International Journal of Innovations in TESOL and Applied Linguistics

Vol. 4, Issue 4; 2019

ISSN 2454-6887
Published by ASLA, Amity University, Gurgaon, India
© 2019

A Compact List of ELT Approaches, Methods, Techniques

(Short Communication)

Sanjay Kumar Jha

Professor (Linguistics)
Amity University Gurugram, India

Received: Mar. 25, 2019 Accepted: Apr. 26, 2019 Online Published: May. 30, 2019

Abstract

Today, ELT world is witnessing unprecedented exhaustive literature on ELT approaches, methods,
and techniques; but, an aspiring ELT practitioner often remain unclear of the distinctions between
them from utilitarian perspectives. This study aims to fill that gap as a primary research by presenting
a compact overview of all the popular ELT approaches, methods, and techniques. As for the method
of data collection, document analysis served as a key source; whereas analysis of data was made
using content analysis.

Key Words: ELT, Methods, Theoretical Base, Skills, Levels, Activities, Role of T and L

Introduction

It is an irony today that most of the aspiring ELT practitioners in India remain unfledged in terms
of theoretical insight and applicability of ELT approaches, methods, and techniques. This study
is an effort to understand the distinctions between ELT approaches, methods, and techniques in a
simple language. In the field of ELT, approach is the first level at which a set of hypotheses or
theories about language learning are conceptualized; whereas, method is the second level at
which theories are put into practices strategically in the form of a well-designed syllabus of the
linguistic contents. A technique refers to implementation of a method in a language classroom
using certain tasks and activities in a procedural manner. For example, if a teacher
conceptualizes that language is communication and learning a language is learning the meanings,
functions and uses of language; the techniques of teaching-learning will be based on the
communicative language teaching and task based methods. In what follows, we shall see a brief
account of four cognition and four context oriented approaches associated with ELT, 19
methods, and 15 techniques.
1|Page
Findings

Approach
ELT approaches are concerned with underlying hypotheses, principles, philosophies, or theories
of how language learning takes place. Simply speaking, approaches are the beliefs of theorists
(first/second language acquisition researchers) about the nature of language learning which in
turn underpins the formulation of an ELT method which in turn underpins the formulation of
different techniques of language teaching for classroom. As any ELT method finds its theoretical
underpinnings in an approach, the astute understanding of approaches is imperative in terms of
designing and implementing a particular ELT method. The following are the brief accounts of
five most quoted ELT approaches.

1. Input Approach
The Input approach or hypothesis was proposed by Stephen Krashen (1992) in which second
language acquisition consists of five main hypotheses (i) acquisition-learning hypothesis, (ii)
monitor hypothesis, (iii) natural order hypothesis (iv) input hypothesis, and (v) affective filter
hypothesis as elucidated below.

Acquisition-learning hypothesis

According to this hypothesis proposed by Krashen (1992), adults have two distinct and
independent ways of developing competence in a second language. They are acquisition and
learning. Acquisition is a subconscious process which is similar to the process of children‟s
acquiring their first language. In this process, speakers are not aware of the fact that they are
acquiring language; nor, are they aware of the rules of the language that they have acquired
inductively or unconsciously. However, they develop a feel of what sounds right or wrong in the
process of acquisition. The second way of developing competence in second language is learning
that is a conscious process in which speakers learn language consciously or deductively by
knowing the grammar rules, pronunciation, synonyms, etc.

Monitor Hypothesis

The Monitor hypothesis explains the relationship between acquisition and learning and defines
the influence of the latter on the former. The monitoring function is the practical result of the
learned grammar. According to Krashen, the acquisition system is the utterance initiator, while
the learning system performs the role of the 'monitor' or the 'editor'. The 'monitor' acts in a
planning, editing and correcting function when three specific conditions are met: that is, the
second language learner has sufficient time at his/her disposal, he/she focuses on form or thinks
about correctness, and he/she knows the rule. It appears that the role of conscious learning is
somewhat limited in second language performance. According to Krashen, the role of the
monitor is - or should be - minor, being used only to correct deviations from 'normal' speech and
to give speech a more 'polished' appearance. Krashen also suggests that there is individual
variation among language learners with regard to 'monitor' use. He distinguishes three types of
learners as mentioned below:

2|Page
  Those learners who use the 'monitor' all the time (over-users);
 Those learners who have not learned or who prefer not to use their conscious knowledge
(under-users);
 Those learners that use the 'monitor' appropriately (optimal users).

