PAIR WORK

GRAPHIC ORGANIZER

PRACTISING IN THE CLASSROOM

INVOLVING BOTH : TEACHERS AND STUDENTS

HELP STUDENTS TO LEARN VOCABULARY AND GRAMMAR

LEARNING AND TEACHING PROCESS OF SECOND LANGUAGE

SIMMILARITIES

FOCUSING TO MASTERING LEARNING SKILSS

DIRECT METHOD
called Natural Method as its based on the way children learn their native language. aims at establishing the direct bond between thought and expressions and between experience and language. It is based on the assumption that the learner should experience the new language in the same way as he experienced his mother tongue.

AN OVERVIEW OF TEACHING APPROACHES, METHODS AND TECHNIQUES GRAMMAR TRANSLATION METHOD

method of foreign language teaching is one of the most traditional methods. A focus on learning the rules of grammar and their application in translation passages from one language into the other.

AUDIOLINGUAL METHOD
to result in rapid acquisition of speaking and listening skills. drills students in the use of grammatical sentence patterns. Speaking and listening competence preceded reading and writing competence. knowledge of sufficient vocabulary to use with grammar patterns.

COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING

final aim of CLT (Communicative Language Teaching) is communicative competence. students will learn to express the functions that best meet their own communication needs.

DIFFERENCES
3

ACTIVITY PLAN

Name : 1. Mohammad Raffiuddin bin Yusof 2. Mohammad Affiq bin Mohammad Zain Task : English Activity : Puzzle, Listening and Dialogue Memorization Year : 2 Teacher Procedure/ Activity 1. Teacher dividing students in class into six group with five members in each group. 2. Leader of the group will draw an envelope containing different pieces of puzzle. 3. Every group was give 5 minute to arrange all the pieces to get a picture of animal. 4. After that, teacher will ask the class the name of the animal that every group gets. 5. Teacher will translate into English the animals name when student tell the name by their mother tongue. 6. After students mastered to 2. Teacher ask student by using questioning technique and translating the animals name into English by using Grammar Translation method because the students were not mastering English yet. Justification 1. Teacher use grouping strategy to build cooperating between students. Puzzle is use as a game for Communicative Language Learning in order to make the student communicate with their friends during the process to finish arranging the pieces of puzzle.

pronounce the animals name in English, teacher plays the sound of animal. 7. Each group need to listen carefully the animals sound according to the animals picture that they get from the puzzle before. 8. Teacher gives every group 12 dialogue where each students will get two dialogue to remember.

3. Teacher plays the animals sound and asks students to hear properly and remember the sound. When the students remember the sound, they will remember the name of animal. Audiolingual method is use because they use their ears to listen and pronounce the name of animals.

4. Teacher gives the dialogue 9. Every student was given 5 containing blank space in order to minutes to remember their own teach the English by using dialogue (refer dialogue 1). English. The words that already 10. Teachers ask every group to stated in dialogue are use to be a present in front of class. guideline for students to practicing speech and communicating. Direct method and communicative language teaching is use through this process.

DIALOGUE 1

Student 1 : what is this (showing the picture of animal). Student 2 : it has ____ legs. Student 3 : we can found it at _____. Student 4 : this is the picture of ____. Student 5 : yes, you are right. Student 1, 2, 3, 4,& 5: the sound of this animal is _______.

Group 1 S1 (chicken), S2 ( two), S3 (village), S1,2,3,4,5 (kokk..kokk..kokk..) Group 2 S1 (cat), S2 ( four), S3 (home), S1,2,3,4,5 (meeowwmeeoww..) Group 3 S1 (cow), S2 ( four), S3 (paddy field), S1,2,3,4,5 (mbohhhmbohhh) Group 4 S1 (bird), S2 ( two), S3 (at sky), S1,2,3,4,5 (ciippp..ciippp..ciippp) Group 5 S1 (frog), S2 ( two), S3 (in the pool), S1,2,3,4,5 (ongggongggonggg)

GROUP WORK

ARTICLES AND NOTES

DIRECT METHOD

10

DIRECT METHOD The Direct Method, also called the Natural Approach, developed towards the end of the 19th century. It represents are critical reaction to the teaching methods of the ancient Grammar Translation Method which produced knowledge about language rather than knowledge of language. The general goal of the Direct Method is to provide learners with a practically useful knowledge of language. They should learn to speak and understand the target language in everyday situations. The historical background to the call for a new approach to the teaching of modern languages like French and English has both socio-economic and scientific aspects. On the social and economic level the industrialization of western European countries created a demand for a practically useful knowledge in subjects like mathematics, physics, and modern languages. In Germany this gave rise to a new type of school called Realschule. Unlike the traditional grammar schools the new type of school catered mainly for children from the rising middle-classes. On the scientific side the call for the teaching of living languages like French and English was accompanied by the development of new linguistic approaches to the study of language. One of the most prominent aspects of that development is the rise of phonetics and phonology as a new linguistic discipline with the creation of the international phonetic alphabet. At a time when teachers had no access to modern gadgets like tape recorders or videos this provided them with the first sound information on how to pronounce the target language words. The teaching methods recommended by the new reform movement followed logically from the emphasis on providing a useful knowledge of target knowledge, because that can only be developed by the direct use of the target language in class. Rather than forcing learners to accumulate abstract knowledge about rules of grammar, declensions and conjugations, with translations as a test of knowledge, reformers proposed that the target language should be learnt like children learn their first language, that is by using it in class. This is why the new approach is known as the Natural Approach or the Direct Method. Typical of the new teaching methods is the use of chains of activities accompanied by verbal comments like: I go to the door. I open the door. I close the door. I return to my place. I sit down. They are also called Gouin Series after the French reformer Gouin. There can be no doubt, however, that given the general authoritarian attitude to education typical of the 19th century teachers remained very much in command and all teaching was very much teacher centred. There was a marked change in teaching contents, however. The emphasis was now on knowledge of words and phrases useful for everyday life, and of factual knowledge about the target language country, its geography, major cities, industry, etc. In contrast to that the reading of great literary texts by the greatest authors, which is typical of the Grammar Translation Method, was given no priority. Note, however, that the still strong and influential faction of grammar school teachers considered this a debasing of the high principles of good education, and eventually many reformers were willing or forced to compromise when they fought for
11

recognition of the new type of Oberrealschule as institutions entitled to issue school living certificates that granted access to university studies and were equal in status to grammar school diplomas. It is important to note this because for many years to come classroom reality was characterized by a mixture of methods and goals of teaching that had their origin no less in ancient grammar translation methods than in the reformist concepts of the Direct Method. Source : http://www2.uniwuppertal.de/FB4/anglistik/multhaup/methods_elt/4_direct_method.htm

