University of Dhaka

Institute of Modern Languages

Department of English Language

A Reflective Essay on “Various Methods of Language Teaching”

Submitted to: Professor Dr. Sayeedur Rahman

Course Tutor: BESL 307, Principles and Methods of English Language Teaching.

Submitted by: Md. Didarul Islam

Roll: BB-093-003

Date of Submission: 04 November 2018

In this paper, I will express my own views on the different language teaching methods I
have been taught in the BESL 307 course. I will make some comments from a very personal
point of view.

Grammar Translation Method

While I was studying GTM, I felt that this is the very method through which I have learnt
English language for 12 years. English language education system of the national
curriculum of Bangladesh mostly follows Grammar Translation Method. Though it has
been said that the referred book series “English for Today” is written according to CLT
method, the syllabus for the exam is designed according to the traditional grammar
translation method. Therefore, the educators are bound to teach their students according to
the syllabus. However, I have mixed feelings about this method of language teaching.

Grammar translation method is highly effective for acquiring reading and writing skills of
any written language. This is highly applicable for most of the dominant living languages
and dead ones as well. This method has been found useful for teaching biblical literature.
Use of mother tongue as the medium of instruction and reference language makes it easier
for the learners to compare the system of their target language with their own language. As
this method has been practiced in Bangladesh for a long time, Bangladeshi learners of
English are very good in reading and writing texts.

However, as the primary target of GTM is to teach learners the reading and writing skills
in the target language, this method severely lacks the communicative skills of language
while communication is considered the primary focus of language teaching. Therefore; as
English is a living language and the main purpose of learning English in today’s world is
communication, GTM should be withdrawn as the sole method of English language
teaching from the national curriculum of Bangladesh.

Direct Method
In my second semester at University, I had Spanish language classes with a native teacher.
Her teaching style seemed to be very interesting and fruitful to me. She used to talk in
Spanish all the class. She would hardly allow us using English, the third and only common
language between us. We did many activities in the class like watching video clips,
listening to Spanish music and conversations, group work etc. Our teacher used to
demonstrate if we had difficulty to understand any word or sentence. We were happy that
we were getting input in our target language for the whole class hour, but sometimes we
really had to face some difficulties to understand the teacher and communicate with her.
Later, I came to know that all of these are the characteristics of a language class using
Direct Method. Let me explain the good and bad sides of a Direct Method language class.

First of all, full immersion in the target language is the best side of a direct method class.
It gives the learner the opportunity to live with the target language and explore it. This is
how a child learns its first language. Secondly, this method is full of activities and audio-
visual aids. Therefore, the learner does not usually get bored. Finally; unlike the GTM, this
method offers the development of all the four skills of a language.
On the other hand, I have sorted out some shortcomings of this method. First, there is no
systematic written work or reading activities in this method. For this reason, a learner may
feel lack of technique for his self-study. Next, as translation or use of mother tongue is
restricted, sometimes communication gap may occur which will lessen the learning
outcome. Sometimes, a simple translation is way easier than tiresome demonstration.
Especially, in the advance level classes this method is not applicable. To conclude, direct
method might be a good way of teaching foreign languages if the restricted rules are not
always maintained for the sake of better learning.

Audio Lingual Method

Last year in our socio linguistics class, our teacher said that the U.S Army takes special
short courses on language before their emergency movement to abroad. Sometimes, these
courses are even of 10 days. We were wondering that how is it possible to learn to
communicate in a foreign language within such short period. Our teacher explained that
they learn specific situational conversation which they really need in abroad. He added that
this method is called Audio Lingual Method of language learning. Based on my study on
ALM, I have summarized below some merits and demerits of this method.

ALM is used to teach highly context specific language chunks, for example, market
conversation, greetings, announcements, directions etc. It teaches the learners to accurately
use the focused patterns of language. I think this method is very useful for the professionals
who need to have good skills on specific use of language. To illustrate, the peace keeping
force from Bangladesh Army takes short training on French language so that they can run
their simple day to day conversation with the native African people. It is not necessary for
them to have advance level skills in French. Similarly, the announcer working in an
international airport must pronounce the words accurate in a number of languages, but he
or she does not need the advance language skill to do it.

Nowadays, scholars highly criticize ALM because its psychological basis is behaviorist
theory. Scholars like Chomsky hold that behaviorist model cannot be applied in language
teaching. Moreover, ALM does not focus on all the four skill and the communicative
competence of the learners. Rather, it considers the learners as a parrot who can memorize
the given language pattern. The learner plays a passive role in the learning process.

Community Language Learning

To me, community language learning is useful for the learners with special needs. We all
know that there are some learners who cannot cope with the regular classroom because of
many reasons like they feel shy and threatened, they cannot keep pace with the class, they
love learning themselves not directly by the teacher and so on. For this kind of people, CLL
provides a calm and sound classroom. This is also called the counselling-approach as the
role of the teacher here is a counsellor or facilitator and the role of the learner is an active
collaborator in the learning. As there is no specific syllabus to follow and the learners get
independence to choose their own topic to discuss over, they feel more comfortable in the
classroom.
However, I think CLL cannot provide a complete model for language learning. This is
more suitable for practicing language for elementary and intermediate level learners.

The Natural Approach

We must have heard people saying “I have not taken any coaching for English speaking,
but I am fluent enough. I just used to watch English movies and listen to music. This is
how I got the fluency.” This situation can be best described by a language teaching method
called Natural Approach developed by Stephen Krashen and Tracy Terrell. This method
says that language learning is a natural process and it is more acquisition than learning. To
me, this method is best suitable at an individual level rather than at an institutional level.
The reason is, according to this method the learner should get a lot of input in the target
language and the language production will come automatically, but people have their
individual preference of getting input. Some may prefer watching movies, some may prefer
listening to music and the list goes on.

I have found overlapping between the direct method and the natural approach. The main
difference is that the natural approach puts more emphasis on exposure to language input
and less on practice.

The Solution

Many methods were proposed until the last century. Kumaravadivelu came up with a
solution in 1994. He proposed that this era is “postmethod era”. This view holds that no
specific method can be fully applied in a classroom. Rather, the teacher knows well when
to use what. Moreover, no individual method could fulfil the need of a sound language
classroom. Therefore, this method incorporates the suggestions of all the previous methods
and there is room for creativity for the teacher.