Thursday, 11/12/2014

English Teaching Methods: Past to Present and The Implementation

By: Melinda Roza,M.Pd.

1. Introduction
Teaching English is an interesting topic to be discussed since English is one of the
foreign languages which is important to be mastered nowadays. Some opinions have occurred
related to this topic, especially about the situation of English teaching in Indonesia. Generally,
all Indonesian people have studied English for six year, three years in Junior High School and
three years in Senior High School. However, the ability in using English is still low. Thus,
who will be blamed for this result? The teacher? The materials? The teaching methods?
The teaching of English as a foreign language in Indonesia has been developed in many
aspects including the methods or approach, the materials, the techniques or even the purpose.
It happens along with the trends of English language teaching in the world. Before, the term
of “ELT” or English Language Teaching is popular as the trends in English teaching in the
world. But nowadays, the trends become “ESP” or English for Specific Purposes since it is
though that there should be a specific purpose in teaching a language which depends on the
use rather than teaching in in general. The language used in the academic situation will be
different with the language used other situation such as in the market, in the hospital, etc.
Thus, the language function also differs based on the situation. Indonesia also follows this
trend as we can see in the change of the curriculum used in school and in the university.
However, even though the trends of English teaching changes, there is the teacher who
should not be changed. The teachers should be able to adjust themselves in every kind of
situation and trends. In Indonesia, whenever the government changes, the policy on education
also changes. Of course, the changes also happen to the teaching elements such as the
curriculum which includes the materials, the methods, the goal and purposes. The teachers
who cannot follow the situation and cannot upgrade their skills and ability in teaching skills
as well as in language skills will be left behind. Consequently, they have to study more about
new trends in English language teaching whether studying by themselves or following some
programs providing by the government.

Melinda Roza 1|
 Thursday, 11/12/2014

Regarding to this situation, this paper disuccusses more about the situation of English
teaching in Indonesia from past to present. Also, it discusses more about the concept
underlying the teaching process such as teaching methodology and the implementation in the
classroom whether in the primary and secondary level, junior and senior high school, and
university level.

2. Overview of English Teaching in Indonesia: Past - Present

Since Independence Day, the government of Indonesia has placed English language
teaching as one of the compulsory subjects in the schools. The government has played an
important role in determining the school curriculum, textbooks, teachers, and so on. The
government has changed the English curriculum five times.
The first curriculum was introduced in 1945. It was a grammar-translation-based
curriculum. During the Dutch occupation of Indonesia, the Dutch educational system had
been widely used. When the Dutch surrendered and were forced to leave the country, most of
the English teachers also returned home. Due to the limited human and material resources,
only local English teachers stayed and continued the program. As Dardjowidjojo (2000) and
Sumardi (1993) have indicated, the teachers preferred grammar translation because it was
suitable for large classes, cheap and only required grammatical mastery of the language.
The second curriculum was introduced in 1958; this was an audio-lingual based
curriculum. This was based on the involvement of Ford Foundation of the United States. It
introduced a two-year training, “Standard Training Courses” (STC) held in Jakarta and
Bukittinggi. This program increased the quality of teacher training due to a number of
reasons. All teachers provided were native speakers, mostly American. The language
laboratory was available for the students during the training. Fifty students were selected
through some tests each year. English became the main language when the students were in
the campus. The curriculum was good and almost all of it concerned English. Moreover, the
students stayed in a boarding house. However, there was still a disadvantage because of the
limited number of participants who joined the training. The Standard Training Courses
produced high quality graduates. However, the number of the students was small compared
with the need of English teachers throughout the nation (Dardjowidjojo:2000 and
Sumardi:1993).
The next curriculum applied in the Indonesian education in 1975 was the revised new
style, audio-lingual based curriculum. This was the first curriculum in the beginning of the
Melinda Roza 2|
 Thursday, 11/12/2014