An evaluation of the person's psychological profile can help to determine to what group they
belong. Usually extroverts are under-users, while introverts and perfectionists are over-users.
Lack of self-confidence is frequently related to the over-use of the 'monitor'.

Natural Order Hypothesis

The Natural Order hypothesis is based on research findings (Dulay & Burt, 1974; Fathman,
1975; Makino, 1980 cited in Krashen, 1987) which suggested that the acquisition of grammatical
structures follows a 'natural order' which is predictable. In other words, the hypothesis says that
language acquisition occurs in a predictable, universal order for L1 and L2 in the same way. It
has been found that different learners of English as an L2 make similar errors regardless from
which linguistic background they come. And it is also noteworthy that these errors resemble the
errors most often made by children when learning their L1 or mother tongues or native
languages. For a given language, some grammatical structures tend to be acquired early while
others late. Krashen however points out that the implication of the natural order hypothesis is not
that a language program syllabus should be based on the order found in the studies. In fact, he
rejects grammatical sequencing when the goal is language acquisition.

Input Hypothesis

The Input hypothesis is Krashen's attempt to explain how the learner acquires a second
language. In other words, this hypothesis is Krashen's explanation of how second language
acquisition takes place. So, the Input hypothesis is only concerned with 'acquisition', not
'learning'. According to this hypothesis, the learner improves and progresses along the 'natural
order' when s/he receives second language 'input' that is one step beyond his/her current stage of
linguistic competence. For example, if a learner is at a stage 'i', then acquisition takes place when
he/she is exposed to 'Comprehensible Input' that belongs to level 'i + 1'.

Simply speaking, this hypothesis states that to progress to the next stage in the acquisition of the
target language, learners need to understand input language that includes a structure that is part
of the next stage. Therefore Krashen uses the formula "I + 1" (i.e., input that contains structures
slightly above the learner's present level). In other words, an acquirer can "move" from a stage I
(where I is the acquirer's level of competence) to a stage I +1 (where I + 1 is the stage
immediately following I along some natural order) by understanding language containing I + 1.
(Krashen and Terrell 1983: 32)

Since not all of the learners can be at the same level of linguistic competence at the same time,
Krashen suggests that natural communicative input is the key to designing a syllabus, ensuring in
this way that each learner will receive some 'i + 1' input that is appropriate for his/her current
stage of linguistic competence.

3|Page
Affective Filter Hypothesis

Finally, the fifth hypothesis, the Affective Filter hypothesis, embodies Krashen's view that a
number of 'affective variables' play a facilitative, but non-causal, role in second language
acquisition. These variables include: motivation, self-confidence and anxiety. Krashen claims
that learners with high motivation, self-confidence, a good self-image, and a low level of anxiety
are better equipped for success in second language acquisition. Low motivation, low self-esteem,
and debilitating anxiety can combine to 'raise' the affective filter and form a 'mental block' that
prevents comprehensible input from being used for acquisition. In other words, when the filter is
'up' it impedes language acquisition. On the other hand, positive affect is necessary, but not
sufficient on its own, for acquisition to take place.

Krashen's model was influential in the field of SLA and also had a large influence on language
teaching, but it left some important processes in SLA unexplained.

2. The Critical Period Hypothesis:

This hypothesis hypothesizes that there is a period in a person‟s life in which he or she must
learn a language, or else language acquisition becomes not only difficult but also impossible. The
basis for this hypothesis is that our brain becomes fully developed by puberty. And if one fails to
learn a language by puberty, s/he will find language acquisition extremely difficult. In other
words, L2 can be learned before the brain is fully developed than afterwards. The way there is a
critical period for learning L1, the same would apply to acquiring L2. There is striking evidence
in favor of this belief. Genie was 13 and ½ years old when she was found living in conditions of
extreme neglect and isolation. By this time, she had received very little interaction with limited
vocabulary; but was never able to grasp on to language as a whole. However some argue that this
evidence does not necessarily support the critical period hypothesis because she may have an
overall low IQ. So her inability to master L1 may be caused by her cognition and not language
acquisition

