T13: Historical overview of foreign language teaching: From Grammar Translation method to the

Communicative Approach

Table of contents
1. Intro
2. Concept of approach, method and technique
3. Historical overview and analysis of the principal methods and approaches in the foreign language
classroom
3.1. Grammar translation method
3.2. Direct method
3.3. Structuralists methods
3.4. Humanistic methods
3.5. Total physical response
3.6. Communicative approach: Communicative language teaching (CLT)
3.7. Natural Approach
3.8. New Approaches
4. Conclusion
5. References
 1. Intro
Aim- TEFL RD 126/2014 acquisition 7 key competences- LOMCE, RD 126/2014 General Objective F, Order
15th January 2021 FLO’s- 5

This topic reviews the history of FLT from the start of the 19th century until today. Changes in FLT methods
throughout history have reflected changes in theories of the nature of language and of language learning. They
have also reflected recognition of changes in the kind of proficiency that learners need, such as a more towards
oral proficiency rather than reading comprehension as the goal of language study.

2. Concept of approach, method and technique

When describing FLT methods, it is necessary to differentiate between a philosophy of language teaching in
theory and the subsequent procedures for teaching a FL. According to Richards and Rogers, the beliefs about
language and language learning are specified in the approach, and the theory is organized into a method
design and carried out in the classroom by the procedures and techniques.

3. Historical overview and analysis of the principal methods and approaches in the foreign language
classroom

The history of language teaching refers to the history of the ideas about language and how it is learned
(Richards and Rodgers 86). From Roman rule, throughout the Middle Ages and until the Renaissance, Latin
was the lingua franca in Europe and continued to play an important role in education until the 19th century,
although modern languages (English) entered the curriculum in the 18th century.

3.1 The Grammar Translation Method

The GT method is the oldest method in language teaching and it applied the same techniques that were used to
study Latin and Greek grammar: learning abstract grammar rules, lists of vocabulary and translated sentences.
The goal of this method was to be able to read and understand literary texts, not to speak the TL.

Some of the main characteristics of this method can be summarised by Richards and Rodgers (86). The main
language skills are reading and writing since the objective is to be able to translate written language, not
communicate orally. Grammar is given as a set of prescribed rules to be learned and vocabulary is offered
in decontextualized lists. Instruction is carried out in the students’ mother tongue and they are expected to
translate from L1- L2 and L2- L1.

The techniques used in a GT lesson include a presentation of a grammatical rule, a list of vocabulary and
finally translation exercises from selected texts. Students may be asked to answer comprehension questions
of a reading, memorize vocabulary or write a composition on a given topic.
.
Some of the advantages of this method include the development of the discourse competence through the
study of texts, as well as the reinforcement of the grammatical competence through grammar exercises.

However, this method fails to develop communicative competence in real meaningful interaction. Students
lack motivation as there is an exaggerated emphasis on faults and errors to be avoided by the learners. It also
offers unrealistic models of language and relies heavily on students' memories to recall vocabulary and
grammatical structures for translations. It also began to be criticized in the 19th century due to the appearance
of the Reform Movement in the 1880s.

3.2 The Direct Method

The DM was the most widely known of the natural methods. Based on the FLT classroom needs and
linguistics, it advocated for using the L2 as the language for instruction and prioritising spoken language in
the classroom. This also meant Ss sould hear the language before seeing it in writing. Selected and graded
grammar and vocabulary elements were contextualized and practiced in meaningful situations leading to
inductive learning. Translation was to be avoided (Richards and Rodgers 86).

The techniques used in the DM use the following structure: presentation of a dialogue by the teacher,
explaining difficult expressions through paraphrasing, synonyms and gestures followed by activities such as
questions and answers in the TL, fill-in-the-blank exercises in TL and self-correction by students (Stern, 83).