12

DIRECT METHOD Also known as Reform Method / Natural Method / Phonetical Method / Antigrammatical Method All reformers were vehemently opposed to teaching of formal grammar and aware that language learning was more than the learning of rules and the acquisition of imperfect translation skills. Vietor ('Die Sprachunterricht muss umkehren' 1882) "This study of grammar is a useless torture. It is certainly not understood; therefore it can have no effect as far as the moulding of the intellect is concerned and no-one could seriously believe that children could learn their living German tongue from it." Instead grammar should be acquired inductively by inducing the rules of how the language behaves from the actual language itself. "Never tell the children anything they can find out for themselves." (Jesperin 1904)

Direct Method based on belief that: 1 Knowing a language was being able to speak it! Primacy of spoken word. New method laid great stress on correct pronunciation and target language from outset. Advocated teaching of oral skills at expense of every traditional aim of language teaching. 2 Second language learning must be an imitation of first language learning, as this is the natural way humans learn any language, and so MT has no place in FL lesson. (Baby never relies on another language to learn its first language). 3 Printed word must be kept away from second language learner for as long as possible (same as first language learner, who doesn't use printed word until he has good grasp of speech). 4 The written word / writing should be delayed until after the printed word has been introduced. 5 The learning of grammar/ translating skills should be avoided because they involve the application of the MT. 6 All above items must be avoided because they hinder the acquisition of a good oral proficiency. Disadvantages of Direct Method 1 Major fallacy of Direct Method was belief that second language should be learned in way in which first language was acquired - by total immersion technique. But obviously far less time and opportunity in schools, compared with small child learning his mother tongue.

13

2 Is first language learning process really applicable to second foreign language learning at later stage First language learning is essential part of child's total growth of awareness of world around him. He starts off with blank sheet, then starts collecting/selecting organising the experience of a totally new world, perceived through his senses, by formulating a variety of pre-verbal concepts. Subsequently part of the process of learning how to live is the acquisition of skills to verbalise his desires and aversions and to label his concepts, so as to make living more sufficient and secure. Effectiveness of these verbalising skills depends on maturation level of the child / on type of environment on intelligence. Language is part of an intrinsic process through which child learns to recognise/ deal with new situations.

Compare learning of second language At 11 years of age, child is not interested in recognition of new living situations, child has normally learned the basic concepts and can handle situations for ordinary living purposes. So as far as 'learning to live' is concerned, no similarities between two processes of learning. (not the case for immigrant children - they need to learn English for survival purposes therefore motivating force is totally different). Older child has already at his disposal a first language, which is securely fixed to the universe of things; (s)he is equipped with this advantage; first language learner does not have this. Older child is more mature and it would seem nonsensical to imitate first language learning processes totally for learning additional language. (think of contact hours needed) this is argument for using MT (anti Direct Method). What does foreign language learner wish to know first? to know the FL equivalent of MT sentences/ words used in hitherto familiar situations. To learn how to handle certain known/ recurring situations through the medium of the FL. He doesn't wish to handle completely new situations in FL terms.

4 The Direct Method rejects use of the printed word - but this objection is illogical since second language learner has already mastered his reading skills. Does printed word interfere with FL pronunciation? -In fact experiments show that the printed word is of real help to consolidate the FL and actually reinforces retention (ef 'Je ma pel') - leaves mental imprint, image of shape of word. 5 Later disciples of Direct Method took it to extremes and refused to speak a single word of English in lessons. To avoid translating new words, they searched for an association between new words and the idea it stood for: 'Voil un livre, voici une
14

craie'. Extreme Direct Methodists had cupboards full of realia. Explanations became cumbersome and time-consuming. (Definition type explanations UN meunier est UN homme qui travaille dans UN moulin' / 'court est le contraire de long'). Teachers would be jumping over desks flapping fins, rather than say that the English for 'saumon' is 'salmon'. Concepts like cependant'/ 'nanmoins' - obviously need immediate translation! 6 Successful teacher of the Direct Method needed competence in his language / stamina/ energy/ imagination/ ability and time to create own materials and courses beyond capacity of all but gifted few. "The method by its very nature presupposes a teacher of immense vitality, of robust health, one endowed with real fluency in the modern language he teaches. He must be resourceful in the way of gesture and tricks of facial expression, able to sketch rapidly on the board and in the language teaching day, he must be proof against linguistic fatigue". 7 Also Direct Methodists failed to grade and structure their materials adequately no selection, grading or controlled presentation of vocabulary and structures. Plunged pupils into flood of living language - quite bewildering for pupils. However, many teachers did modify the Direct Method to meet practical requirements of own schools, implemented main principles, i.e teaching through oral practice and banning all translation into target language. Obviously compromise was needed. Direct method did pave the way for more communicative, oral based approach, and as such represented an important step forward in the history of language teaching. Source : http://www.aber.ac.uk/~mflwww/seclangacq/langteach5.html

15

The Direct Method

The Direct Method was the outcome of a reaction against the Grammar Translation Method. It was based on the assumption that the learner of a foreign language should think directly in the target language. According to this method, English is taught through English. The learner learns the target language through discussion, conversation and reading in the second language. It does not take recourse to translation and foreign grammar. The first verses are taught while pointing to objects or pictures or by performing actions. According to H.G. Palmer, The Direct Method has the following: 1. Translation in every shape or form is banished from the classroom including the use of the mother tongue and that of the bilingual dictionary. 2. Grammar, when it is taught, is taught inductively. 3. Oral teaching precedes any form of reading and writing. 4. The use of disconnected sentences is replaced by the use of connected texts. 5. Pronunciation is taught systematically in accordance with the principles of phonetics and phonology of the target language. 6. The meanings of words and forms are taught by means of object or natural context. 7. The vocabulary and structure of the language are inculcated to a large extent by the teacher and answered by students. Aims: The Direct Method aims at establishing the direct bond between thought and expressions and between experience and language. It is based on the assumption that the learner should experience the new language in the same way as he experienced his mother tongue. In the Grammar Translation Method, the foreign concept or idea is first translated into the mother tongue and then understood. But in the Direct Method the intervention of the mother tongue is done away with the learner understands what he reads or hears in the second or foreign language without thinking of the mother tongue equivalence. Likewise, he speaks or writes the foreign language without the need of translating his thought or idea from the mother tongue into the second/foreign language. He acquires, what Champion calls that instinctive, unerring language sense which we all possess in variant degree in the mother tongue, and which superseding all rules, grammar and dictionaries, resting at
16

bottom on the direct association between experience and expression, is the only sure guide in the use of language. Principles: 1. Oral Training The direct Method emphasizes the value of oral training in learning a foreign language. The pupil is given sufficient practice in listening to the language and then speaking it. It also lays emphasis on the knowledge of phonetics so that the learner may be able to acquire intelligible pronunciation. Oral training helps in establishing direct association between the words of the foreign language and the ideas for which they stand.