3. The creative construction hypothesis:

Much of the early research in the 1970s was guided by the conception (stimulated by work in
first language acquisition) of a “language acquisition device,” which facilitates a process of
“creative construction” in the mind of the learner. Partly in reaction to behaviorist ideas that
second language learning is a process of habit-formation in which the major obstacle to learning
is interference from the mother tongue, many researchers (e.g., Dulay & Burt, 1973) set out to
show that second language as well as first language learners are endowed with innate
mechanisms for processing language and creating their own internal grammar. The grammar that
learners construct is often called their “interlanguage” (i.e., a language located somewhere on a
continuum between their mother tongue and the target language) (Selinker, 1972) or “transitional
competence”, a competence which is in a state of transition, as it develops in the direction of the
target language, (Corder, 1967). However it does not generally become identical with the target
language, as some non-target features become “fossilized” in the learner‟s grammar. In this
theory (variously called the “creative construction hypothesis” or “interlanguage theory”), it is

4|Page
usually claimed that many of these innate mechanisms are specific to language learning rather
than of a general cognitive nature, since the input does not contain enough evidence for general
cognitive mechanisms to work on. The input acts primarily as a “trigger” to activate the
mechanisms.
 Interlanguage: An interlanguage is an emerging language system in the mind of a second
language learner. A learner's interlanguage is not a deficient version of the language being
learned filled with random errors, nor is it a language purely based on errors introduced from
the learner's first language. Rather, it is a language in its own right, with its own systematic
rules. It is possible to view most aspects of language from an interlanguage perspective,
including grammar, phonology, lexicon, and pragmatics. There are three different processes
that influence the creation of interlanguage:
 Language transfer: Learners fall back on their mother tongue to help create their
language system. This is now recognized not as a mistake, but as a process that all
learners go through. Particularly when the second language shares a wide range of
structures with the mother tongue, transfer is a powerful process that can already take the
learner deep into the new system (Odlin, 1989). For example, when French native
speakers begin to learn English, they already know how word order usually signals
meaning; how the logical object becomes the grammatical subject when the passive voice
is used; the basic principles that underlie the uses of the definite and indefinite articles;
the main patterns for forming relative clauses; and so on. They already possess the
cognitive habit of paying attention to (and signalling) number each time they use a noun,
or tense each time they use a verb. Sometimes of course, even within the domains just
mentioned, they may transfer knowledge which is not appropriate and leads them into
error. For example, they may say I am actor, omitting the article on the pattern of French
je suis acteur, or they may over-use the present perfect tense in Yesterday I have sold my
car under the influence of French Hier j’ai vendu mavoiture. Overall, however, they can
transfer a large body of relevant mother tongue knowledge, which makes the second
language learning process easier and quicker. Indeed, errors such as those just mentioned
illustrate even more clearly than their correct utterances that the process of transfer is
taking place. The extent to which transfer helps French native speakers to learn English
becomes clearer if we consider the problems encountered by native speakers of a
language which does not share so many features with English.
 Overgeneralization: Learners use rules from the second language in a way that native
speakers would not. For example, a learner may say "I goed home", overgeneralizing the
English rule of adding -ed to create past tense verb forms. The ability to go “beyond the
information given” in experience and make generalizations, which can then be used to
understand and create new instances of experience, is fundamental to learning (Bruner,
1973). The process means, for example, that second language learners do not need to
learn separately, for each verb, how it can be used to express time in the past: once they
know the underlying pattern that creates walked from walk and danced from dance, they
can also create jumped from jump and stepped from step. At the level of sentence
structure, once they have a rule that enables them to make the logical object of one action
into the subject and topic of a sentence by means of the passive, they can do it for a
whole range of other logical objects.
 Simplification: Transfer and generalization are ways of actively making sense of a new
language in terms of what is already known. A third process that often takes place,

5|Page
 especially in the early stages of learning, is more reductionist in nature. This is the
process of simplification, in which a speaker omits elements that are redundant and
produces something similar to the “telegraphic speech” found in early mother tongue
acquisition. For example, a Chinese native speaker in Hong Kong saw that I had some
photocopying to be done and informed me Photocopier broken. On another occasion,
after I had paid in advance for a cup of tea at the cash desk of a canteen and was going to
the wrong counter to collect it, the cashier corrected me with an appropriate gesture and
Sir! . . . tea there. Simplification may be supported here by transfer, since the Chinese
equivalents of these utterances would not require a copula. Such simplified utterances
enable a speaker to convey essential meanings with a minimum of linguistic competence.

