Downloaded from search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/ielapa.684121893739102.

on 06/16/2023 02:13 AM AEST; U

r
'The Four Strands of a Language C o u r s e

Paul Nation describes '.he main types of activity that should make ufc a balanced language course.
3
These include meaning-focused listening and reading, language-focused instruction, meaning-focused
speaking and writing, and fluency development activities.

attention to the sounds and spelling of the

T
he a i m o f this paper is t o a p p l y recent research
a n d t h e o r y in s e c o n d language a c q u i s i t i o n to language, t h r o u g h direct v o c a b u l a r y study, t h r o u g h

the design o f courses for learners o f English, g r a m m a r exercises a n d e x p l a n a t i o n , a n d I h r o u g h

i n d e p e n d e n t o f a n y particular m e t h o d o f language deliberate attention l o discourse features.

teaching. i Learning t h r o u g h m e a n i n g - f o c u s e d o u t p u t ; thai is,

A basic assumption that lies b e h i n d this paper is that t h r o u g h speaking a n d w r i t i n g w h e r e the learners'

it is n o l w i s e for a teacher or a t t e n t i o n is o n c o n v e y i n g ideas a n d messages to

to ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ _ ^ ^ _ ^ ^ _ a n o t h e r person.

themselves w i t h a p a r t i c u l a r •*... teaching and learning activities 4 . D e v e l o p i n g f l u e n t use o f

method of language that have become unfashionable known language items and
t e a c h i n g . It is m u c h more for a variety of reasons may still features o v e r the four skills o f
productive to become m a k e a positive contribution t o listening, s p e a k i n g , reading
aware of the important and writing; that is,
learning if they apply useful
principles of teaching and b e c o m i n g fluent w i t h w h a t is
l e a r n i n g , a n d to a p p l y these
principles and if they are focused already k n o w n .
in ways that suit the on worthwhile goals."
^^— A well-planned language
learners, the teaching
course ha appropriate balance o f these four
c o n d i t i o n s a n d the skills o f t h e teacher. This m a y result
strands.
in courses that use different k i n d s of t e a c h i n g a n d
l e a r n i n g activities b u t w h i c h f u n d a m e n t a l l y d r a w o n It is t h r o u g h these strands that learners a c h i e v e the
t h e same p r i n c i p l e s . l e a r n i n g goals o f a language c o u r s e ; n a m e l y f l u e n t
c o n t r o l o f t h e s o u n d s , s p e l l i n g , vocabulary, g r a m m a r
A related a s s u m p t i o n is that t e a c h i n g a n d l e a r n i n g
and discourse features o f the language, so that t h e y
activities that have b e c o m e u n f a s h i o n a b l e f o r a variety
c a n be used to c o m m u n i c a t e effectively.
o f reasons m a y still m a k e a positive c o n t r i b u t i o n to
l e a r n i n g if Ihey a p p l y useful p r i n c i p l e s and if t h e y a r e There is a t e n d e n c y tor language courses not to
focused o n w o r t h w h i l e goals. Thus, pronunciation b a l a n c e the f o u r strands a n d , i n d e e d , to g i v e almost
practice, structure drills, learning words out of n o attention l o some o f t h e m . Courses w h i c h have a
c o n t e x t , d i c t a t i o n activities and repetition activities very strong c o m m u n i c a t i v e focus often actively
p e r f o r m e d in a n a p p r o p r i a t e w a y c a n c o n t r i b u t e t o
discourage f o r m a l language-focused l e a r n i n g . There is
o n e o f t h e strands o f a c o u r s e . The t r i c k lies in g i v i n g
n o j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r this as s e c o n d language a c q u i s i t i o n
t h e m a useful focus a n d a suitable a m o u n t o f t i m e .
research s h o w s that a p p r o p r i a t e l y focused a t t e n t i o n to
language ilems c a n m a k e a very positive c o n t r i b u t i o n
T h e four strands t o l e a r n i n g (Fllis 1 9 9 0 ; L o n g 1988). A t t h e other
e x t r e m e , there are courses thai seem to d o little else
This paper suggests that a w e l l - b a l a n c e d language
b u t f o c u s o n f o r m a l features o f Ihe language w i t h little
c o u r s e s h o u l d consist o f four r o u g h l y equal strands:
o r n o o p p o r t u n i t y t o use w h a t has been learned to
1 Learning t h r o u g h m e a n i n g - f o c u s e d i n p u t ; that is, receive a n d p r o d u c e real messages. Perhaps e v e n
t h r o u g h listening a n d reading w h e r e the learners"' more commonly, t h e r e a r e courses t h a t provide
a t t e n t i o n is o n t h e ideas and messages c o n v e y e d
o p p o r t u n i t y l o receive a n d p r o d u c e messages, that
b y t h e language.
g i v e useful a t t e n t i o n to language features, b u t that d o
2 Learning t h r o u g h deliberate a t t e n t i o n to language n o t p r o v i d e o p p o r t u n i t y for the learners t o b e c o m e
Mil anguage features; t h a t is, through t r u l y f l u e n t in using w h a t t h e y k n o w .

