The Direct Method

ghostgirl · #1 16.06.09, 17:09

The Direct Method

[coverattach=1]Towards the end of the late 1800s, a revolution in language teaching philosophy took place that is seen by many as the dawn of modern foreign language teaching. Teachers, frustrated by the limits of the Grammar Translation Method in terms of its inability to create communicative competence in students, began to experiment with new ways of teaching language. Basically, teachers began attempting to teach foreign languages in a way that was more similar to first language acquisition. It incorporated techniques designed to address all the areas that the Grammar Translation did not - namely oral communication, more spontaneous use of the language, and developing the ability to think in the target language. Perhaps in an almost reflexive action, the method also moved as far away as possible from various techniques typical of the Grammar Translation Method - for instance using L1 as the language of instruction, memorizing grammatical rules and lots of translation between L1 and the target language.

The appearance of the "Direct Method" thus coincided with a new school of thinking that dictated that all foreign language teaching should occur in the target language only, with no translation and an emphasis on linking meaning to the language being learned. The method became very popular during the first quarter of the 20th century, especially in private language schools in Europe where highly motivated students could study new languages and not need to travel far in order to try them out and apply them communicatively. One of the most famous advocates of the Direct Method was the German Charles Berlitz, whose schools and Berlitz Method are now world-renowned.

Still, the Direct Method was not without its problems. As Brown (1994:56) points out, "(it) did not take well in public education where the constraints of budget, classroom size, time, and teacher background made such a method difficult to use." By the late 1920s, the method was starting to go into decline and there was even a return to the Grammar Translation Method, which guaranteed more in the way of scholastic language learning orientated around reading and grammar skills. But the Direct Method continues to enjoy a popular following in private language school circles, and it was one of the foundations upon which the well-known "Audiolingual Method" expanded from starting half way through the 20th century.

Objectives

The basic premise of the Direct Method is that students will learn to communicate in the target language, partly by learning how to think in that language and by not involving L1 in the language learning process whatsoever. Objectives include teaching the students how to use the language spontaneously and orally, linking meaning with the target language through the use of realia, pictures or pantomime (Larsen-Freeman 1986:24). There is to be a direct connection between concepts and the language to be learned.

Richards and Rodgers (1986:9-10) summarize the key features of the Direct Method thus:

(1) Classroom instruction is conducted exclusively in the target language.

(2) Only everyday vocabulary and sentences are taught.

(3) Oral communication skills are built up in a carefully traded progression organized around
question-and-answer exchanges between teachers and students in small, intensive classes.

(4) Grammar is taught inductively.

(5) New teaching points are taught through modeling and practice.

(6) Concrete vocabulary is taught through demonstration, objects, and pictures; abstract vocabulary
is taught by association of ideas.

(7) Both speech and listening comprehension are taught.

(8) Correct pronunciation and grammar are emphasized.

Typical Techniques

Diane Larsen-Freeman, in her book Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching (1986:26-27) provides expanded descriptions of some common/typical techniques closely associated with the Direct Method. The listing here is in summary form only.

(1) Reading Aloud
(Reading sections of passages, plays or dialogs out loud)

(2) Question and Answer Exercise
(Asking questions in the target language and having students answer in full sentences)

(3) Student Self-Correction
(Teacher facilitates opportunities for students to self correct using follow-up questions, tone, etc)

(4) Conversation Practice
(Teacher asks students and students ask students questions using the target language)

(5) Fill-in-the-blank Exercise
(Items use target language only and inductive rather than explicit grammar rules)

(6) Dictation
(Teacher reads passage aloud various amount of times at various tempos, students writing down
what they hear)

(7) Paragraph Writing
(Students write paragraphs in their own words using the target language and various models)

Comments

The Direct Method is undoubtedly a highly effective method in terms of creating language learners who are very competent in terms of using the target language communicatively. However, as pointed out above, it requires small class sizes, motivated learners and talented teachers in order to succeed really well. It is also an unfortunate fact of life that students of foreign languages these days need more than just the ability to communicate confidently - they need to be able to demonstrate grammatical accuracy and good reading skills in order to succeed in both national and international language testing systems. It becomes something of an issue in countries where English language learning is primarily EFL-based (that is, English as a Foreign Language) and there is a distinct shortage of both (1) the opportunity to apply the language communicatively in real-life situations outside the actual classroom, and (2) teachers who have the required level of native or native-like ability in the target language and the creativity to provide realistic examples to illustrate what elements of the language actually mean.

