the 1960s, but it came under attack for various reasons.
Its theoretic foundation in terms of language theory and learning theory was questioned
especially by the mentalist view that emerged in the late 1950s. Besides, the results were
unsatisfactory for students. The latter did not manage to use the target language as promised
by the method. TheMassachusetts Institute of Technology rejected both structuralism and
behaviorism. According to Chomsky (1965), language is not a set of verbal habits. Human
beings are endowed by the mental ability to produce entirely new sentences never heard of.
Sentences are produced and created thanks to an internal system of abstraction. They are not
learnt through imitations and repetitions, rather they are generated by the abstract system we
possess in our brain.

Conclusion
ALM is a scientific language teaching method that was very popular and that attempted
to impart in the learner the ability to speak a foreign language rapidly throughsimple mastery
of language structures and by means of repetitions and drillings. It has a very solid theoretical
basis, but it has failed to enable foreign language learners to speak the language fluently.
Skinner’s (1957) approach came under attack and linguists such as Chomsky (1957, 1965)
demonstrated eloquently and strongly that language is not a process of habit formation.
Rather, the mentalists’ movement viewed language as a creative process of meaning making.
Lecture 7: Oral/Situational Language Teaching

Introduction

The Oral Approach or Situational Language Teaching (SLT)) is less known than ALM;
it is an approach to language teaching developed by British applied linguists (1930-1960-
Richards & Rodgers, 2001) in the context of structuralism and as a response to the
shortcomings of the DM. Although this instructional method is less popular in comparison to
the other foreign language methods that marked the 20th century, it has influenced directly and
significantly the design of many standard textbooks such as Alexander’s (1967) series of
textbooks First things First, Practice and Progress, Developing Skills, Fluency in English.
These books are known to Algerians; as a matter of fact, they were used in Algerian public
schools in the 1970s.

1. Background: A more Principled Way to English Language Teaching

The British applied linguists Harold Palmer and A.S. Hornby are credited with the
foundation of SLT. According to Richards and Rodgers (2001), these outstanding linguists
who were well-informed about the work of Otto Jespersen and Daniel Jones, as well as the
practices of the DM tried to promote a more principled way for English language teaching
(Richards & Rodgers, 2001, p. 36). This new approach reorganized the language content and
graded it in novel ways using scientific criteria. In fact, in this method, and unlike the DM, the
teacher does not submerge students with uncontrolled content; rather, some selection of
content is carried out before it is presented to them. More specifically, syllabus designers
apply principled criteria to grammar and vocabulary content. There are three major distinctive
features of SLT that contributed to its appearance and widespread.

1.1. Vocabulary Control

Palmer, who worked at home and abroad and was in partnership with other applied
linguists (such as Otto Jespersen, Michael West, and Daniel Jones), advocated the importance
of reading and vocabulary in foreign language teaching (Howatt, 1984). His examination of
the most important English vocabulary elements showed that writers often use a sum 2000
words (Richards & Rodgers, 2001). This insight led to the use of the criterion of frequency
and other criteria (such as gradation) for vocabulary selection; and later in 1953, Hornby and
Michael West published the Word Service List for English Words (Richards & Rodgers, 2001,
p. 37). This course design document contains 2000 words, which can improve foreign
language level.

1.2. Grammar Control

Additionally, during the same period, Palmer and Hornby described basic English
grammar in a form of categories (sentence patterns, rather than abstract rules). Examples of
these could be the following: “there is/there are/how many/how much?”These applied
linguists compiled new grammatical materials in the form of dictionaries and named them
“sentence types and substitution exercises” (Howatt, 1984, p. 238).The innovative course
design materials were given to course writers to devise textbooks and to teachers to apply in
the classroom.

1.3. Situational Factor

Furthermore, the factor that contributed to the uniqueness of SLT is the use of language
in context. SLT teachers use realia and other visual materials to present language in context,
making it easier for students to master. Apart from this, SLT recommends the use of content
words to make meanings clearer in sentence patterns. George Pittman substantiated this
outstanding principle in the design of situational teaching materials (Richards & Rodgers,
2001).

2. Principles of Situational Language Teaching

According to Richards and Rodgers (2001), the following are the major tenets of SLT.
- Language teaching begins with the spoken language. Material is taught orally before it
is presented in written form.
- The target language is the language of the classroom.
- New language points are introduced and practiced situationally.
- Vocabulary selection procedures are followed to ensure that the general service
vocabulary is covered and the most useful words are studied.
- Items of grammar are graded following the principle that simple forms should be
taught before complex ones. . (Richards & Rodgers, 2001, p. 39
3. Theoretical Assumptions

SLT is rooted in the tradition of British structuralism. First, language is related to

context in accordance to M.A. K. Halliday’s notion of context of situation (relating structures
to context). The word context refers here to the participants and objects making up the
communicative event. Second, speech is primary as established by the 19th century Reform
Movement and as a consequence of the foundation of IPA and the influence of the DM. Third,
language is viewed as a set of patterns (sentence types) which are graded and sequenced from
the easiest to the most difficult (influence of Palmer and Hornby materials). Fourth, only the
most useful and frequent words are taught. Therefore, language ability means the mastery of
sentence patters and vocabulary and their acceptable use in oral communication.

As the learning theory, the teaching procedures follow the driving principles of
behaviorism (Richards & Rodgers, 2001). In other words, it involves correct repetition and
practice of language models.

4. Design

Objectives: The SLT teacher focuses first on listening and speaking, then the mastery of
structures, and then the acquisition of useful vocabulary follows to allow students to read and
write better.

Syllabus: the basic building blocks of SLT’s syllabus design are language patterns and lists of
vocabulary (see Table 4 below). Patterns of sentences are explained more through content
words and realia.

Instructional activities: Much like the Audio-lingual method, SLT uses repetitions, guided
practice, substitution, chorus repetition, and writing and reading activities.

Learner role: At the beginning of the course, the learner should be silent and listen to his/her
teacher; he/she has simply to react to teacher’s questions; otherwise, he/she will give way to
undesirable behaviors. Later, more active participation is recommended when he/she has a
reasonable command of the language (Richards & Rodgers, 2001).

Teacher role: The teacher’s role is firstly to serve as a model during the presentation stage,
demonstrating and illustrating the new content; then, he/she guides the practice of the new
sentence types and vocabulary; finally, he/she should skillfully elicit answers from the
learner.

4. Procedures

There are many types of procedures for teaching through SLT; the following model is
one of them.

- Listening practice
- Choral imitation
- Individual imitation
- Isolation of difficult sounds, words, or group words
- Building up a new model: teacher asks students to supply answers in which they use
the new language categories and introduce the new model
- Elicitations in which the teacher uses mimes, pictures, and demonstrations to bring
learners to produce the new structures
- Substitution drills, in which the teacher uses cues
- Correction, in which the teacher indicates that there is an error

(Adapted from Davies et al., 1975, pp- 67, in Richards & Rodgers, 2001, p. 46)

Conclusion

The reader can notice from the above description of SLT that this approach is equally a
structural/behavioral-focused language teaching method, though it attempts to make meanings
clearer in the context through bringing into play demonstrations, pictures, and realia. Thus,
the teaching content is still the language structure, and its meaning is expressed in language
patterns. The procedures of teaching are much like those of ALM; in fact, SLT equally
focuses on the oral accuracy, uses repetitions and drillings, utilizes substitution activities,
delays the use of writing; and gives restricted freedom to creative practice of language
structures and meanings.