; 6 No 2 June 1996
Downloaded from search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/ielapa.684121893739102. on 06/16/2023 02:13 AM AE
Let us now look at each of the tour strands to see what
Justification there is for distinguishing it as a separate
strand, the conditions that support learning, and some
typical activities that set up the conditions for
learning.
requiring comparison with the learners' present
knowledge, and creative use of lire item. Creative use
can be receptive and may involve meeting the item in
new conlexts, or having to rethink the significance of
the item.

Typical activities lo represent this strand of learning in

Meaning-focused input a course are reading graded readers, listening to
stories, taking part in or observing negotiated dialogue
Meaning-focused input consists of messages lhat the
in information gap activities, and receptive
learner is likely to focus on mainly for the ideas that
information transfer activities (Palmer 1980).
arc contained in the message. It could include
activities like listening to a In listening to stories, the
story, taking part in a teacher chooses a story that
conversation, following
"Language-focused instruction
is suitable for the level of the
instructions, or watching involves giving attention to learners and reads it to them
television, features of the language not just so that they can enjoy the
Several writers (Krashen for a particular message that they
story. Any difficult words or
convey, but for their spoken or constructions that occur are
1981; Newmark 1981;
quickly explained and noted
Taylor 1982; Terrell 1982) written form, their general on the blackboard, without
using different terminology- meaning, the patterns that they fit
interrupting the story too
see meaning-focused input
as the major source of
into or their correct use." much. The main focus is on
the learners following and
language learning, provided
enjoying the story. If the story is a long story, like a
certain conditions for this learning through
graded reader, it can continue over several days, like
comprehension occurred. Newmark (1981: 39), for
a serial. The teacher should read the story at a
example says:
reasonably slow pace making sure the learners are
A comprehension approach can work ... as long as following. There should be frequent pauses to give the
the material presented for comprehension in fact learners time to understand, and phrases or sentences
consists of 11) sufficient |2) language instances (3) can be repeated to make them clearer.
whose meaning can he inferred by students C4) who
are paying attention. The emphasis in this strand is on the quality of
enjoyable, understandable input.
Terrell (1982) and Krashen (1981) would also add that
the learner must not feel anxious or threatened by the
situation.
Language-focused learning
Language-focused instruction involves giving
The comprehension approach has its critics. Some
such as Ciregg (1984) criticise the logic and research attention to features of the language not just for a
evidence that the approach is based on. Others such particular message that they convey, but for their
as Swain (198.')) suggest that it is not sufficient to result spoken or written form, their general meaning, the
in the kind of learning lhat is needed to produce the patterns that they fit into, or their correct use. For
language. All these critics, however, agree that example, (he teacher may explain the meaning of a
language learning courses should contain substantial word lo learners and show the pattern it fits into, or
quantities of receptive activity. They consider thai this the learners may work through exercises based on a
receptive activity alone, however, is not sufficient for rule, such as add -cd lo make the pas) tense.
language learning.
There is now considerable evidence to show thai
In addition to being interested in the input and being language-focused instruction can help second
able to understand mosl of it. some researchers would language learning. Reviews by Long (1988) and Ellis
say that the new items in the input should be noticed (19901 suggesl that language-focused instruction can
by the learners, and if possible processed in ways have the following effects:

TlSOl In Context Volume- 6 No I lune l<)'lt.