4. The Universal Grammar hypothesis:

The theory of UG claims that there is a set of principles which govern all languages and are
already wired into the human brain when we are born. The principles themselves are universal,
but they allow for variation in the form of certain parameters that need to be set. For example,
there is a “structure-dependency” principle, which specifies that every language is organized
hierarchically, such that each component not only forms part of a higher-level structure but also
(down to the individual morpheme) has its own internal structure.

1. Context-oriented theories

This section will look at theories and hypotheses, which shift attention from cognition to the
context and the ways in which it facilitates the process of learning.

1.1. The interaction hypothesis

The “interaction hypothesis” is a development of the input hypothesis. The prerequisite for
learning is still seen as comprehensible input, but attention is now drawn to the conditions that
enable comprehensible input to be made available. The hypothesis argues that this is most likely
to occur in situations of social interaction. As a result, it is more likely that the input will be
tuned to the current level of competence of the individual learner and thus become “intake”
which is available for learning. Researchers have shown that increased opportunities for
negotiation are indeed likely to lead to increased comprehension. They have also studied the
kinds of classroom interaction task that are most likely to lead to the negotiation of meaning
(e.g., pair-work tasks in which both learners have information and must reach a decision or a
solution to a problem).

1.2. The output hypothesis

Second language learners often go through a “silent period” when they listen and respond, but do
not actually produce language themselves. Nonetheless they develop knowledge of the language
which can later serve as a basis for their own production. In the input hypothesis described
earlier, this leads to the claim that acquisition occurs through processing “comprehensible input,”
in which forms occur from the learner‟s next natural developmental stage. Language production

6|Page
(including oral or written practice in class) is not necessary to learning and can be simply left to
develop naturally, when learners feel they are ready. The “output hypothesis” argues that input is
not sufficient and that output too plays a significant role in acquisition (Swain, 1995). The need
to speak or write makes learners pay attention to aspects of grammar which they would not need
for comprehension purposes alone and thus makes them notice gaps in their knowledge. It gives
them opportunities to make hypotheses about how the grammatical system works and (when
meanings are negotiated) they get feedback about whether these hypotheses are correct. It
stimulates them to discuss the language with others and thus “scaffold” each other in their efforts
to understand the language.

1.3. The scaffolding hypothesis

In the interaction hypothesis, social interaction plays a mediating role: it facilitates the provision
of input, which in turn triggers acquisition. In what we will call here the “scaffolding
hypothesis,” social interaction provides the substantive means by which learning occurs. The
hypothesis is based on sociocultural theory, which goes back to the work of Vygotsky in the
1930s and holds that social interaction is the most important stimulus for all learning. Two
central concepts are “scaffolding” and the “zone of proximal development.” “Scaffolding” refers
to the way in which, with support from others, learners can reach levels of achievement which
they would be unable to reach independently. This support often comes from an expert (e.g., a
teacher), but learners themselves may also provide it for each other. The “zone of proximal
development” is the domain of performance that a learner cannot yet achieve independently but
is capable of achieving with the help of scaffolding. The expectation is that what is currently
possible through scaffolding will later become possible without it. Researchers have shown how
learners who help each other during interaction may, together, produce language that neither
could produce alone. They have also shown how language items which learners produce on one
occasion with the help of scaffolding may subsequently be incorporated into their independent
discourse.

1.4. The acculturation model and social identity theory

According to the “acculturation model” associated with John Schumann (1978), language
learning involves a process of acculturation and is therefore heavily dependent on the degree of
social and psychological distance that learners perceive between themselves and the speakers of
the target language. This distance is smaller (and the conditions for learning are correspondingly
more favourable) when, for example, the learner‟s own community shares social facilities and
has regular contacts with the target language community. The “social identity model” (Norton,
2000) is based on the mutual influences that link language and identity: language is one means
by which identity is constructed and identity affects the ways in which we use language. This
identity is seen as dynamic and, as a person consolidates his or her identity in a new community,
so his or her ability to speak and learn the language increases.