The pros of this method mean that students are exposed to the spoken language in a more realistic and
meaningful context and errors can be corrected immediately. On the other hand, it overemphasized the
similarity of learning L1 to learning L2 and required native or native-like teachers.

3.3 The Structuralist Methods

The different methods analyzed in this section share a common conception that FL learning is based and
justified on behavioural science, specifically behaviourism, the theory put forth by Skinner (57), which
provided the psychological mechanisms needed to improve language learning. According to structuralism,
languages consist of systems of structurally related elements that could be learned through habit formation.
Instead of learning a collection of rules, grammar was presented as a list of structures that served as the
building blocks for language learning. One of the main features of SM is the introduction and importance of
oral aspects of the language, before written language. Students first heard the language before speaking,
reading and finally writing. This represents a shift from the dominant Grammar Method.

There were two main approaches with this method: Situational Language Teaching dominant from the 1930-
1960s based on British applied linguistics, and the Audiolingual Method developed in North America based on
the work of Bloomfield (42) and became popular after WWII until the 1970s.

The aim of these methods was the memorization of set language patterns through the use of imitation,
repetition and mimicry in the form of drill exercises. Learners were expected to infer meanings from context
inductively and errors must be avoided. A learner was competent if they knew a lot of structures and forms.

Some of the advantages of structuralism are that they were the first methods to base language learning on
linguistic and psychological theories and they promoted the use of simple techniques which could extend
language learning to a large number of people.

In contrast, it gives too much importance to grammatical facts, while habit formation neglects real social
interactions. Teachers are not given the criteria to appropriately deal with error treatments and it promotes
automation and learner passivity.
 3.4 Humanistic Methods

This section will look at some other less well-known methods but deserving of attention. These are related to
humanistic ideas and all of these methods are centred on the learner and recognize the importance of a
positive classroom atmosphere. Even so, teachers need special training and the evaluation criteria are
unclear.

Community Language Learning (CLL): Developed in the 1970s by Charles Curran, this approach combines
emotional and linguistic knowledge in a safe environment to engage the whole person. Teachers are
facilitators of group work and free conversations in which students prepare discussions, presentations and
talk about their feelings or personal problems.

The Silent Way: Developed by Caleb Gattegno in the 1960s, its goal is to help learners gain basic fluency in
the TL to become independent learners who are encouraged to use the language as much as possible and
express their feelings. The teacher is as silent as possible and guides learners to discover language through the
a selection of vocabulary and meaningful contexts.This method fosters respect and cooperative learning, but is
lacking with regards to understanding.

Suggestopedia: Developed by Georgi Lozanov in the 1970s, it is based on the idea that the mind has great
potential and can retain information by the power of suggestion. By using music to promote a relaxing
atmosphere, students are expected to accidentally and accidentally and subliminally learn the language.
However, it has little organization of language learning and few opportunities to put it into practice.

3.5 Total Physical Response

Total Physical Response is a language teaching method developed by J. Asher (66) around the coordination of
speech and action, helping children acquire the L2 naturally, similarly to how children learn their L1
through commands and react to them physically before being able to speak. He argues that adults can learn
language the same way.

The techniques used in this method are based on the teacher’s voice and actions instead of a textbook.
Teachers provide comprehensible input in an enjoyable way which helps students to remember words and
phrases. The teacher may perform the actions to help students, and students react to or obey the verbal
orders. Eventually, they will not need the extralinguistic back-up as students will have learnt and internalized
the expressions, phrases or actions the teacher used.

Asher draws on several fields of study to support his method. TPR has a humanistic quality, as it is concerned
with a positive classroom atmosphere. At the beginning levels it relies on behaviourist theories about
stimuli-response with action based drills. But mostly, it is a comprehension first approach: students first
understand the words, phrases or expressions used without being pushed to produce.