2. Inhibition of the Mother Tongue Another way of securing bond between experience and expression is to inhibit the use of the mother tongue. Pupils are taught new words by actually showing them the objects for which they stand or performing actions or by suitable illustration in context. This enables them to think in English and respond directly in English.

3. Sentence is the Unit of Speech Therefore, the teaching of a language starts with the teaching of sentence patterns rather than individual words. This enables the learner to internalize the structure of the target language. New vocabulary items are introduced gradually based on the principle of selection and gradation. They are taught through material association, explanation or use in suitable context.

4. Inductive Teaching of Grammar In the direct method, grammar of the target language is not taught for its own sake. It is a means to an end. Its aim is to enable the learner to correct errors in his speech and writing. Grammar is taught inductively. It may be pertinent to point out here that in the Direct Method also lessons are prepared by the teacher or the author of textbooks according to some grammatical plan. The quantum of exposure to the language enables the learner to form his own hypothesis and rules of the language.

17

Advantages: 1. It is a natural method. It teaches the second/foreign language in the same way as one learns ones mother tongue. The language is taught through demonstration and conversation in context. Pupils, therefore, acquire fluency in speech. They are quick at understanding spoken English. They can converse in English with felicity and ease.

2. No gap between active and passive vocabulary. This method does not differentiate between active and passive vocabularies. According to this method whatever is required for understanding through English is also required for expressing through it. If English is taught through the mother tongue, the gulf between the active and passive vocabularies is widened. The learner acquires more of passive vocabulary because he concentrates on understanding English rather than expressing through it.

3. This method is based on sound principles of education. It believes in introducing the particular before general, concrete before abstract and practice before theory.

Defects: 1. There are educationists, who hold the view that the Direct Method does not take into account all aspects of language teaching. Dr. Michael West considers that the best thing about this method is that it links the foreign word with idea that it represents. Hence, instead of being called a Direct Method it should be called a Direct Principle. 2. Not Comprehensive Language learning involves acquisition of skills listening, speaking, reading and writing. The Direct Method concentrates on listening and speaking but not reading and writing. That is why many of those who have learned English through the Direct Method feel that they do not get adequate command over written language. A comparison between the Direct Method and the Grammar Translation Method must take into account the following points:

18

i. The Direct Method: 1. avoids close association between the second or foreign language and the mother tongue. 2. lays emphasis on speech. 3. follows the childs natural way of learning a language. 4. teaches the language by use and not by rule. 5. does not favour the teaching of formal grammar at the early stage. ii. The Grammar Translation Method: 1. maintains close association between the foreign language and the mother tongue. 2. lays emphasis on speech. 3. follows the adults natural way of learning a language. 4. teaches the language by rule and not by use. 5. teaches formal grammar from the very beginning.

Source : http://purwarno-linguistics.blogspot.com/2006/01/direct-method.html

19

GRAMMAR TRANSLATION METHOD

20

The Grammar-Translation Method The grammar-translation method of foreign language teaching is one of the most traditional methods, dating back to the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It was originally used to teach 'dead' languages (and literatures) such as Latin and Greek, and this may account for its heavy bias towards written work to the virtual exclusion of oral production. As Omaggio comments, this approach reflected "the view of faculty psychologists that mental discipline was essential for strengthening the powers of the mind." (Omaggio 89) Indeed, the emphasis on achieving 'correct' grammar with little regard for the free application and production of speech is at once the greatest asset and greatest drawback to this approach. The major characteristic of the grammar-translation method is, precisely as its name suggests, a focus on learning the rules of grammar and their application in translation passages from one language into the other. Vocabulary in the target language is learned through direct translation from the native language, e.g. with vocabulary tests such as: the house = das Haus the mouse = die Maus Very little teaching is done in the target language. Instead, readings in the target language are translated directly and then discussed in the native language, often precipitating in-depth comparisons of the two languages themselves. Grammar is taught with extensive explanations in the native language, and only later applied in the production of sentences through translation from one language to the other, e.g. Do you have my book? = Hast du mein Buch? Ich wei nicht, wo dein Buch ist. = I don't know where your book is. As Omaggio describes is, testing of the students is done almost exclusively through translation: "students had learned the language well if they could translate the passages well." (Omaggio 90) Obviously, there are many drawbacks to the grammar-translation approach. Virtually no class time is allocated to allow students to produce their own sentences, and even less time is spent on oral practice (whether productive or reproductive). Students may have difficulties "relating" to the language, because the classroom experience keeps them from personalizing it or developing their own style. In addition, there is often little contextualization of the grammar -although this of course depends upon the passages chosen and the teacher's own skills. Culture, when discussed, is communicated through means of reading passages, but there is little direct confrontation with foreign elements. Perhaps most seriously, as Omaggio points out, the type of error correction that this
21

method requires can actually be harmful to the students' learning processes: "students are clearly in a defensive learning environment where right answers are expected." (Omaggio 91) Despite all of these drawbacks, there are certain positive traits to be found in such a rigid environment. Although far from trying to defend or reinstate this method, I must still say: my highschool German class was almost entirely grammar-translation based, with the exception of a few dialogues from the textbook, and I don't really feel it "harmed" or even hampered my acquisition of the language -- and it certainly gave me a strong grounding in German grammar! For left-brained students who respond well to rules, structure and correction, the grammar-translation method can provide a challenging and even intriguing classroom environment. For those students who don't respond well to such structures, however, it is obvious that the grammar-translation method must be tempered with other approaches to create a more flexible and conducive methodology.