Some of the teachers who go on to practice this kind of methodology tend to be native speakers who travel to foreign countries where thay have no ability in the local language. In many cases they are not even aware they are following what is known as the "Direct Method" - they are trying to make the best out of a difficult classroom situation where creativity and constant (careful) use of the target language are required to make up for teachers' shortcomings elsewhere, whether that be a lack of ability in the students' mother language or a lack of knowledge about various pedagogic approaches to language teaching.

In an interesting development, it is not at all uncommon to find a blend of teaching techniques consisting of partner teachers - one a native speaker with no knowledge of the local language, culture or educational system, the other a local teacher who speaks English as a second or foreign language. The native speaker is often referred to as the "conversation teacher", and represents the "global communication" aspect of a marketing strategy so important for private language institutes. The local teacher may be known as the "grammar and translation" half of the overall package, the teacher who can use the students' mother language to control their behavior, put them at ease and explain how the grammar works. In essence, this kind of teaching teamwork is an often unconscious effort to combine the Direct Method with the Grammar Translation Method in an attempt to provide a (basically misguided) "holistic" approach to teaching the language - the basic premise being that the shortfallings of one are covered by the other and vice-versa. There are even institutes that consider themselves "advanced" because they employ a native-speaking teacher who has a "Direct Method" style approach in combination with a local teacher who teaches according to a blend of the Grammar Translation Method and the Audiolingual Method (that is, the local teacher sometimes or often uses L1 to explain the grammar, but for the rest of the time applies the kind of rote-learning and over-learning of forms typical of the Audiolingual Method).

How well does such a combination of styles work for the average language learner? In my opinion, the two styles undermine rather than complement each other, and inject both unnecessary extra confusion into the language learning process as well as what could be termed "stereo-typical roles" for teachers based purely on nationality.

I will admit that I myself have been through what I call the "Direct Method for Initial Classroom Survival" phase, basically because I didn't know better and felt that with it I was achieving some measure of tangible success as a teacher of "communicative English". Having (hopefully!) reached a somewhat more enlightened outlook through both experience and research, I realized that there is a fundamental flaw to the Direct Approach that has nothing to do with ensuring the students achieve a sufficient level of proficiency in English structure and reading. Like many other "modern" language teaching methods that preceded the "communicative approach", the Direct Method contains nothing in its essential theory and principles that deals with the learners themselves - cognitive and affective principles orientated around stepping into the boots of the students and looking out at the strange and confusing landscape of the foreign language they are asking (or being asked) to learn.
The Direct Method was an important turning point in the history of foreign language teaching, and represented a step away from the Grammar Translation Method that was progressive and heading in the right direction. I would encourage teachers to view the method in exactly the same way - not a bad way to teach but a long way short of the big picture modern language teaching methodology is attempting to achieve.
alıntı...

ghostgirl · #2 16.06.09, 17:11

DIRECT METHOD

Also known as Reform Method / Natural Method / Phonetical Method / Anti-grammatical Method
All reformers were vehemently opposed to teaching of formal grammar and aware that language learning was more than the learning of rules and the acquisition of imperfect translation skills.

Vietor ('Die Sprachunterricht muss umkehren' 1882) "This study of grammar is a useless torture. It is certainly not understood; therefore it can have no effect as far as the moulding of the intellect is concerned and no-one could seriously believe that children could learn their living German tongue from it."

Instead grammar should be acquired inductively by inducing the rules of how the language behaves from the actual language itself. "Never tell the children anything they can find out for themselves." (Jesperin 1904)

Direct Method based on belief that:
1 Knowing a language was being able to speak it! Primacy of spoken word. New method laid great stress on correct pronunciation and target language from outset. Advocated teaching of oral skills at expense of every traditional aim of language teaching.
2 Second language learning must be an imitation of first language learning, as this is the natural way humans learn any language, and so MT has no place in FL lesson. (Baby never relies on another language to learn its first language).
3 Printed word must be kept away from second language learner for as long as possible (same as first language learner, who doesn't use printed word until he has good grasp of speech).
4 The written word / writing should be delayed until after the printed word has been introduced.
5 The learning of grammar/ translating skills should be avoided because they involve the application of the MT.

6 All above items must be avoided because they hinder the acquisition of a good oral proficiency.

Disadvantages of Direct Method
1 Major fallacy of Direct Method was belief that second language should be learned in way in which first language was acquired - by total immersion technique. But obviously far less time and opportunity in schools, compared with small child learning his mother tongue.
2 Is first language learning process really applicable to second foreign language learning at later stage

First language learning is essential part of child's total growth of awareness of world around him. He starts off with blank sheet, then starts collecting/selecting organising the experience of a totally new world, perceived through his senses, by formulating a variety of pre-verbal concepts.

