Enseñanza del Inglés: Historia, Enfoques y Métodos

Extended outline - Materiales de clase

  1. Brief description of the course syllabus.
  2. Terminological clarification "language teaching" or "foreign language teaching."
  3. Foreign Language Learning:
    • 3.1. Need for various groups to communicate with other groups from the caveman era to the present day.
    • 3.2. Importance of learning languages throughout the entire history of humanity: from the Sumerians, Egyptians, etc. to contemporary times.
    • 3.3. The reality of today's world: travel and knowledge of languages.
    • 3.4. Distinction between natural learning in children and adults, on the one hand, and formal learning in adults, on the other.
    • 3.5. Need to find more effective ways to learn languages in addition to natural ways (through practice and use).
  4. Brief analysis of two current situations:
    • 4.1. Some advertisements in the market for foreign language teaching
    • 4.2. Reliable information about the reality of learning and interesting propaganda; 'Learn English in three months'.
  5. Objectives of critical-diachronic-comparative analysis:
    • 5.1. General:
      • Understand the theoretical and practical skills of present day foreign language teaching through a critical review of the proposed methods and / or those used in past centuries.
    • 5.2. Specifically:
      • 5.2.1. Know the methods used in the past and understand their evolution through history.
      • 5.2.2. Recognise the distinguishing features of current methods and their differences and similarities with previous methods.
      • 5.2.3. Know the advantages and disadvantages of the methods of past centuries, in order to confront present day methodological problems with a critically-based attitude.
  1. What is the “method” concept in language teaching?
  2. Methods for teaching foreign languages: necessary or redundant?
  3. Is there an ideal universal method?
  4. The two main types of methods in the history of language teaching: deductive (formal instructional context) vs. inductive (natural mode of learning).
  5. Three proposals for the operationalization of the language teaching method concept. Comparative Critical Analysis: similarities, differences, advantages and drawbacks:
    1. Anthony (1963)
    2. Richards and Rodgers (1986,  2001)
    3. Sánchez (1997, 2009)
  6. The basic components of the language teaching method concept. Analytical description.
  7. Activities as identifying features of language teaching methods.
  1. Conversational tradition. Distinguishing characteristics:
    1. Framework of the first methods in the history of language teaching.
    2. "Natural Approach": Learn the language in a "natural" way (in the manner of the native language). Practice and use: listening, repetition, memorization, oral interaction. Contact with native speakers (Sumerians, Akkadians, Egyptians). Later, reading and writing of texts.
    3. Functional Objective: to satisfy communication needs of daily life.
    4. Mode of learning: inductive.
    5. Materials designed to promote oral interaction: books of dialogues. From the Romans to the present day. Boom in the Middle Ages and Renaissance.
    6. William Bathe (17th century): the search for balance between conversational and grammatical currents.
    7. 16th–21st century: Montaigne, Comenius, pre-reformers (Dufief, Gouin, etc.), Direct Method, Communicative Approach and spin-offs.
  2. The Grammar Tradition. Distinguishing characteristics:
    1. Schools (from the beginning of the second millennium)
    2. Formal education. Hallmark of quality from the Renaissance Period: prestige associated with the academic, educational and cultural world.
    3. Systematization of knowledge about language: grammatical categories and rules, management of content.
    4. Objective: intellectual exercise.
    5. Manner of learning: deductive.
    6. Emphasis on written language. Teacher’s competence is not necessarily fluent at an oral level. Leaving aside the needs of oral communication.
    7. Up to the Middle Ages: dominance of the conversational tradition. Rise of the grammatical tradition from the Middle Ages (Latin) and Renaissance (vernacular languages), along with the dissemination of their teaching in schools.
    8. Different types of grammars that co-exist:
      1. Speculative and based on reason and abstraction. Grammar-Translation Method (19th century).
      2. Pedagogical. Explanation of rules, practices and examples. Ahn’s and Ollendorff’s "practical method" (19th century).
      3. Mixed works.
  1.  The teaching of languages before the Middle Ages

    1.1. The Sumerians (5th millenium BC)

            1.1.1. Learning Sumerian as a native language. Scribes and school system. Study of grammar.
            1.1.2. Learning of Sumerian as a foreign language: Sumerian vs. Akkadians. Language of the conquered (Sumerian) vs.  invaders’ language (Akkadian). Language and culture vs. language and power.

    1.2. The Egyptians (from the 4th millenium BC)

          1.2.1. Similar case of the Akkadians. Amarna Archives: multilingual tablets.
          1.2.2. Learning phrases or sayings (no grammar rules or isolated vocabulary).

    1.3. The Greeks (7th-2nd centuries BC)

          1.3.1. Foreign languages or barbarian, not appreciated.
          1.3.2. Greek model of education: Homer. Koine: language spoken by the Greek people.
          1.3.4. Learning bilingual lists of words arranged in parallel columns.