»
Downloaded from search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/ielapa.684121893739102. o

i A (-nmhm!i<si --J i,in.t-i„ii:t-:ut.i»e:i in-m<"<>r Meaning-focused output

and mitdning-toruswl insiruclion leads W better
results than either kind ol instruction alone-

2 Language-focused influx "inn c m speed up Hie 'iKisni-d't. -.|>f,>% S*-» ,-• ' 'J'f • r - j
rate of second language acqirisition- t d ncomrmthM* nmfl w a l - U h4v r»
ld
i I ^il.Mi.''Ir-n.sivl itsL'iiLl.ur I I : - V ' u l " IcM'nprs !,i •" " " '■' '' "■ '*"■ ""■

rattierthanbecomins suckw«hcertainenors. ff«w» chaoses evidence tu supp

•I Some language-focused
I gamers are pushed wl>en
! W H » ° ! 1 »"'.! .;.;C 'd ttr USrl
* ed output extends speakers through encouiagemcnt CK
and in doing so heightens their
awareness of Che importance of
ocubcd particular grammatical features in
Kin.xiiy productive use of the language.*
provide meaning-focused
"***■ toadlns * s n speaking
There are, however, limitations on the effect ol speakmv ,.c-i.m vin.H-
lanu.uaKP-focused instruction. Ihcse limitations ex|>ec r-\ i - |.r<„iu< .

nuiiied with ibn opportunity

115. in meaning-roaised use.
repeal iheui uui retail die forms needed to express
learned through larifiuage^I>GUBed meanings*. and Hie chance to use items in WAYS :-i.it
nly tie available to the learner i,

elementary level ivrMnitit. fucused speakir

/ity called S.IJP.«,K£ m wnixri puls thf?

The learner with : ial 11 ie l l * ... Lwoorthfet

sentences about his of h«pirrw:ul»rtoi . the tat
speaker calk a nufflbt and ' i e learner vt ft ial
number has to ask the speaker a question related to
the topic just spoken about. When llw question is
answered, the questioner calls a number and the
Downloaded from search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/ielapa.684121893739102. o

More advanced activities include role plays, problem

solving activities, reading activities, onU split
information tasks.

Fluency development activities

Fluency 'ids dm following characteristics:
I It involves "the processing ot language in leal
time"' (Schmidt 1992: 358). That is, learners
demonstrate fluency when they take pan in
meaning-focused activity and do it with speed and
ease without holding op die flow or talk. There are likely to develop il [lie folio

lh& /fiimws Mire ;J.HJ ;o ximlMX where all the

iclude
-vllable
(C.riffith* I991>. number ol tilled pause* sut.ii .
urn, ah, er, and a number ol unfilled pauses.
1 the use ot language, does not require a peat de;
t Fluency is a skill asped of language use. Although
/<)Ogik*fte tiefTJi are within their previous
ex/wrieiice. This mean- u\i; lire learners work with
largely familiar topics and types ol discourse
making u'.f- ol k'luwn vocabulary
0. The lear.neis'
of a message and

rr tit 984:56-57),
.■c (> >i>oovr: ,•..■»! i«i<'.i,r,i?{<me.": tnr vie fewer
U al-M.lv known. perform M ,1 higher Until normal level. This
jus that in an activity with a fluency
Usually :■ (f'srncion ■> IMIIC l-1'iv..iii Hi
plMpnerl goal, learners should he speaking
Human and between actfyitles thai arc d
I comprehending fastei. hesitating less, and
ifcvdup rluen™ and accUIOl. p . , a,l
ig larger planned chunks ih.^n (hoy do in their
difficult In maintain. Natini- IWfl 1 \
NaOOlHl y9lilouadlr-.il aria( . i v latta
10 bring ibout an incraise ip . ■ ., y .1 j i
a rcduition of wore and an In i w n ,i
::ili:.:!i. , ily. As Ihsraw increases ••'• Ill » i It
mote ii* B of what they know, then they a
yivc rnoi0 OUeiilion lo the quality of what ll been for little purpose.
Sebmidf s (19921 tomuiehunuvp -evil" In the 4$/2 technique (Maurice 1983}, learners work
1:1 p..jrs w i n or-*.)(-n? as --le speakci *tnd Ihe other