“new era”. The government, for the first time, introduced new textbook series for the junior
high school (English for the SLTP) and senior high school (English for the SLTA). These
books become compulsory for the students. Tjokrosujoso and Fachurrazy (1997) point out the
revised curriculum contained more systematic teaching guidelines that covered all curriculum
components, such as teaching objectives, materials, and approaches and evaluation. This was
mostly focused on the achievement of a working knowledge of English (Priyono, 2004). The
Department of Education as cited by Jazadi (2004) argued that the structure-based audio-
lingual 1975 curriculum was not successful because the curriculum did not support the
achievement of the learning objectives, so a new curriculum that encouraged communication
(both receptive and productive) needed to be introduced.
Later, in 1984, the new curriculum was launched, which was a structure-based
communicative curriculum. This curriculum was considered to develop communicative skills.
However, Jazadi (2004) argues that the 1984 curriculum was still form-focused with language
structure as dominant feature as shown in the English for Junior High School and English for
Senior High School textbook series in 1988. The structure-based communicative curriculum
focused on the development of language skills, functions, and the mastery of vocabulary. The
most of the materials talked about tenses instead of communicative learning. The teaching
method at that time focused on memorizing the words. Priyono (2004) concludes that there
are a number of reasons why the curriculum was not very successful. The teachers still used
features of audio-lingual and the grammar translation method such as mechanical drills and
explicit grammar explanation. Indonesian language was used as a medium of instruction in
the classroom and vocabulary was presented as individual items with meaning provided in
Indonesian.
The Department of Education then revised the 1984 curriculum with the new
curriculum, named the revised meaning-based communicative curriculum, in 1994 where the
classroom techniques known as three phase techniques. During this time, communicative
approach was mostly used in the schools around the world. Musthafa (2001) cited in Jazadi
(2004) proposes that the meaningfulness approach, another name for the communicative
approach underpinning the 1994 curriculum, is theoretically solid, as it reflects characteristics
associated with communicative approaches in the language teaching. However, after some
years of use, the 1994 curriculum was found to be too difficult to use owing to the lack of
connection among the curriculum components. Moreover, the curriculum and its
accompanying textbooks have not really attempted to accommodate learners’ diverse needs
Melinda Roza 3|
 Thursday, 11/12/2014

and local contexts, as well as teachers’ beliefs and judgments (Jazadi, 2004). Alisjahbana
(1990) and Tomlinson (1990) as cited by (Priyono, 2004) note, the failure result of the 1994
curriculum were because students were unable to communicate or comprehend English
standard textbooks, let alone write composition. Also, Alwasilah (1997) and Jazadi (2000)
observe two reasons why the curriculum of 1984 and 1994 achieved the same disappointing
result. Firstly, the curriculum contents focus mostly on reading comprehension materials
despite an attempt to integrate the four skills to accommodate the changing orientation to a
focus on productive skills. Secondly, the national examination still used the same format as in
1984, that is reading and form-based multiple-choice question, which does not test all aspects
of the students’ communicative performance.
Along with KTSP, 2004, the curriculum used genre based approach (GBA) or the
focus of the teaching based on the text type. Genre-Based Instruction have been identified by
Rodgers (2001) where the teaching and learning focuses on the understanding and production
of selected genre of texts. This become the major trend in ELT at the beginning of the new
millenium era. In the classroom practice, GBA provided the specific tecniques called Genre
Based Techniques applying four phases and two cycles. The four techniques are: Building
Knowledge of the Field (BKOF), Modelling of The Text (MoT), Joint Construction of the
Text (JcoT) and Independent Construction of The Text (IC). During the classroom techniques,
the skills are devided into two cycles: Oral Cycle (Speaking and Listening) and Written
Cycles (Reading and Writing). In this approach, the concept of ZPD (the zone of proximal
development) was occured. What is ZPD? It was originally developed by Vygotsky (1978).
“One conception states that ZPD is the zones between what Vygotsky calls
‘actual’ development (what the learner can do independently) and ‘potential’
development (what the learner can do in the future, with the help of others now).
Every act of learning occurs within a ZPD, building on what the learner already
knows and can do. Each learner has two levels of development: a level of
independent performance and a level of potential performance. To sum up, ZPD is
the gap between these two levels.” (Freeze and Joyce, in Fauziati, 2014:43).

So, GBA and its techniques apply a concept of ZPD where the students develop in two zones,
the actual development related to what they can do independently and the potential
development related to their ability in the future after getting the teaching program.
The recent curriculum, known as “Kurikulum 2013”, is applied baed on Ministry of
Education Regulation No. 32 Year 2013 about the change of Minisry of Education Regulation
No. 19 year 2005 about the National Education Standards. This curriculum applies scientific