    1.4. The Romans (1st century BC-3rd century AD)

         1.4.1. Loss of Greek hegemony in favour of Latin. Hermeneumata (early 3rd century).
         1.4.2. Inductive and deductive learning. Memorising words and phrases. Direct and reverse translation for words, phrases and texts.

  2.  Language teaching in the Middle Ages

    2.1.Until the 9th century (approx.)

         2.1.1. Latin as the language of communication and culture.
         2.2.2. Vernacular languages: Early glosses.

                      i) Informal settings / private instruction.

                      ii) Formal contexts: Monastic schools.

         2.2. 5th-15th centuries (approx.):
              2.2.1. Latin: status of a second language and language of culture.
              2.2.2. Vernacular languages: Conversion process to national languages (both as native and foreign languages).

  1. Latin
    1. Informal settings / private instruction: virtual disappearance by new status of Latin as a classical language, restricted only to academics.
    2. Formal contexts: schools. Study of Latin as an end in itself. No practical function but an intellectual exercise (“mental gymnastics”. Mallison, 1957. In Titone, 1968: 26).
    3. Instruments:
      1. Grammatical books.
      2. Books of dialogues.
  2. Vernacular languages
    1. Informal settings / private instruction. Instruments: 2.2. Formal contexts: schools. Instruments: Grammar.
      • 2.1.1. Dialogues books and glossaries.
      • 2.1.2. Pedagogical grammar and mixed works, grammar for both native speakers and foreigners.
      • 2.2.1. Theoretical and for foreigners. Pedagogical grammars and mixed works.
      • 2.2.2. Dialogues and glossary books (supplementing materials).
  3. Some relevant authors (16th-18th century):
    1. Roger Ascham and “Double Translation Method” (direct and inverse).  The Schoolmaster (1580). Method or technique?
    2. William Bathe: Ianua Linguarum (1611).  Integration of grammatical and conversational traditions. Regular procedure (deductive) and irregular procedure (inductive).
    3. J. Amos Comenius. A pioneer of natural methods and the Direct Method. Ianua Linguarum Reserata Aurea (1631), Orbis Sensualium Pictus (1658).
  1. GT
    1. Origins: Classical Method
      1. “Mental gymnastics” (Mallison, 1957. In Titone, 1968: 26)
      2. School context: teaching classical languages (Latin and Greek).
      3. Model language: rediscovery of classical authors (Virgil, Ovid, Cicero). Formal correctness.
      4. Teaching model: Abstract statement of grammatical rules, memorization of these and vocabulary lists, translation of texts and exercises to practise written language. E.g. "The philosopher pulled the lower jaw of the hen" (Titone, 1968: 28)
    2. From the 19th century: Introduction of foreign languages into the official school curriculum
      1. Establishment of the G-T.
      2. Objectives: To translate from one language to another. Literary studies. Emphasis on written language; writing and reading skills.
      3. Characteristic authors: Meidinger, Plötz, Seidenstücker, Tierks.
  2. Ahn’s and Ollendorff’s "practical method" (19th century)
    1. Ahn and Ollendorff: halfway between the G-T and the advocates of natural methods.
      1. Ahn: predecessor of Ollendorff. First work: 1834.
      2. Ollendorff. Nouvelle Méthode pour apprendre à lire, à écrire et à parler une langue en six mois, appliquée à l’allemand. (1835). Adaptations into French, Spanish, English. Very popular in Europe and also in the United States. Distinguishing features:
        1. Grammar points introduced according to intuitive, ascending, gradation of complexity.
        2. Descriptive explanations of use, not abstract statement of grammatical rules.
        3. Practice of oral interaction: question and answer between teacher and student in L2.
        4. Configuration of the Ollendorffian method according to his followers: "Traditional Method" (20th-21st centuries).
  3. Criticism of the G-T and Ahn’s and Ollendorff’s "practical method" from linguistic, psychological and pedagogical perspectives.
  1. 19th century: the rise of the Natural Approach.
  2. Origin in historical factors: new learner of foreign languages emerged from the Industrial Revolution, emigration to North-America, etc.
  3. Distinguishing characteristics:
    1. Learning a foreign language in the native way: listening and speaking. Constant practice. Connection with conversational tradition.
    2. Removal of grammar and all “artificial” intervention.
    3. Emphasis on oral language.
  4. Relationship between the Natural Approach and the “practical method” by Ahn and Ollendorff.
  5. Predecessors:
    1. Michel de Montaigne. Essay on the Education of Children (1580). The example of Latin and the ineffectiveness of formal learning.
    2. Jan Amos Comenius. Ianua Linguarum Reserata (1633), Orbis Sensualium Pictus (1658). First author to explicitly establish the principles of inductive learning for adults. Object-based teaching.