toph whil* IE t- . - m listens, Then die pairs change

of the know e*I)
ACT* rhtfoi-y ot
larger units, broadening the use of
mowing the scono of oiiiors, and
lose that are most effective. Cheng
■ iS!ili;-lllfi VJ ,1- '-■*' V-V\[ ;l t-.-.-.U.t'.
with each speaker giving the same information lo a
new partner in three minutes, followed by a further
From rhe point of view of fluency, thii activity has
these important features. First, the demands of the
activity aie limited to a much smaller set than would
occur In mos: iin,-cn-ollec it-amir.; J
Downloaded from search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/ielapa.684121893739102. on 06/16/2023 02:13 AM AEST; U
(hf four Strands o! a Language Course

This can be done by control by the teacher, there are ni vays of designing a planning and
case in most receptive fluency activities JC!- preparation ent into lisle ling and speaking
reading graded readers or listening lo stories, or can activities lere are some brief suggestions:
be done by choice, planning or repetition by the
brainstorming the topic;
learner. In the 4/3/2 aclivily Ihe speaker chooses the
ideas and language hems, and plans the way of pre-reading on Ihe topic;
organising the talk. The 4- and 3-tninule deliveries observation of others doing the activity;
allow the speaker to bring these aspects well under
control, so that fluency can become the learning goal repeated opportunities to do Ihe aclivily;
oi the activity. Note thai the
■ preparing and prat
repetition of Ihe talk is still in Ihe first language;
with the learner's attention •*Another way of reaching a higher
• prediction activities.
focused on the message than usual level of performance is
because of the changing The purpose of ihe
audience. Second, the
to work on the quality of the
preparation is to make the
speaker's attention is on performance. This can be done quality of the listening or
getting the listener to through having an opportunity for speaking reach a higher
understand what is being level than it would withoul
said. Third, the learner is — "
planning and preparation.**
Ihe preparation.
helped to reach a high level of performance by having
the opportunity to repeat, and by the challenge of
decreasing time to convey the same message. Fourth,
Balancing the strands
the user is encouraged to process a large quantity of The four strands of a course should get roughly equal
language. In 4/3/2 this is done by allowing the speaker proportions of time. In making this calculation, time
to perform without interruption and by having the spent with the language outside the classroom must
speaker make three deliveries of the talk. also be considered, but only if it meets the conditions
for learning for a particular strand. That is, if a learner
spends a lot of time watching TV, this could not be
Another way of reaching a higher than usual level of
counted as much meaning-focused input if most of
performance is to work on the quality of the
what is heard from the TV is not understood,
performance. This can be done through having an
opportunity for planning and preparation. Crookes There could be small adjustments to the proportion of
11989) investigated learners who were given 10 time according lo the level of the students. For
minutes to plan what words, phrases and ideas they example, at the intermediate level about 20% of ihe
would use in their explanation of how to build a class time could be given to language-focused
I EGO model or complete a map. He found that, instruction. This instruction might include
compared to learners who were not given time to pronunciation practice, vocabulary teaching and
plan, the learners who planned produced longer learning, grammar models and explanation, and
utterances, and produced more grammatically feedback on speaking and writing performance. This
complex speech. would be less than in the beginning of the course
where Ihe learners needed more models, guidance
Planning and preparation can be done individually,
anil explanation. Later in the course, language-
with the help of guide sheets or in groups. Before
focused instruction still has a useful role to play,
doing a same or different split information activity, for
although the lime given lo it would be less. In the
example, all the learners who are A get together and
advanced slages, there could be formal feedback on
work on what they will say. Similarly all the learners
performance (especially to get over fossilisjtion;,
who are 8 get together and plan and practise. After vocabulary expansion, and attention to discourse and
this has been done, the A's pair up with the B's to do sociolinguistic conventions.
the activity.
Where there is little contact wilh Ihe language outside
the school, at the intermediate level, mean inn-focused

TESOL in Co:'v;i v-li.