Source : http://www.nthuleen.com/papers/720report.html

22

The Grammar Translation Method

The Grammar Translation Method is the oldest method of teaching in India. It is as old as the international of English in the country. A number of methods and techniques have been evolved for the teaching of English and also other foreign languages in the recent past, yet this method is still in use in many part of India. It maintains the mother tongue of the learner as the reference particularly in the process of learning the second/foreign languages. The main principles on which the Grammar Translation Method is based are the following: (i) Translation interprets the words and phrases of the foreign languages in the best possible manner. (ii) The phraseology and the idiom of the target language can best be assimilated in the process of interpretation. (iii) The structures of the foreign languages are best learnt when compared and contrast with those of mother tongue. In this method, while teaching the text book the teacher translates every word, phrase from English into the mother tongue of learners. Further, students are required to translate sentences from their mother tongue into English. These exercises in translation are based on various items covering the grammar of the target language. The method emphasizes the study of grammar through deduction that is through the study of the rules of grammar. A contrastive study of the target language with the mother tongue gives an insight into the structure not only of the foreign language but also of the mother tongue. Advantages: 1. The phraseology of the target language is quickly explained. Translation is the easiest way of explaining meanings or words and phrases from one language into another. Any other method of explaining vocabulary items in the second language is found time consuming. A lot of time is wasted if the meanings of lexical items are explained through definitions and illustrations in the second language. Further, learners acquire some short of accuracy in understanding synonyms in the source language and the target language. 2. Teachers labour is saved. Since the textbooks are taught through the medium of the mother tongue, the teacher may ask comprehension questions on the text taught
23

in the mother tongue. Pupils will not have much difficulty in responding to questions on the mother tongue. So, the teacher can easily assess whether the students have learnt what he has taught them. Communication between the teacher and the learnersdoes not cause linguistic problems. Even teachers who are not fluent in English can teach English through this method. That is perhaps the reason why this method has been practiced so widely and has survived so long. Disadvantages: 1. It is an unnatural method. The natural order of learning a language is listening, speaking, reading and writing. That is the way how the child learns his mother tongue in natural surroundings. But in the Grammar Translation Method the teaching of the second language starts with the teaching of reading. Thus, the learning process is reversed. This poses problems. 2. Speech is neglected. The Grammar Translation Method lays emphasis on reading and writing. It neglects speech. Thus, the students who are taught English through this method fail to express themselves adequately in spoken English. Even at the undergraduate stage they feel shy of communicating through English. It has been observed that in a class, which is taught English through this method, learners listen to the mother tongue more than that to the second/foreign language. Since language learning involves habit formation such students fail to acquire habit of speaking English. Thus, they have to pay a heavy price for being taught through this method. 3. Exact translation is not possible. Translation is, indeed, a difficult task and exact translation from one language to another is not always possible. A language is the result of various customs, traditions, and modes of behaviour of a speech community and these traditions differ from community to community. There are several lexical items in one language, which have no synonyms/equivalents in another language. For instance, the meaning of the English word table does not fit in such expression as the table of contents, table of figures, multiplication table, time table and table the resolution, etc. English prepositions are also difficult to translate. Consider sentences such as We see with our eyes, Bombay is far from Delhi, He died of cholera, He succeeded through hard work. In these sentences with, from, of, through can be translated into the Hindi preposition se and vice versa. Each language has its own structure, idiom and usage, which do not have their exact counterparts in another language. Thus, translation should be considered an index of ones proficiency in a language. 4. It does not give pattern practice. A person can learn a language only when he
24

internalizes its patterns to the extent that they form his habit. But the Grammar Translation Method does not provide any such practice to the learner of a language. It rather attempts to teach language through rules and not by use. Researchers in linguistics have proved that to speak any language, whether native or foreign entirely by rule is quite impossible. Language learning means acquiring certain skills, which can be learnt through practice and not by just memorizing rules. The persons who have learnt a foreign or second language through this method find it difficult to give up the habit of first thinking in their mother tongue and than translating their ideas into the second language. They, therefore, fail to get proficiency in the second language approximating that in the first language. The method, therefore, suffers from certain weaknesses for which there is no remedy Source : http://purwarno-linguistics.blogspot.com/2006/01/grammar-translationmethod_13.html

25

The Grammar Translation Method Orrieux, C. (1989: 79) History of Ancient Civilizations Latin and Ancient Greek are known as dead languages, based on the fact that people no longer speak them for the purpose of interactive communication. Yet they are still acknowledged as important languages to learn (especially Latin) for the purpose of gaining access to classical literature, and up until fairly recently, for the kinds of grammar training that led to the mental dexterity considered so important in any higher education study stream. Morris, S. (1996: 12) Techniques in Latin Teaching Latin has been studied for centuries, with the prime objectives of learning how to read classical Latin texts, understanding the fundamentals of grammar and translation, and gaining insights into some important foreign influences Latin has had on the development of other European languages. The method used to teach it overwhelmingly bore those objectives in mind, and came to be known as theClassical Method. It is now more commonly known in Foreign Language Teaching circles as the Grammar Translation Method. The Grammar Translation Method Howatt in his book, The Empirical Evidence for the Influence of L1 in Interlanguage (1984: 98) points out The Classical Method (Grammar translation Method) was originally associated with the teaching of Latin and to a much lesser extent ancient Greek. The aim of teaching Latin and Greek was (and is) obviously not so that learners would be able to speak them. The aims were/are rather to develop : Logical thinking Intellectual capacities to attain a generally educational and civilizing effect

An ability to read original texts in the languages concerned , at least in the better learners. Interestingly, Howatt (1984: 131) also states: Grammar and Translation are actually not the distinctive features of GT, since they were already well-accepted as basic principles of language teaching. What was new was the use of invented, graded
26

sentences rather than authentic literary texts in order to make language learning easier. Key features According to Prator and Celce-Murcia in Teaching English as a Second Foreign Language (1979:3), the key features of the Grammar Translation Method are as follows: 1) Classes are taught in the mother tongue, with little active use of the target language. 2) Much vocabulary is taught in the form of lists of isolated words. 3) Long elaborate explanations of the intricacies of grammar are given. 4) Grammar provides the rules for putting words together, and instruction often focuses on the form and inflection of words. 5) Reading of difficult classical texts is begun early. 6) Little attention is paid to the content of texts, which are treated as exercises in grammatical analysis. 7) Often the only drills are exercises in translating disconnected sentences from the target language into the mother tongue. 8) Little or no attention is given to pronunciation. Typical Techniques Diane Larsen-Freeman, in her book Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching (1986:13) provides expanded descriptions of some common/typical techniques closely associated with the Grammar Translation Method. The listing here is in summary form only. 1) Translation of a Literary Passage (Translating target language to native language) 2) Reading Comprehension Questions
27

(Finding information in a passage, making inferences and relating to personal experience) 3) Antonyms/Synonyms (Finding antonyms and synonyms for words or sets of words). 4) Cognates (Learning spelling/sound patterns that correspond between L1 and the target language) 5) Deductive Application of Rule (Understanding grammar rules and their exceptions, then applying them to new examples) 6) Fill-in-the-blanks (Filling in gaps in sentences with new words or items of a particular grammar type). 7) Memorization (Memorizing vocabulary lists, grammatical rules and grammatical paradigms) 8) Use Words in Sentences (Students create sentences to illustrate they know the meaning and use of new words) 9) Composition (Students write about a topic using the target language) Disadvantages

The Grammar Translation Method may make the language learning experience uninspiring and boring. The Grammar Translation Method may also left the students with a sense of frustration when they travel to countries where the studied language is

28

used (they cant understand what people say and have to struggle mightily to express themselves at the most basic level)

This method neither approaches nor encourages the students communicative competence.