7|Page
ELT Methods

Today, ELT world has a range of ELT methods but half of them are either unused or
impracticable in India. Method is the level at which theory is put into practice and choices are
made about the particular skills to be taught, the content to be taught, and the order in which the
content will be presented. According to Asher and James (1982), Methods are the combination of
techniques that are used and plasticized by the teachers in the classrooms in order to teach their
students

According to Freeman (2000), Methods which are taught to the teachers make a base and give
them thinking about the applicable techniques and principles according to the situation where
they stand. Having knowledge of method is a prerequisite for classroom teaching. Referring to
the findings of Richards (2014) Nagraj (1995), Jha (2014), this study reports 25 ELT methods as
follows:

1. Grammar Translation Method (GTM):1850s

GTM is based on deductive learning which gives grammar rules explicitly to the learners then
the rules are reinforced with examples (Larsen, 2000).
Activities: It employs mainly six activities: translating L2 into L1, reading comprehension,
vocabulary drills (finding synonyms, antonyms, and cognates), deductive application of grammar
rules with examples, using missing or new words to make a sentence, and composition.

2. Montessori Method (MM): 1870s

Theoretical Base: Learning theory of MM developed by Dr Maria Montessori is based on careful
observation of what children reveals about their developmental needs. L2 is presented like L1.
Role of T and L: The teacher has to adjust the usage of Montessori materials according to
different ages of the learners. Learners are expected first to learn vocabulary through different
activities followed by pinking materials.
Skills: MM focuses mainly on Speaking and Writing followed by Reading.
Activities: Repetition, Rhymes, Stories, Songs, Finger-plays, Phonics, Opposites, Memory
Cards, Life Experience, etc.
Level(s): MM is Ideal for PP level learners

3. Direct Method (DM): 1890s

Theoretical Base: Learning theory of DM is based on inductive learning which gives direct
exposure to L2 to improve learners‟ spoken communication.
Role of T and L: In DM, teacher and learners play equal role using L2 in classroom activities.
Skills: DM focuses mainly on speaking and listening followed by writing and reading skills.
Activities: It employs mainly ten activities: everyday speech, teaching vocabulary using visual
aids, reading aloud, question-answer exercise, self correction, conversation practice, fill-in-the-
blank exercise, dictation, drawing (for listening comprehension), and paragraph writing.
Level(s): Ideal for SE and IF level learners

4. Audio Lingual Method (ALM): 1960s

Theoretical Base: Learning theory of ALM is based on the principles of Behaviourism. ALM
advocates learning a language through habit formation with immediate positive results.

8|Page
Role of T and L: Teacher controls classroom activities as a role model. Learners play the role of
imitators by imitating teachers or recorded audio of native speakers.
Skills: ALM focuses on listening and speaking skills followed by reading and writing.
Activities: It mainly employs six activities: memorizing and completing dialogue, minimal pair
drill of pronunciation, grammar games, repetition drill, chain drill, and substitution drill.
Level(s): Ideal for all levels of learners

5. Community Language Learning (CLL): 1970s

Theoretical Base: Learning theory of CLL is based on a holistic approach which views learner as
a 'whole person‟. Learners sit in circle to share their feelings, intellect, relationship, and reaction.
Role of T and L: Teacher plays the role of a counselor and minimizes any threatening factors in
the classroom. Gradually, learners become independent in classroom activities.
Skills: It focuses primarily on listening and speaking followed by reading and writing skills.
Activities: It mainly employs six activities: lexical translation (L1 to L2), sharing learning
experience, reflective listening (recording and listening own voices), teachers‟ repeating correct
form as many times as the learners need, and small group tasks to know one another.
Level(s): Ideal for SE level learners