Melinda Roza 4|
 Thursday, 11/12/2014

approach in the teaching process. As its name, scientific means based on knowledge. “It is a
systematic and logical approach through testing and analysis to discover how things in the
universe work. Science based on fact, not opinion or preferences” (Fauziati, 2014:153). This
approach, regarding to the classroom procedure, applies five steps: observing, questioning,
experimenting or gathering information, associating or information processing and
communicating. The purpose of those steps is to develop the students’ attitude such as
honesty thoroughness, tolereance, as well as to develop their ability to think systematically
and to express thier idea briefly and to develop their language skills. In my opinion, this
classroom is not suitable for language teaching since language is not merely a scince and
knowledge, it is more about skills which cannot be observed. And also, the second step,
questioning, is already part of the language activity and language skills. It is the mikro skills
of speaking that is the ability to give question and to answer the question. Eventhough
quetioning here is a kind of step, it is still not become step in language teaching. However,
frankly speaking, I myself do not get in touch with this approach yet so my understanding in
applying this approach is really far from what it should be.
Those explanation above only talks about the English teaching English in school. How
about teaching English in the university. In short, the development of English teaching in the
university level is not as complicated as in school. Until 1984, there was no specific focus of
English teaching in university. If we see the curriculum given by Department of religious
Affars in 1997, the content of the syllabus was merely about grammar and it was taught for
six credit hours. During 2004-2006, the government has arranged the Comptetency Based
Curriculum which has been revised and socialized in all higher education intitutions in
Indonesia (Dirjen Dikti, 2008). In this curriculum, the syllabus and the subject was arranged
by the institute. This curriculum is still being applied until now.
However, most of the university lecturers does not really concern about the curriculum
stated by the government. The lecturers tends to teach according to their foreign language
ability. Besides, the most of the problem faced by the university is about the availabity of the
lecturers. Most of the lecturers does not come from language department so that their ability
of teaching English is not enough. They do not have the knowledge about language teaching
methods. That is why most of them who are not from language department are teaching about
the language, not teaching the skills. Thus, the English teaching in university depends on the
institute policy.

Melinda Roza 5|
 Thursday, 11/12/2014

Along with the government regulation for Kurikulum 2013, the concept of Kerangka
Kualifikasi Nasional Indonesia is applied for teaching in university. The syllabus should be
designed based on this qualification. It is the concept that every level should have a specific
competence, thus, the materials, the subject to be studied and the credit hours are arranged
based on this concept.

3. From Approach to Classroom Techniques

The terms related to teaching method such as approach, techniques, methods and
strategy are the most important part to be master besides the materials. The teacher has to
follow and has to ‘up-date’ his knowledge about those terms. Whenever the curriculum
changes, there will be a change of approach, methods and classroom technique. In defining
those terms, there are several definition given by some experts. Each of them gives different
concept. In attempting to define what ‘method’ is, first, we can consider Edward Anthony’s
tripartite distinction of Approach, Method and Technique (Anthony: 1963). This distinction
was developed and recast by Richards and Rodgers (1982, 1985) as Approach, Design and
Procedure, encompassed within the overall concept of Method, “an umbrella term for the
specification and interrelation of theory and practice” (Richards & Rodgers 1985: 16) where:
➢ Approach refers to the beliefs and theories about language, language learning and
teaching that underlie a method;
➢ Design relates the theories of language and learning to the form and function of
teaching materials and activities in the classroom;
➢ Procedure concerns the techniques and practices employed in the classroom as
consequences of particular approaches and designs.

METHOD

Approach Design

Procedure

(Richards & Rodgers 1985:17)

Melinda Roza 6|
 Thursday, 11/12/2014

There are many publications discussing the various language teaching methods
employed over the years. Brown draws a distinction between methods as “specific,
identifiable clusters of theoretically compatible classroom techniques” (p15), and
methodology as “pedagogical practices in general…Whatever considerations are involved in
‘how to teach’ are methodological” (Brown, 2001). ‘Methodology’ here can thus be equated
to Richards and Rodgers’ ‘Procedure’. Pedagogic approaches are typically informed by both a
theory of language and a theory of language learning. For example, audiolingualism was
informed by a structuralist model of language and by behaviourist learning theory (Richards
and Rodgers, 1986).
From those opinions above, my opinion is that the terms approach and method
sometimes can be overlapping since both of them include the theory and philosophy. Thus, in
term of classroom practice, methods and techniques also have overlapped. But, let have a
conclusion about the position of approach, method, and technique by our own understanding.
As language teachers, if the word ‘method’ occurs, we directly refer it to the ‘old’
methods in language teaching, they are: GTM, Direct Method, Audiolingual Method,
Suggestopaedia, Silent Way, etc. Those methods have included the teaching techniques and
procedure. Also when talking about approach, it refers to Natural Approach, Genre-Based
Approach, etc. In practice, approach is not directly the task of the teacher to decide. It is the
government who has to decide what approach to be used the the curriculum applied. Usually,
the specific techniques will follow the approach. For example, Genre Based techniques will
used in GBA, etc. But, methods are related to the classroom practice, so it is the teacher who
decides what methods will be used in the classroom. The teacher can use specific methods, or
he can mix the methods or just combine them eclectically. Finally, in my opinion, the best
method in the world in the teacher himself!