Reasons why it still used The Grammar Translation Method is still common in many countries even popular. Brown in his book Incremental Speech Language (1994) attempts to explain why the method is still employed by stating: This method requires few specialized skills on the part of teachers. Grammar rules and Translation Tests are easy to construct and can be objectively scored. Many standardized tests of foreign languages still do not attempt to test communicative abilities, so students have little motivation to go beyond grammar analogies, translations and other written exercises. Conclusions The Grammar Translation Method was developed for the study of dead languages and to facilitate access to those languages classical literature. Thats the way it should stay. English is certainly not a dead or dying language, so any teacher that takes an approach for dead language study into an English language classroom should perhaps think about taking up Math or Science instead. Rules, universals and memorized principles apply to those disciplines pedagogy and communicative principles do not. Source : http://oswaldoipc.wordpress.com/2007/06/22/the-grammar-translationmethod/

29

COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING

30

COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING The origins of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) are to be found in the changes in the British language teaching tradition dating from the late 1960s. Until then, Situational Language represented the major British approach to teaching English as a foreign language. In Situational Language Teaching, language was taught by practicing basic structures in meaningful situation-based activities. British applied linguists emphasized another fundamental dimension of language that was inadequately addressed in current approaches to language teaching at that time - the functional and communicative potential of language. They saw the need to focus in language teaching on communicative proficiency rather than on mere mastery of structures. Another impetus for different approaches to foreign language teaching came from changing educational realities in Europe. With the increasing interdependence of European countries came the need for greater efforts to teach adults the major languages of the European Common Market and the Council of Europe, a regional organization for cultural and educational cooperation. Education was one of the Council of Europe's major areas of activity. It sponsored international conferences on language teaching, published monographs and books about language teaching. The need to articulate and develop alternative methods of language teaching was considered a high priority. In 1971 a group of experts began to investigate the possibility of developing language courses on a unit-credit system, a system in which learning tasks are broken down into "portions or units, each of which corresponds to a component of a learner's needs and is systematically related to all the other portions" (van Ek and Alexander 1980: 6). The group used studies of the needs of European language learners, and in particular a preliminary document prepared by a British linguist, D. A. Wilkins (1972), which proposed a functional or communicative definition of language that could serve as a basis for developing communicative syllabuses for language teaching. Wilkins's contribution was an analysis of the communicative meanings that a language learner needs to understand and express. Rather than describe the core of language through traditional concepts of grammar and vocabulary, Wilkins attempted to demonstrate the systems of meanings that lay behind the communicative uses of language. The work of the Council of Europe; the writings of Wilkins, Widdowson, Candlin, Christopher Brumfit, Keith Johnson, and other British applied linguists on the theoretical basis for a communicative or functional approach to language teaching; the rapid application of these ideas by textbook writers; and the equally rapid acceptance of these new principles by British language teaching specialists, curriculum development centers, and even governments gave prominence nationally
31

and internationally to what came to be referred to as the Communicative Approach, or simply Communicative Language Teaching. (The terms notionalfunctional approach and functional approach are also sometimes used.) Although the movement began as a largely British innovation, focusing on alternative conceptions of a syllabus, since the mid-1970s the scope of Communicative Language Teaching has expanded. Both American and British proponents now see it as an approach (and not a method) that aims to (a) make communicative competence the goal of language teaching and (b) develop procedures for the teaching of the four language skills that acknowledge the interdependence of language and communication. Howatt distinguishes between a "strong" and a "weak" version of Communicative Language Teaching: There is, in a sense, a 'strong' version of the communicative approach and a 'weak' version. The weak version which has become more or less standard practice in the last ten years, stresses the importance of providing learners with opportunities to use their English for communicative purposes and, characteristically, attempts to integrate such activities into a wider program of language teaching.... The 'strong' version of communicative teaching, on the other hand, advances the claim that language is acquired through communication, so that it is not merely a question of activating an existing but inert knowledge of the language, but of stimulating the development of the language system itself. If the former could be described as 'learning to use' English, the latter entails 'using English to learn it.' (1984: 279) Finocchiaro and Brumfit (1983) contrast the major distinctive features of the Audiolingual Method and the Communicative Approach , according to their interpretation. Approach Theory of language The communicative approach in language teaching starts from a theory of language as communication. The goal of language teaching is to develop what Hymes (1972) referred to as "communicative competence." Hymes coined this term in order to contrast a communicative view of language and Chomsky's theory of competence. Chomsky held that linguistic theory is concerned primarily with an ideal speaker-listener in a completely homogeneous speech community, who knows its language perfectly and is unaffected by such grammatically irrelevant conditions as memory limitation, distractions, shifts of attention and interest, and errors (random or characteristic) in applying his knowledge of the language in actual performance. (Chomsky 1965: 3)