6. Silent Way (SW): 1970s

Theoretical Base: Learning theory of SW is based on Cognitive Psychology and learning is not
habit-formation rather rule-formation.
Role of T and L: Though teacher plays a silent role, s/he facilitates learning by knowing what
learners already know and what should be the next step for them. Learners play the role of self-
learners by learning the rules inductively from known to the unknown facts.
Skills: It focuses mainly on reading and writing followed by speaking and listening.
Activities: It employs five activities: teaching pronunciation with fidel charts, cognitive coding
with colour rods, teacher's silence, structured feedback, practicing daily happenings.
Level(s): Ideal for PP and EP level learners

7. Suggestopedia: 1970s
Theoretical Base: Learning theory of suggestopedia is based on the hypothesis that mind has
great potential of retaining new knowledge using relaxation and suggestion. The aim of
suggestopedia is to enhance learning by lowering anxiety (negative thoughts) of the learners.
Role of T and L: Teacher controls entire activities by desuggesting or removing learners‟
negative thoughts and instilling positive thoughts in them to make any lesson or activities totally
relaxed and playful. Learner assumes new identity in L2 to become more suggestible.
Skills: The main focus is on listening and speaking followed by writing and reading.
Activities: It mainly employs six activities: direct or indirect positive suggestion, peripheral
learning, visualization, choosing a new identity, concert, and activation.
Level(s): Ideal for all levels of learners

8. Total Physical Response (TPR): 1970s

Theoretical Base: Learning theory of TPR is based on Innate Bio-Program (to develop "a
cognitive map" of the language during learning process), Brain Lateralisation (to activate both
hemispheres of brain for effective learning), and Stress-affective filter (to enhance learning by
lowering the stress).

9|Page
Role of T and L: In the first half of learning, the teacher directs and learners act accordingly; but
in the second half, the learners - after having confidence in speaking - start directing the teachers.
Skills: The main focus is on listening and speaking followed by writing and reading.
Activities: It employs three activities: commands for action, role reversal, action sequence.
Level(s): Ideal for PP, EP, and SE level learners

9. Communicative Approach (CA): 1970s

Theoretical Base: Learning theory of CA (also known as Communicative Language Teaching)
uses real communication by prioritizing function rather than form.
Role of T and L: The role of a teacher is to manage and facilitate classroom activities and
learners are the real communicator as they assume responsibility of self learning.
Skills: It focuses mainly on listening and speaking followed by reading and writing.
Activities: It employs mainly five activities: Authentic Discourse, Scrambled Sentences to teach
cohesion and coherence, Language Games, Picture Strip Story, and Role Play.
Level(s): Ideal for SE and IF level learners

10. Audio Visual Method (AVM): 1970s

Theoretical Base: Learning theory of AVM is based on using any technology which facilitates
teachers to teach less and the learner to learn more to expedite learning. It creates native
atmosphere in the classroom with audio and visual devices making learning more enjoyable and
effective. Audio and video aids are indispensable to substantially accelerate mastering of English
grammar (Shelby, 2012).
Role of T and L: The role of a teacher is to avoid the use of mother tongue and orient the
learners towards native pronunciation, intonation, and other supra-segmental aspects of English
through video lessons. Learners are expected to imitate native speakers through visuals.
Skills: It focuses on all the four language skills equally.
Activities: It employs pronunciation drills, sentence patterns, fluency, spelling, reading with
speed, handwriting, composition, everyday speech by using rotating charts, slides, films, video
tapes, posters, tape recorders, radio, TV, computerized language lab, and language software.
Level(s): Ideal for all levels of learners

11. Cooperative Learning (CL): 1970s

Theoretical Base: The learning theory of CL is based on the three cognitive theories: Piagetian,
Vygotskian and Social Learning which center largely on the development of human‟s cognition.
CL is a structured and systematic instructional approach in which a group of learners work
together by sharing responsibility for a task to maximize everyone‟s learning to reach a common
goal (Brown, 1987).
Role of T and L: The role of a teacher is to create cooperation rather than competition among the
learners and the learners are expected to accomplish their tasks as a group.
Skills: There is an equal focus on all the four language skills.
Activities: It employs activities like interaction based on social and conflict-resolution, think-
pair-share, numbered heads together, jigsaw, and circle the sage.
Level(s): Ideal for SE and IF level learners