3.6 The Communicative Approach: Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)

The communicative approach, sometimes referred to as the functional approach, focuses on the use of language
in everyday situations, or the functional aspects of language, and less on the formal structures. There must be
a certain balance between the two. It gives priority to meanings over forms and communication in context is a
basic premise. It moves away from the habit-forming exercises prominent in the Audiolingual Method and
focuses on interactive activities in which the language used is meaningful and the situations are real.
(Johnson 82)

The communicative approach was born from the criticisms of previous methods and the new reality in
Europe. Chomsky and others criticized previous methods as creating structurally competent but
communicatively incompetent learners, and the Council of Europe entrusted language experts to study and
introduce a new method to meet the real communicative needs of learners. Thus, the “Threshold Level of the
Council of Europe” was written which led to the creation of the new communicative approach. It considers
language as a means of communication in social interactions. Therefore, the goal of FLT is to develop
students’ communicative competence (Hymes 72).

Furthermore, the materials used in a Communicative approach are meant to improve classroom interaction
and the use of language in a communicative way. According to Johnson 82, this includes activities in which
students must transfer information, such as giving personal opinions about some pictures and the use of
authentic materials, such as letters, songs, timetables, stories, etc so they are not faced with artificially adapted
language. Communicative language games are motivating to students, as are role plays, pair and group work
and problem solving which allow students to be aware of different social contexts and make students think.

Therefore, in a Communicative Approach the teacher’s role is to facilitate the students’ learning and to
provide input and feedback. Thus, the FL teacher should broaden students’ experiences through interactive
activities about their interests, present new language in meaningful contexts and give students words or
expressions they will need to talk about their experiences. The teacher must also create situations in which
students can use their new language and exploit every language-learning task so that it will reinforce
communication.

The positive aspects of this approach is that the concept communicative is applied to all 4 language skills and
includes the learner’s knowledge and experiences of the mother tongue. It also recognizes that errors are a
natural part of the learning process. However, some believe there is too much emphasis on listening and
speaking and some non-native English teachers are not confident enough to work with this approach. It also
implies a selection of language through functions, much like structuralism did with structures.

3.7 The Natural Approach

The natural approach is a method of language teaching developed by Stephen Krashen and Tracy Terrell in
the late 1970s and early 1980s. According to them, communication is a main function of language and SLA
requires meaningful interaction in the target language - natural communication, not explicit grammar and
linguistic instruction.

According to Krashen, students learn when they are given comprehensible input, or language that is a slightly
more advanced level than their own (ZPD- Vygotsky).
The NA is based on 5 hypotheses of Krashen’s language acquisition theory.
Acquisition/learning hypothesis states that there are 2 ways to develop language. Acquisition is a
subconscious process, like a child learning its own language, while learning is a conscious process of learning
language through language lessons.
The Natural order hypothesis states that language is acquired in a predictable order that cannot be
influenced by direct teaching of features that a learner is not ready to acquire.
Monitor Model hypòthesis states that learners can use what they have learned about language rules to
monitor or self-correct their language output. This is easier to do with written language than with speaking.
Input hypothesis says we only acquire language when we are exposed to input (both written and oral) that is
comprehensible to us.
Affective filter hypothesis states that comprehensible input will not result in language acquisition if that input
is filtered out before it can reach our brain’s language processing areas. Filtering may happen due to anxiety,
poor self-esteem or low motivation.

3.8 New Approaches

In the last decade there have been important innovations in theory, research and classroom experience which
are bringing changes to FLT and challenging the dominant model. There have been changes in how
language, teaching methodology and learners’ contributions are viewed in education. Language is seen as
mainly communicative. Methodologies must consider more than just the objectives and contents, taking into
account implementation and techniques. Social interaction in the classroom is the basis for learning.