32

For Chomsky, the focus of linguistic theory was to characterize the abstract abilities speakers possess that enable them to produce grammatically correct sentences in a language. Hymes held that such a view of linguistic theory was sterile, that linguistic theory needed to be seen as part of a more general theory incorporating communication and culture. Hymes's theory of communicative competence was a definition of what a speaker needs to know in order to be communicatively competent in a speech community. In Hymes's view, a person who acquires communicative competence acquires both knowledge and ability for language use with respect to 1. whether (and to what degree) something is formally possible; 2. whether (and to what degree) something is feasible in virtue of the means of implementation available; 3. whether (and to what degree) something is appropriate (adequate, happy, successful) in relation to a context in which it is used and evaluated; 4. whether (and to what degree) something is in fact done, actually performed, and what its doing entails. This theory of what knowing a language entails offers a much more comprehensive view than Chomsky's view of competence, which deals primarily with abstract grammatical knowledge. Another linguistic theory of communication favored in CLT is Halliday's functional account of language use. "Linguistics ... is concerned... with the description of speech acts or texts, since only through the study of language in use are all the functions of language, and therefore all components of meaning, brought into focus" (Halliday 1970: 145). In a number of influential books and papers, Halliday has elaborated a powerful theory of the functions of language, which complements Hymes's view of communicative competence for many writers on CLT (e.g., Brumfit and Johnson 1979; Savignon 1983). He described (1975: 11-17) seven basic functions that language performs for children learning their first language: 1. the instrumental function: using language to get things; 2. the regulatory function: using language to control the behaviour of others; 3. the interactional function: using language to create interaction with others; 4. the personal function: using language to express personal feelings and meanings; 5. the heuristic function: using language to learn and to discover;

33

6. the imaginative function: using language to create a world of the imagination; 7. the representational function: using language to communicate information. Learning a second language was similarly viewed by proponents of Communicative Language Teaching as acquiring the linguistic means to perform different kinds of functions. At the level of language theory, Communicative Language Teaching has a rich, if somewhat eclectic, theoretical base. Some of the characteristics of this communicative view of language follow. 1. Language is a system for the expression of meaning. 2. The primary function of language is for interaction and communication. 3. The structure of language reflects its functional and communicative uses. 4. The primary units of language are not merely its grammatical and structural features, but categories of functional and communicative meaning as exemplified in discourse. Theory of learning In contrast to the amount that has been written in Communicative Language Teaching literature about communicative dimensions of language, little has been written about learning theory. Neither Brumfit and Johnson (1979) nor Littlewood (1981), for example, offers any discussion of learning theory. Elements of an underlying learning theory can be discerned in some CLT practices, however. One such element might be described as the communication principle: Activities that involve real communication promote learning. A second element is the task principle: Activities in which language is used for carrying out meaningful tasks promote learning (Johnson 1982). A third element is the meaningfulness principle: Language that is meaningful to the learner supports the learning process. Learning activities are consequently selected according to how well they engage the learner in meaningful and authentic language use (rather than merely mechanical practice of language patterns). These principles, we suggest, can be inferred from CLT practices (e.g., Little-wood 1981; Johnson 1982). They address the conditions needed to promote second language learning, rather than the processes of language acquisition. More recent accounts of Communicative Language Teaching, however, have attempted to describe theories of language learning processes that are compatible with the communicative approach. Savignon (1983) surveys second language acquisition research as a source for learning theories and considers the role of
34

linguistic, social, cognitive, and individual variables in language acquisition. Other theorists (e.g., Stephen Krashen, who is not directly associated with Communicative Language Teaching) have developed theories cited as compatible with the principles of CLT. Krashen sees acquisition as the basic process involved in developing language proficiency and distinguishes this process from learning. Acquisition refers to the unconscious development of the target language system as a result of using the language for real communication. Learning is the conscious representation of grammatical knowledge that has resulted from instruction, and it cannot lead to acquisition. It is the acquired system that we call upon to create utterances during spontaneous language use. The learned system can serve only as a monitor of the output of the acquired system. Krashen and other second language acquisition theorists typically stress that language learning comes about through using language communicatively, rather than through practicing language skills. Johnson (1984) and Littlewood (1984) consider an alternative learning theory that they also see as compatible with CLT-a skill-learning model of learning. According to this theory, the acquisition of communicative competence in a language is an example of skill development. This involves both a cognitive and a behavioral aspect: The cognitive aspect involves the internalisation of plans for creating appropriate behaviour. For language use, these plans derive mainly from the language system they include grammatical rules, procedures for selecting vocabulary, and social conventions governing speech. The behavioural aspect involves the automation of these plans so that they can be converted into fluent performance in real time. This occurs mainly through practice in converting plans into performance. (Littlewood 1984: 74) This theory thus encourages an emphasis on practice as a way of developing communicative skills. Design Objectives Piepho (1981) discusses the following levels of objectives in a communicative approach: 1. an integrative and content level (language as a means of expression) 2. a linguistic and instrumental level (language as a semiotic system and an object of learning);

35

3. an affective level of interpersonal relationships and conduct (language as a means of expressing values and judgments about oneself and others); 4. a level of individual learning needs (remedial learning based on error analysis); 5. a general educational level of extra-linguistic goals (language learning within the school curriculum). (Piepho 1981: 8) These are proposed as general objectives, applicable to any teaching situation. Particular objectives for CLT cannot be defined beyond this level of specification, since such an approach assumes that language teaching will reflect the particular needs of the target learners. These needs may be in the domains of reading, writing, listening, or speaking, each of which can be approached from a communicative perspective. Curriculum or instructional objectives for a particular course would reflect specific aspects of communicative competence according to the learner's proficiency level and communicative needs. The syllabus Discussions of the nature of the syllabus have been central in Communicative Language Teaching. We have seen that one of the first syllabus models to be proposed was described as a notional syllabus (Wilkins 1976), which specified the semantic-grammatical categories (e.g., frequency, motion, location) and the categories of communicative function that learners need to express. The Council of Europe expanded and developed this into a syllabus that included descriptions of the objectives of foreign language courses for European adults, the situations in which they might typically need to use a foreign language (e.g., travel, business), the topics they might need to talk about (e.g., personal identification, education, shopping), the functions they needed language for (e.g., describing something, requesting information, expressing agreement and disagreement), the notions made use of in communication (e.g., time, frequency, duration), as well as the vocabulary and grammar needed. The result was published as Threshold Level English (van Ek and Alexander 1980) and was an attempt to specify what was needed in order to be able to achieve a reasonable degree of communicative proficiency in a foreign language, including the language items needed to realize this "threshold level." Types of learning and teaching activities The range of exercise types and activities compatible with a communicative approach is unlimited, provided that such exercises enable learners to attain the communicative objectives of the curriculum, engage learners in communication, and require the use of such communicative processes as
36