12. Presentation-Practice-Production (PPP): 1980s

10 | P a g e
Theoretical Base: According to Harmer (2006), learning theory of PPP is based on three
principles: P(resentation), P(ractice), and P(roduction). Here, the teachers present a context say
of „robot‟ by explaining what it can and can‟t do. Thereafter, the learners practice making
sentences based on the pattern of can and can’t. Finally, the learners produce their learned
knowledge by relating it to other contexts.
Role of T and L: Initially, classroom is teacher-centred as teacher provides a pattern of language
items to the learners for practice. Thereafter, classroom becomes learner-centred as the learners
develop confidence in using the target language.
Skills: PPP focuses on all the four language skills equally.
Activities: Along with information gap, dialogue creation, pairwork, it follows all the activities
of TPR method.
Level(s): Ideal for SE, IF, and AF level learners

13. Task-Based Approach (TBA): 1980s

Theoretical Base: Learning theory of TBA is based on the hypothesis that we learn a language
when we use it. The emphasis is on the task rather than the language (Harmer, 2006). TBA helps
learners use their language best by speaking as fluently and flawlessly as they can because the
focus is on function rather than form.
Role of T and L: Teachers‟ role is to give a task to the learners to complete by hearing or seeing
someone else do it. The learners are also given hints to clear up any language problem they
encounter while completing the task. The role of learners is to report their completed tasks to
pair, group, class, and larger audience.
Skills: It focuses on all the four language skills equally.
Activities: It employs activities like completing a task in groups, (e.g. putting items in order of
importance, comparing two versions of the same story, a class survey, or writing a poem),
making the accomplished task public, problem solving activities (information jigsaws), etc.
Level(s): Ideal for SE, IF, and AF level learners

14. Multiple Intelligences (MI): 1980s

Theoretical Base: MI was proposed by Gardner (1983). Learning theory of MI is based on nine
types of intelligence: linguistic, logical, musical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal,
spatial-visual, naturalist, and existential. MI shares some similarities with other methods like
CLT, TPR, and Suggestopedia in terms of laying emphasis on communicative competence and
learners‟ needs.
Role of T and L: Teachers‟ role is central as s/he addresses the great diversity in learners,
develops learners‟ intelligences and “create an individualized learning environment” (Christison,
1996). Simply speaking, teachers are involved in inventing multisensory activities for the
learners and learners are active in using their particular intelligences to accomplish the activities.
Skills: It focuses on all the four language skills equally.
Activities: Most of the activities are those of CLT, TPR, ALM, AVM, and Suggestopedia.
Level(s): Ideal for all levels of learners

15. Learner Autonomy (LA): 1990s

Theoretical premise of LA, proposed by Henri Holec in 1979, is based on the “ability to take
charge of one‟s own learning” (Holec, 1981). The development of autonomy in language
learning is governed by three basic pedagogical principles: (1) Learner Development: engaging
learners to share responsibility for the learning process, (2) Learner Reflection: helping learners
11 | P a g e
to think critically when they plan, monitor and evaluate their learning, and (3) Appropriate
Target Language Use: using the target language as the principal medium of language learning
(Little, 1991).

16. Principled Eclecticism (PE): 2000s

Theoretical premise of PE believes that language learning is a combined process of structural and
communicative activities. Larsen-Freeman (2000) and Mellow (2000) have used the term
principled eclecticism to describe a desirable, coherent, pluralistic approach to language
teaching. The term Eclecticism subsumes a variety of language learning activities as there are
strengths as well as weaknesses of single theory based methods.

17. Natural Approach (NA): 1980s

Tracey Terrell (1977) proposed the natural approach of language teaching which was further
developed by Stephen Krashen. This approach believes that language is a means of conveying a
message. Natural approach believes in "naturalistic" principles which emphasize on exposure, or
input (Krashen, 1987). It aims at developing basic communication skills by exposing
comprehensible input and different topics in a given situation for using the target language. NA
believes that a language is essentially its lexicon (words) for perceiving, producing, and
interpreting any message.

18. Lexical Approach (LXA): 1990s

Theoretical premise of LXA , which was proposed by Michael Lewis in 1993, believes that the
building blocks of language learning and communication are not grammar but lexis „the total
word stock‟ with lexical rather than grammatical meaning. Simply speaking, language learning is
possible through vocabulary in the form of collocations, idioms, phrasal verbs, fixed and semi-
fixed expressions. LA uses authentic corpus for showing natural word frequency.