Subsequently part of the process of learning how to live is the acquisition of skills to verbalise his desires and aversions and to label his concepts, so as to make living more sufficient and secure.

Effectiveness of these verbalising skills depends on maturation level of the child / on type of environment on intelligence.

Language is part of an intrinsic process through which child learns to recognise/ deal with new situations.

3 Compare learning of second language

At 11 years of age, child is not interested in recognition of new living situations, child has normally learned the basic concepts and can handle situations for ordinary living purposes. So as far as 'learning to live' is concerned, no similarities between two processes of learning. (not the case for immigrant children - they need to learn English for survival purposes - therefore motivating force is totally different).
Older child has already at his disposal a first language, which is securely fixed to the universe of things; (s)he is equipped with this advantage; first language learner does not have this.
Older child is more mature and it would seem nonsensical to imitate first language learning processes totally for learning additional language. (think of contact hours needed) this is argument for using MT (anti Direct Method).
What does foreign language learner wish to know first?
to know the FL equivalent of MT sentences/ words used in hitherto familiar situations.
To learn how to handle certain known/ recurring situations through the medium of the FL. He doesn't wish to handle completely new situations in FL terms.
4 The Direct Method rejects use of the printed word - but this objection is illogical since second language learner has already mastered his reading skills.

Does printed word interfere with FL pronunciation? -In fact experiments show that the printed word is of real help to consolidate the FL and actually reinforces retention (ef 'Je ma pel') - leaves mental imprint, image of shape of word.

5 Later disciples of Direct Method took it to extremes and refused to speak a single word of English in lessons. To avoid translating new words, they searched for an association between new words and the idea it stood for: 'Voilà un livre, voici une craie'. Extreme Direct Methodists had cupboards full of realia. Explanations became cumbersome and time-consuming. (Definition type explanations UN meunier est UN homme qui travaille dans UN moulin' / 'court est le contraire de long'). Teachers would be jumping over desks flapping fins, rather than say that the English for 'saumon' is 'salmon'. Concepts like cependant'/ 'néanmoins' - obviously need immediate translation!

6 Successful teacher of the Direct Method needed competence in his language / stamina/ energy/ imagination/ ability and time to create own materials and courses - beyond capacity of all but gifted few.

"The method by its very nature presupposes a teacher of immense vitality, of robust health, one endowed with real fluency in the modern language he teaches. He must be resourceful in the way of gesture and tricks of facial expression, able to sketch rapidly on the board and in the language teaching day, he must be proof against linguistic fatigue".

7 Also Direct Methodists failed to grade and structure their materials adequately - no selection, grading or controlled presentation of vocabulary and structures. Plunged pupils into flood of living language - quite bewildering for pupils.

However, many teachers did modify the Direct Method to meet practical requirements of own schools, implemented main principles, i.e teaching through oral practice and banning all translation into target language. Obviously compromise was needed.

Direct method did pave the way for more communicative, oral based approach, and as such represented an important step forward in the history of language teaching.

Comparison of first and second-language learning processes (Language Teaching and the Bilingual Method, CJ Dodson, Pitman Publishing 1967,ISBN 0 273 31665 6)

If first and second-language learning processes are compared, the following pattern emerges-

First-language learner

1. He has no command of another language before learning the target language
2 He is neurologically immature, thus his mother tongue is not fixed

3. He learns to recognise and cope with reality through the target language

4. He requires a high contact-frequency with the target language to learn that all things have names

5 He requires a high contact-frequency with the target language to recognise the meaning of sounds representing the names of things, because he is neurologically immature because his range of experience with the outside world is limited and as he has no knowledge of the equivalent meaning of sounds from another language for the same things

6. He requires a high contact-frequency to establish integration of mother-tongue sounds with things

Second-language learner
1. He has command of another language before learning the target language

2. He is neurologically mature,thus his mother tongue is fixed

3. He learns to recognise and cope with reality through the mother tongue, not the target language

4. He already knows that all things have names

5. He has already experienced the process, involving high contact-frequency and maturation, of recognising the meaning of sounds representing the names of things in his mother tongue. As he is now neurologically mature, he need not be subjected a second time to the same process in the new target language merely to recognise the equivalent meaning of target-language sounds for the same things. (Recognition of the sound representing the thing should not be confused With the integration of the sound with the thing, set

6 He has already established integration of mother-tongue sounds with things, but requires high contact-frequency to establish new integration of target-language sounds with the same things

Seçenekler
Yazdırılabilir şekli göster Sayfayı E-Mail olarak gönder
Stil
Normal Hybrid-Şeklinde gösterime geç Ağaç şeklinde gösterime geç