information sharing, negotiation of meaning, and interaction. Classroom activities are often designed to focus on completing tasks that are mediated through language or involve negotiation of information and information sharing. Learner roles The emphasis in Communicative Language Teaching on the processes of communication, rather than mastery of language. Teacher roles Several roles are assumed for teachers in Communicative Language Teaching, the importance of particular roles being determined by the view of CLT adopted. Breen and Candlin describe teacher roles in the following terms: The teacher has two main roles: the first role is to facilitate the communication process between all participants in the classroom, and between these participants and the various activities and texts. The second role is to act as an independent participant within the learning-teaching group. The latter role is closely related to the objectives of the first role and arises from it. These roles imply a set of secondary roles for the teacher; first, as an organizer of resources and as a resource himself, second as a guide within the classroom procedures and activities.... A third role for the teacher is that of researcher and learner, with much to contribute in terms of appropriate knowledge and abilities, actual and observed experience of the nature of learning and organizational capacities. (1980: 99) Other roles assumed for teachers are needs analyst, counselor, and group process manager. NEEDS ANALYST The CLT teacher assumes a responsibility for determining and responding to learner language needs. This may be done informally and personally through one-to-one sessions with students, in which the teacher talks through such issues as the student's perception of his or her learning style, learning assets, and learning goals. It may be done formally through administering a needs assessment instrument, such as those exemplified in Savignon (1983). Typically, such formal assessments contain items that attempt to determine an individual's motivation for studying the language. For example, students might respond on a 5-point scale (strongly agree tostrongly disagree) to statements like the following. I want to study English because... 1. I think it will someday be useful in getting a good job.

37

2. it will help me better understand English-speaking people and their way of life. 3. one needs a good knowledge of English to gain other people's respect. 4. it will allow me to meet and converse with interesting people. 5. I need it for my job. 6. it will enable me to think and behave like English-speaking people. On the basis of such needs assessments, teachers are expected to plan group and individual instruction that responds to the learners' needs.
COUNSELOR

Another role assumed by several CLT approaches is that of counselor, similar to the way this role is defined in Community Language Learning. In this role, the teachercounselor is expected to exemplify an effective communicator seeking to maximize the meshing of speaker intention and hearer interpretation, through the use of paraphrase, confirmation, and feedback. GROUP PROCESS MANAGER CLT procedures often require teachers to acquire less teacher-centered classroom management skills. It is the teacher's responsibility to organize the classroom as a setting for communication and communicative activities. Guidelines for classroom practice (e.g., Littlewood 1981; Finocchiaro and Brumfit 1983) suggest that during an activity the teacher monitors, encourages, and suppresses the inclination to supply gaps in lexis, grammar, and strategy but notes such gaps for later commentary and communicative practice. At the conclusion of group activities, the teacher leads in the debriefing of the activity, pointing out alternatives and extensions and assisting groups in self-correction discussion. Critics have pointed out, however, that non-native teachers may feel less than comfortable about such procedures without special training. The focus on fluency and comprehensibility in Communicative Language Teaching may cause anxiety among teachers accustomed to seeing error suppression and correction as the major instructional responsibility, and who see their primary function as preparing learners to take standardized or other kinds of tests. A continuing teacher concern has been the possible deleterious effect in pair or group work of imperfect modeling and student error. Although this issue is far from resolved, it is interesting to note that recent research findings suggest that "data contradicts the notion that other learners are not good conversational partners because they can't provide accurate input when it is solicited" (Porter 1983).
38

The role of instructional materials A wide variety of materials have been used to support communicative approaches to language teaching. Unlike some contemporary methodologies, such as Community Language Learning, practitioners of Communicative Language Teaching view materials as a way of influencing the quality of classroom interaction and language use. Materials thus have the primary role of promoting communicative language use. We will consider three kinds of materials currently used in CLT and label these textbased, task-based, and realia. TEXT-BASED MATERIALS There are numerous textbooks designed to direct and support Communicative Language Teaching. Their tables of contents sometimes suggest a kind of grading and sequencing of language practice not unlike those found in structurally organized texts. Some of these are in fact written around a largely structural syllabus, with slight reformatting to justify their claims to be based on a communicative approach. Others, however, look very different from previous language teaching texts. Morrow and Johnson's Communicate (1979), for example, has none of the usual dialogues, drills, or sentence patterns and uses visual cues, taped cues, pictures, and sentence fragments to initiate conversation. Watcyn-Jones's Pair Work (1981) consists of two different texts for pair work, each containing different information needed to enact role plays and carry out other pair activities. Texts written to support the Malaysian English Language Syllabus (1975) likewise represent a departure from traditional textbook modes. A typical lesson consists of a theme (e.g., relaying information), a task analysis for thematic development (e.g., understanding the message, asking questions to obtain clarification, asking for more information, taking notes, ordering and presenting information), a practice situation description (e.g., "A caller asks to see your manager. He does not have an appointment. Gather the necessary information from him and relay the message to your manager."), a stimulus presentation (in the preceding case, the beginning of an office conversation scripted and on tape), comprehension questions (e.g., "Why is the caller in the office?"), and paraphrase exercises. TASK-BASED MATERIALS A variety of games, role plays, simulations, and task-based communication activities have been prepared to support Communicative Language Teaching classes. These typically are in the form of one-of-a-kind items: exercise handbooks, cue cards, activity cards, pair-communication practice materials, and student-interaction practice booklets. In pair-communication materials, there are typically two sets of material for a pair of students, each set containing different kinds of information. Sometimes the information is complementary, and partners must fit their respective parts of the "jigsaw" into a composite whole. Others assume different role
39

relationships for the partners (e.g., an interviewer and an interviewee). Still others provide drills and practice material in interactional formats. REALIA Many proponents of Communicative Language Teaching have advocated the use of "authentic," "from-life" materials in the classroom. These might include languagebased realia, such as signs, magazines, advertisements, and newspapers, or graphic and visual sources around which communicative activities can he built, such as maps, pictures, symbols, graphs, and charts. Different kinds of objects can be used to support communicative exercises, such as a plastic model to assemble from directions. Conclusion Communicative Language Teaching is best considered an approach rather than a method. Thus although a reasonable degree of theoretical consistency can be discerned at the levels of language and learning theory, at the levels of design and procedure there is much greater room for individual interpretation and variation than most methods permit. It could be that one version among the various proposals for syllabus models, exercise types, and classroom activities may gain wider approval in the future, giving Communicative Language Teaching a status similar to other teaching methods. On the other hand, divergent interpretations might lead to homogeneous subgroups. Communicative Language Teaching appeared at a time when British language teaching was ready for a paradigm shift. Situational Language Teaching was no longer felt to reflect a methodology appropriate for the seventies and beyond. CLT appealed to those who sought a more humanistic approach to teaching, one in which the interactive processes of communication received priority. The rapid adoption and implementation of the communicative approach also resulted from the fact that it quickly assumed the status of orthodoxy in British language teaching circles, receiving the sanction and support of leading British applied linguists, language specialists, publishers, as well as institutions, such as the British Council (Richards 1985). Now that the initial wave of enthusiasm has passed, however, some of the claims of CLT are being looked at more critically (Swan 1985). The adoption of a communicative approach raises important issues for teacher training, materials development, and testing 'and evaluation. Questions that have been raised include whether a communicative approach can be applied at all levels in a language program, whether it is equally suited to ESL and EFL situations, whether it requires existing grammar-based syllabuses to be abandoned or merely revised, how such an approach can be evaluated, how suitable it is for non-native teachers,
40

and how it can be adopted in situations where students must continue to take grammar-based tests. These kinds of questions will doubtless require attention if the communicative movement in language teaching continues to gain momentum in the future. Source : http://www2.vobs.at/ludescher/Alternative%20methods/communicative_language_te aching.htm