19. Semiotic Approach (SA): 1970s

Theoretical Base: Learning theory of SA is based on the premise that language learning is sign
learning with the help of different signs, symbols, icons, body language, and visual
communications. Levi Strauss, Geertz and Michael Silverstein, who mainly studied SA, claimed
that culture was a system of signs and has important contributions

Techniques

As for technique, this is the third level at which all the linguistic contents prescribed in a method
are described and delivered in the form of certain activities as discussed under ELT methods
above. Simply speaking, unlike approaches and methods, ELT techniques are more concrete,
perceivable, executable, or implementable. For example, if we talk of the types of error
correction techniques in a method called silent way, a teacher does not praise or criticize
language learners as the learners develop more reliance on themselves. Similarly in Audio
Lingual Method, a teacher often praises when a student has made a good thing in learning;
whereas in Total Physical Response the teacher repeats the right expression when a student
produces a wrong expression. In case of natural method, the teacher does not care when a student
makes an error if it does not hinder communication. The following are some the ELT techniques
used in EFL/ESL classrooms.

12 | P a g e
1. Action sequence
2. Activation
3. Authentic Discourse
4. Chain drill
5. Choosing a new identity
6. Circle the sage
7. Cognitive coding
8. Colour rods
9. Commands for action
10. Completing a task in groups, (e.g. putting items in order of importance, comparing two versions of the
same story, a class survey, or writing a poem)
11. Composition
12. Composition
13. Concert
14. Conversation practice
15. Deductive application of grammar rules with examples
16. Dialogue creation
17. Dictation
18. Direct or indirect positive suggestion
19. Discussion
20. Drawing (for listening comprehension)
21. Everyday speech
22. Everyday speech by using rotating charts
23. Fill-in-the-blank exercise
24. Films
25. Finger-plays
26. Fluency
27. Grammar games
28. Handwriting
29. Information gap
30. Interaction based on social and conflict-resolution
31. Interview
32. Jigsaw
33. Language Games
34. Life Experience
35. Memorizing and completing dialogue
36. Memory Cards
37. Minimal pair drill of pronunciation
38. Numbered heads together
39. Opposites
40. Pair work
41. Paragraph writing
42. Peer-editing
43. Peripheral learning
44. Peripheral learning through Video tapes, posters, tape recorders, radio, TV, computerized language lab, and
language software
45. Phonics
46. Picture Strip Story
47. Practicing daily happenings

13 | P a g e
 48. Pronunciation drills
49. Question-answer display
50. Question-answer exercise
51. Reading aloud
52. Reading comprehension
53. Reading or listening passage presented for passive reception
54. Reading with speed
55. Reflective listening (recording and listening own voices)
56. Repetition drill
57. Rhymes
58. Role Play
59. Role reversal
60. Scrambled Sentences to teach cohesion and coherence
61. Self correction
62. Sentence patterns
63. Sharing learning experience
64. Simulation: Activity involving complex interaction between groups and individuals based on simulation of
real-life actions and experiences
65. Slides
66. Small group tasks to know one another
67. Songs
68. Spelling
69. Stories
70. Structured feedback
71. Substitution drill
72. Teacher's silence
73. Teachers‟ repeating correct form as many times as the learners need
74. Teaching pronunciation with fidel charts
75. Teaching vocabulary using visual aids
76. Think-pair-share
77. Translating L2 into L1
78. Using missing or new words to make a sentence
79. Visualization
80. Vocabulary drills (finding synonyms, antonyms, and cognates)
81. Warm-up: Mimes, dance, songs, jokes, play

References:

Brown, D. H. (1987). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New Jersey: Printice Hall
Regents.
Celce-Murcia, M. (1991). Language Teaching Approaches. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching
English as a Second or Foreign Language. (pp.3-10). Boston, Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1993). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Hong Kong:
Oxford University Press.
Prichard, Alan.2009. Ways of Learning: Learning theories and learning styles in the classroom.
New York: Routledge.
Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T. S. (1990). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching: A
description and analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.

14 | P a g e