Downloaded from search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/ielapa.684121893739102. on 06/16/2023 02:13 AM AEST Paul Nation
listening and reading inpul could be given about 30%
of Ihe class time, meaning-focused sneaking and
writing about 20%, and fluency activities about 30%.
I hese last three strands become very difficult to
distinguish from each other as learners'" proficiency
increases. This is because speaking activities involve
others listening, group work inevitably involves a
mixture of listening and speaking interaction, and
fluency activities may also conti ihi.tr■ u, ,u i uracy, the
learning of language items, and disc ourse knowledge,
as well as improving skill in use. It is probably not
important lo distinguish these three strands at
advanced levels of proficiency. What is more
important is to ensure that the learners are not getting
too much of one strand at the expense of another.
This article is based on a book entitled Teaching
1 istening and Speaking lh.il is in the draft stage.
References
Anderson, |.R. 1989. Practice, working memory, arid
the ACT" theory of skill acquisition: a comment on
Oirlson, Sullivan, and Schneider, journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and
Cognition 15: 527 1)30.
Areviirt, Supol & Nation. I.S.P. 1991. Fluency
improvement in a second language. KELC. journal
22, 1:84 94.
Becbe, L.M. led.) 1988. Issues in Second Language
Acquisition. New York: rsewbury House.
Brurnfii, C.J. 1984. Communicative methodology in
language leaching: The roles of fluency and
accuracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cheng, P.VV. 1983. Restructuring versus automaticity:
Alternative accounts of skill acquisition.
Psychological Review 92: 414-423.
Crookcs, G. 1989. Planning and interlanguagc
variation. Studies in Setxmd Language Acquisition
11:367-384.
Fills. R. 1990. Instructed Second Language
Acquisition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
1992. learning lo communicate in the
classroom: A study of two language learners'
requests. Studies In Second t anguage Acquisition
14:1:1 23
— 1993. The structural syllabus and second
language acquisition. I'ESOL Quarterly 27:
1:91-113.
Folos, S. 1994. Integrating grammar instruction and
communicative language use through grammar
12
consciousness-raising tasks. TESOL Quarterly
28:2:323-3 51.
CJass. Susan M. and Madden, Carolyn G. ieds) 1985.
Input in Second Language Acquisition. Mass:
Newbury House.
Gregg, K.R. 1984. Krashen's monitor and Occam's
ra^or. Applied Linguistics 3:79-100.
Griffiths, K. 1991. Pausological research in an 12
context: a rationale, and review of selected studies.
Applied I inguistics 12:4:345-364.
Krashen, S.D. 1981. The fundamental pedogogical
principle in second langaugc teaching. Studia
Linguistica 35:1-2:50-70.
Lennon, P. 1990. Investigating fluency in EFL: A
quantitative approach. Language Learning. 40:3:
387^f17.
long, M. 1988. Instructed interlanguagc development
in Beebe. I., ed. 1988.
Maurice, K. 1983. The fluency workshop. TESOL
Newsletter 17:4:29.
Nation, I.S.P. 1989. Improving speaking fluency.
System 17:3:377 384.
Palmer, D.M. 1982. Information transfer for listening
and reading. English Teaching forum 20:1:29-33.
Schmidt, R. 1990. The role of consciousness in second
language learning. Applied Linguistics 11:2:
129 158.
Schmidt, R. 1992. Psychological mechanisms
underlying second language fluency. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition 14:357 385.
Swain, M. 1985. Communicative competence: Some
roles of comprehensible input and coptnrehensiblc
output in its development. In S..M. Gass and C.Ci.
Madden 1985:235-253.
Taylor. B.P. 1982. In search of real reality. TFSOL
Quarterly 161:28 42.
Terrell, I'.D. 1982. The natural approach to language
teaching: An update. Modern Language journal
66:2:121 132.
Paul Nation is an Associate Professor at Ihe English
Language Institute in Victoria University oi
Wellington, New 7ealand. He has taught in Indonesia,
lhailand, the. United Stales, Finland, and japan. His
specialist interests are language teaching methodology
and vocabulary learning.
It-SO) in Context Volume 6 No I June *. 'm<