There has also been a shift from focusing on the result of learning, to a focus on the learning process, meaning
new approaches emphasize how language is to be learnt. This means learners and teachers are both decision-
makers who negotiate objectives and content.

a. Task-based learning focuses on the use of authentic language to complete a meaningful task in the
target language (Nunan). Tasks can include visiting a doctor, calling customer service, making a
reservation at a restaurant, etc. The focus of the tasks is on meaning rather than form and assessment is
primarily based on task outcome (the appropriate completion of real-world tasks) rather than on
accuracy of prescribed language forms.

b. CLIL is a term coined by David Marsh in 1994 which stands for Content and Language Integrated
Learning. This means studying another subject (for example, science, history, or literature) and learning
a language, such as English, at the same time - integrating the two subjects. According to the 4Cs
curriculum (Coyle 2010), a successful CLIL lesson should combine content, communication,
cognition and culture. In CLIL lessons, the 4 language skills can be integrated in a way so listening
and reading are used for input activities, speaking focuses on fluency and writing is used to recycle
grammar.

The tasks designed for production must be subject-oriented so that both content and language are
recycled. Typical speaking activities include questions and answers, information gaps, word guessing
games, questionnaires, trivia search and students using a visual with language support to present
information. Since the content of the subject is the aim, it may be necessary to use more linguistic
support from the teacher than a typical FL class.
 c. Flipped classroom is a method that brings significant changes to the educational process including the
organization of place and time of learning, the roles of teachers and learners and the educational
goals. Although first introduced in 2007 by Strayer, teachers Bergmann and Sams are the most well-
known promoters of it. It is a type of blended learning where students are introduced to content at
home and practice working through it at school, which promotes active and collaborative learning in
which doubts are resolved quickly by the teacher.

A flipped classroom allows for discovery-based learning (Marquis 2012) with a number of positive
characteristics. Those include increased interaction between teachers and students, students taking
responsibility for their own learning, and allowing the classroom to be a place where all students are
engaged in their learning and can get personalised attention.

However, it cannot be considered synonymous with online videos or replacing teachers with videos.
Students should also not work in isolation without structure just staring at a computer screen.

d. Challenge Based Learning provides an effective framework for learning while solving real-world
challenges. It is a hands-on model which asks all participants (Ss, Ts, Ps & community) to identify big
ideas, ask good questions, solve challenges and gain in-depth subject area knowledge to develop 21st
century skills and share their thoughts with the world. It emerged in 2008 from the Apple Classrooms
of Tomorrow-Today project in a bid to come up with a new teaching and learning environment that
met the needs of the 21st century. It provides an authentic relationship between academic disciplines
and real work experience. It also focuses on global issues and appropriate solutions and creates an
environment in which learners are encouraged to think creatively, try new ideas, experiment, fail, get
feedback and try again. Students first engage with the problem by formulating questions about the
problem, then investigate the methods and tools they need to develop a solution. In the final stage
students take action and implement and evaluate their plan of action.

4. Conclusion

Methodology is something that is open and flexible

The development of the communicative competence
Pros and cons of methods and techniques (general view)
CEFR guidelines

8. References
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your Classroom: Reach Every Student in Every Class Every Day
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CUL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press
Dobobuto, Isabel & Silva Marieva, (2007): History of Language Teaching
http://es.slideshare.net/isabeldobobuto/history-of-language-teaching
Estaire, S. and Zanon, J. (1994): Planning Classwork. A Task-Based Approach. Oxford: Heinemann
Finocchiaro, M., & Brumfit, C. (1983): The Functional-Notional Approach: from Theory to Practice.
New York: Oxford University Press
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1986): Teaching and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University
Press
Madrid, D. & N. Mcl aren (2004): TEFL in Primary Education. Granada: GEU
Nunan, D. (1989): Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Ortega, J.L. y Madrid, D. (2006): Teorías curriculares y práctica docente en el aula de inglés. Granada:
Grupo Editorial Universitario
Prabhu, N. (1987): Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Richards, J.C. and T.S. Rodgers. (2002): Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. A
Comprehensive Description and Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Widdowson, H.G., 1978. Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford University Press
Willis D. and Willis J. (2007): Doing Task-Based Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press