TEACHING ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE

by: Paulo C. Dorongon
The field of second or foreign language teaching has undergone many fluctuations and shifts over the years. Different from physics and chemistry, in which progress is more or less steady until a major discovery causes a radical theoretical revision (Kuhn 1970) as quoted by Murcia (2006), language teaching is a field in which fads and heroes have come and gone in a manner fairly consistent with the kinds of changes that occur in youth culture.

Literature has it that language teaching methodology has vacillated between two types of approaches: getting learners to use a language (i.e., to speak and understand it) versus getting learners to analyze a language (i.e., to learn its grammatical rules). In her book, Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language, Murcia (2006) mentioned the pre-twentieth-century trends of language teaching which changes due to different factors. She said that both classical Greek and medieval Latin periods were characterized by an emphasis on teaching people to use foreign languages. The classical languages, first Greek and then Latin, were used as lingua francas. Higher learning was conducted primarily through these languages all over Europe. During the Renaissance, on the other hand, the formal study of the grammars of Greek and Latin became popular through the mass production of books made possible by the invention of the printing press.

Different language teaching approaches emerged during the final quarter of the twentieth century. These approaches influenced and shaped the kind of teaching approaches and methodologies employed by English teachers worldwide. These approaches include: Grammar-Translation Approach, Direct Approach, Reading Approach, Audilolingualism, Oral Situational Approach, Cognitive Approach, Affective-Humanistic Approach, Comprehension-Based Approach, and the Communicative Approach.

Specifically, the Reading Approach, as reflected in the work of Michael West (1941) and others as quoted by Murcia (2006), held sway in the United States until the late 1930s and early 1940s, when world war II broke out and made it imperative for the U.S military to quickly and efficiently teach foreign language learners how to speak and understand a language. During this time, the U.S. government hired linguists to help teach languages and develop materials: the Audiolingual Approach (Fries 1945), which drew heavily on structural linguistics (Bloomfield 1933) and behavioral psychology (Skinner 1957), was born as quoted by Murcia(2006). Additionally, in Britain, the same historical pressures influenced the rise of Oral or Situational Approach (Pittman 1963).

Communicative competence being the goal of all teachers to see among students assumed that the goal of language teaching is learner ability to communicate in the target language. Communicative competence being rooted from Communicative Approach is the aspect of language users’ competence that enables learners to convey and interpret messages and to negotiate meanings interpersonally within specific contexts ( Brown, 1987) as quoted by Diaz-Rico and Weed (1995). I found this method useful and very effective in letting my students express themselves in the target language. In this method, I frequently use cooperative learning because it provides opportunities for students to share and contribute equally with one another in the group. Additionally, this method allows learners to negotiate meaning in situations in which the other member in the group has information that the others lack. Therefore, Communicative Approach does not only allow students to work cooperatively, but develop their competency in the target language. Language teachers should provide rich and stimulating classroom activities which will encourage student to do their best to attain mastery. Activities such as sharing of personal interests, favorite books, best projects they ever had, favorite pictures, etc. can be utilized. With this, teachers will come to know more of their students, and will make them (teachers) teach in a way which centers on the strengths of each individual learner.

However, given the statement of Richards and Rodgers (1986) :    Eclecticism needs to be principled if instruction is to be effective, and techniques and activities need to be chosen intelligently to relate to specific program objectives, teachers should bear in mind that Eclecticism addresses the diverse needs of the students. Echevarria and Graves (2003) stated teachers benefit from having a decision-making model rooted in theory to assist them in making instructional modifications that meet the learning needs of their students. Individuals differ in their preferences and learning styles, and one single approach rarely meets the needs of all students. If students are not responding to instruction, Echevarria and Graves (2003) suggested that teachers need to ask these questions:

1.    What are the assumptions underlying the approach I’m using?

2.    DO these assumptions apply to my students?

3.    Do I obtain my desired outcome using this approach?

 In teaching vocabulary for instance via reading in a homogeneous classroom (with Korean, Japanese and other foreign students), it would be helpful if the teacher uses the Grammar Translation Method. In here instruction is given in the native language of the students. A typical exercise is to translate the words, or the sentences from the target language into the mother tongue (or vice versa). This of course needs the mastery or the knowledge of the teacher of the native tongue of his/her learners. If these learners need to emerge in the target language—that is emerging themselves in the lexical/words and grammatical structure of the target language, then an Oral-Situation Approach can be integrated. This method reiterates that all language material is practiced orally before being presented in written form (reading and writing are taught only after an oral base in lexical and grammatical form has been established). Additionally, efforts are made to ensure that the most general and useful lexical items are presented, and grammatical structures are graded from simple to complex ( Murcia, 2006).

REFERENCES:

Echevarria,J. and Graves, A. (2003). Sheltered Content Instruction :Teaching English-Language Learners with Diverse Abilities. Massachusetts: Pearson Education,Inc

Diaz-Rico, L. and Weed, K. (1995). The Crosscultural, Language and Academic Development Handbook. Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon

Murcia, M (2006). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Philippines: Heinle and Heinle