4. Content-Based Instruction and Study Skills: A Proposed Teaching for University

Content-Based instruction (CBI) has become famous in the teaching foreign language
for college and university. This instruction is concerning with the collaboration within the
language learning and the specific content area. According to Brinton et al. (1989:2), CBI is
“... the integration of particular content with language teaching aims... the concurrent teaching
of subject matter and second language skill”. Short (in Duenas: 2004) suggest that “In
content-based instruction, language teachers use content topics, rather than grammar rules or
Melinda Roza 7|
 Thursday, 11/12/2014

vocabulary lists, as the scaffolding for instruction”. In short, those experts inform that CBI
relates to integration of teaching foreign language skills and the content of specific area of
field.
In applying CBI for IAIN, the need analysis should be done in order to find the specific
materials needed by the students based on their field of study. In this case, I suggests that at
least the content of teaching material in CBI will be based on the faculty. For example,
Tarbiyah faculty focuses on the teaching theories, teaching techniques, any other theories
supporting the teaching knowledge, besides their field of study. For Biology Department,
besides those stated above, the materials can also include the knowledge about Biology
subject.
There are some models of CBI, but the most common models is theme-based teaching.
In this model, the content materials become the theme to lead the process of teaching to the
use of language skills. Thus, the language skills are also be specified into the skills related to
the academic situation called “study skills”. Study skills are the micro skills of the language,
such as micro skills in writing that related to the academic situation are: summarizing,
paraphrasing, making note, etc. Through the combination of study skills and theme-based
teaching, it is hoped that the teaching og English at university will be more effective and
meaningfull since the material relates to the students field of study.

5. Conclusion
In conducting a classroom teaching, the most important thing is the teacher’s ability in
arranging his class. What method or design will be applied based on the material to be taugh
will be his choice. Reviewing from the history of the language curriculum in Indonesia, the
main problem is not about the curriculum itself but the teacher’s ability in conducting the
class and how far does he master the material to be taught. Not all teacher can teach language
since teaching language is not about teaching the knowledge about the language but teaching
how to use the language skills. And there is a focus in teaching each skills where each skills
has the micro skills. So, the good language teacher tends to be a trainer rather then a teacher.

Melinda Roza 8|
 Thursday, 11/12/2014

6. Bibliography

Alwasilah, A.Chaedar. 1997. Politik, Bahasa dan Pendidikan. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.
Depdiknas. 2000. Selayang Pandang Pendidikan Nasional. Assessed 3 March 2005.
Available:
http://www.depdiknas.go.id/selayangpandangpenyelenggaraanpendidikannasional
Dirjen Dikti. 2008. Buku Panduan Pengembangan Kurikulum Berbasis Kompetensi
Pendidikan Tinggi (Sebuah alternatif penyusunan kurikulum). Jakarta: Dirjen Dikti.
Freeman, Donald and Jack C. Richards. (Ed) 1996. Teacher Learning in Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Jordan,R.R. 2009. English for Academic Purpose: A Guide and Resource Book for Teachers.
Cambridge: Cambridge Unive. Press.
Jazadi, Iwan. 2004. “ELT in Indonesian The Context of English as a Global Language”. In
Cahyono, Y. B and Widiati, Utami (Eds). The Tapestry of English Language Teaching
and Learning in Indonesia. Malang: State University of Malang Press.
Priyono. 2004.“Logical Problems of Teaching English as A Foreign Language in Indonesia”.
In Cahyono, Y. B and Widiati, Utami (Eds). The Tapestry of English Language
Teaching and Learning in Indonesia. Malang: State University of Malang Press.
Richards, J.C. (2001), Curriculum Development in Language Teaching, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Sumardi, M. (1993), “Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris di Sekolah Menengah: Tinjauan dari Masa
ke Masa”. In B. K. Purwo (Ed), Analysis Wacana Pengajaran Bahasa. Kanisius,
Yogyakarta.
Sutarsyah, Cucu. (2004), “Designing an English for Young Learners: Course as a Part of
English Curriculum”. In Cahyono, Y. B and Widiati, Utami (Eds), The Tapestry of
English Language Teaching and Learning in Indonesia, State University of Malang
Press, Indonesia.
Swales, John M. 1991. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Setting.
Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Tjokrosujoso and Fachurrazy. (1997), Pengembangan Materi Bahasa Inggris dan Kurikulum
SMU. Universitas Terbuka, Jakarta.

Melinda Roza 9|