41

Introduction Communicative language teaching began in Britain in the 1960s as a replacement to the earlier structural method, called Situational Language Teaching. This was partly in response to Chomsky's criticisms of structural theories of language and partly based on the theories of British functional linguistis, such as Firth and Halliday, as well as American sociolinguists, such as Hymes , Gumperz and Labov and the writings of Austin and Searle on speech acts. Approach Theory of language The functional view of language is the primary one behind the communicative method, as well as Theory of learning Not a great deal has been written about the learning theory behind the communicative approaches, but here are some principlesthat may be inferred:

activities that involve real communication promote learning activities in which language is used for carrying out meaningful tasks promote learning language that is meaningful to the learner promotes learning

Design Objectives Here are some of the objectives of Communicative Language Teaching:

students will learn to use languge as a means of expression students will use language as a means of expressing values and judgments students will learn to express the functions that best meet their own communication needs.

The syllabus Communicative language teaching often uses a functional-notional syllabus. Yalden(1987) has classified a number of communicative syllabus types. Types of learning techniques and activities Communicative language teaching uses almost any activity that engages learners in authentic communication. Littewood, however has distinguished two major activity types:

functional communication activities: ones aimed at developing certain language skillsand functions, but which involve

42

communication, and social interaction activities, such as conversation and discussion sessions, dialogues and role plays

Procedure It is difficult to summarize the procedure in communicative classes because of the wide variety of activities used. Source : http://www.sil.org/lingualinks/languagelearning/waystoapproachlanguagelearning/Co mmunicativeLanguageTeaching.htm

43

AUDIOLINGUAL METHOD

44

AUDIOLINGUAL METHOD This method of Language Learning is also called the Aural-Oral Method. This method is said to result in rapid acquisition of speaking and listening skills. The audiolingual method drills students in the use of grammatical sentence patterns. When this method was developed it was thought that the way to acquire the sentence patterns of the second language was through conditioning or helping learners to respond correctly to stimuli through shaping and reinforcement. The Audiolingual Method is based on the following principles:

Speaking and listening competence preceded reading and writing competence. Use of German is highly discouraged in the classroom. The development of language skills is a matter of habit formulation. Students practice particular patterns of language through structured dialogue and drill until response is automatic. Structured patterns in language are taught using repetitive drills. The emphasis is on having students produce error free utterances. This method of language learning supports kinesthetic learning styles. Only everyday vocabulary and sentences are taught. Concrete vocabulary is taught through demonstration, objects, and pictures. Abstract vocabulary is taught through association of ideas. The printed word must be kept away from the second language learner as long as possible.

Introduction The audio-lingual method was widely used in the United States and other countriesin the 1950's and 1960's. It is still used in some programs today. Approach Theory of language The Structural view of language is the view behind the audio-lingual method. Particular emphasis was laid on mastering the building blocks of language and learning the rules for combining them. Theory of learning Behaviorism, including the following principles:

language learning is habit-formation mistakes are bad and should be avoided, as they make bad habits language skills are learned more effectively if they are presented orally first, then in written form analogy is a better foundation for language learning than analysis
45

the meanings of words can be learned only in a linguistic and cultural context

Design Objectives Here are some of the objectives of the audio-lingual method:

accurate pronunciation and grammar ability to respond quickly and accurately in speech situations knowledge of sufficient vocabulary to use with grammar patterns.

The syllabus Audiolingualism uses a structural syllabus Types of learning techniques and activities

dialogues drills

Procedure Here is a typical procedure in an audio-lingual course

Students hear a model dialogue Students repeat each line of the dialogue Certain key words or phrases may be changed in the dialogue Key structures from thedialogue serveas the basis for pattern drills of different kinds. The students practice substitutions in the pattern drills

Source : http://www.sil.org/lingualinks/languagelearning/waystoapproachlanguagelearning/Th eAudioLingualMethod.htm

46

BIBLIOGRAPHY

47

INTERNET

http://www2.uniwuppertal.de/FB4/anglistik/multhaup/methods_elt/4_direct_method.htm accessed on 20 August 2011 http://www.aber.ac.uk/~mflwww/seclangacq/langteach5.html accessed on 20 August 2011 http://purwarno-linguistics.blogspot.com/2006/01/direct-method.html accessed on 20 August 2011 http://www.nthuleen.com/papers/720report.html accessed on 20 August 2011 http://purwarno-linguistics.blogspot.com/2006/01/grammar-translationmethod_13.html accessed on 27 August 2011 http://oswaldoipc.wordpress.com/2007/06/22/the-grammar-translation-method/ accessed on 27 August 2011 http://www2.vobs.at/ludescher/Alternative%20methods/communicative_language_te aching.htm accessed on 8 September 2011 http://www.sil.org/lingualinks/languagelearning/waystoapproachlanguagelearning/Co mmunicativeLanguageTeaching.htm accessed on 8 September 2011 http://www.sil.org/lingualinks/languagelearning/waystoapproachlanguagelearning/Th eAudioLingualMethod.htm accessed on 8 September 2011

BOOKS J.S Mukalel, Approaches to English Language Teaching, Discovery Publishing House, 2007, New Delhi

48

COLLABORATION FORM

49

INSTITUT PENDIDIKAN GURU KAMPUS DATO RAZALI ISMAIL KURSUS PROGRAM IJAZAH SARJANA MUDA PERGURUAN DENGAN KEPUJIAN SEMESTER 4 2011 Name Course Lecturer Subject Date : Mohammad Affiq bin Mohammad Zain : PISMP Matematik 2 Semester 4 : Madam Azlinda binti Abd Aziz : Principles of English Languang Teaching Activity Signature

50

APPENDIXES

51