    3. John Locke. Some Thoughts Concerning Education (1693). Philosophical essay. Influence of Montaigne and Comenius.
    4. P. J. F. Luneau de Boisgermain. Cours de Langue Italienne (1783). First author who defined the concept of the “natural method”.
  6. General framework for educational procedure in the natural current.
  7. Two major groups within the natural current of the 19th century:
    1. Pedagogical strand. 7.2. Psychological and linguistic strand. The Reform movement: The scientific approach in language teaching. Origin of Applied Linguistics. Rise of the science of phonetics.
      1. Individual pre-reformers: Dufief, Jacotôt, Marcel, Prendergast, Rosenthal, Gouin.
        Direct Method. From its predecessors (Comenius, Pestalozzi, Sauveur) to its final configuration with Berlitz.
  1. N. Dufief. Nature displayed in her mode of teaching languages to man … Adapted to FRENCH. (1804). The "refined" version of Ollendorff's "practical method".
  2. J. Jacotôt. Enseignment Universel, Langue Étrangere (1830). "All is in all".
  3. C. Marcel. Language as a Means of Mental Culture and International Communication (1853). Distinction between impression (reception) and expression (production).
  4. T. Prendergast. The Mastery of Languages, or the Art of Speaking Foreign Languages Idiomatically (1864). "The Mastery System".
  5. R. S. Rosenthal. The Meisterschaft System. (1881).
  6. F. Gouin. L'art d'enseigner et d'étudier les langues (1880).
    1. Increased impact of all the pre-reformers. “A happy source of inspiration for the later work of ‘direct methodists’ ” (Titone, 1968: 33). 
    2. Principles and configuration of Gouin’s Series. 6.3. Positive and negative points of Gouin's Series, both in its original version and in possible contemporary adaptations.
      1. Cause-effect relationship between sentences and logic of the series.
      2. Verb as its principle element.
      3. Emphasis on oral language: listening and incubation period followed by oral expression.
  1. Origin and reasons for the emergence of the Reform Movement: Viëtor: Language Teaching Must Start Afresh (1882). Discontent with traditional grammar and the G-T. Need for phonetic science.
  2. Innovative drive of the teaching of foreign languages from academic circles. “Scientific approach” to learning and teaching of foreign languages. Origin of Applied Linguistics.
  3. Authors and principle events/works:
    1. Passy. Founder of the Phonetic Teachers' Association (1886), the forerunner of the International Phonetic Association (IPA) (1897).
    2. Sweet. The Practical Study of Languages (1899). “The man who taught phonetics to Europe” (Howatt, 2004: 199). Intellectual leader of the Reform Movement.
    3. Jespersen. How to Teach a Foreign Language (1904).
  4. Basic principles of the reformers, firmly established by the work of Sweet and Jespersen:
    1. Emphasis on phonetics and the priority of oral versus the written language.
    2. Adoption of the psychological theory of associations (Franke, 1826). The concept and the foreign word must relate directly, without resort to the native word.
    3. Choice of texts as a means to present language.
    4. Rejection of translation. Use of realia, pictures, gestures.
    5. Inductive learning of grammar and vocabulary.
  5. Reactions of teachers during the Reform Movement. Impact on pedagogical practice in the first third of the 20th century.
  1. Clarification of terms and coverage of each: Natural Method, Direct Method, Berlitz Method.
  2. Predecessor of the Direct Method: Comenius (17th century). Object-based teaching
  3. Origin of the Direct Method (18th-19th centuries):
    1. Historical factors. New foreign language learner emerged from the Industrial Revolution, emigration to North-America, etc.
    2. J. H. Pestalozzi. Object-based teaching. G. Heness. Lambert Sauveur. An Introduction to the Teaching of Living Languages without Grammar or Dictionary (1874). “The Natural Method”.  The beginnings of “genuine questions” in “conversations” (interaction) and communication.
  4. The Berlitz Method. Maximilian Delphinus Berlitz (1852-1911).
    1. Nicholas Joly.
    2. Systematization of the natural approach and subsequent success of the Direct Method in Europe and the United States (private schools). Beginning of the “Era of methods”.
    3. Fundamental principles of the Berlitz Method:
    4. Didactic means and practical pedagogical implications (Berlitz, 1931: 1):
    5. Action guidelines for teachers. Textbooks as a reference.
    6. Differences and similarities with other methods and proposed methodological approaches:
    7. Criticism of the Direct Method.
    8. Influence of the Direct Method on foreign language teaching in the 20th and 21st centuries.
      • 4.4.1. Teaching of the Concrete by Object Lessons.
      • 4.4.2. Teaching of the Abstract by the Association of Ideas.
      • 4.4.3. Teaching of Grammar by Examples and Ocular Demonstration.
      • 4.6.1. G-T.
      • 4.6.2. Ollendorff’s “practical method”.
      • 4.6.3. The Reform Movement.
  1. Clarification of terms: Oral Approach (United States) vs. Oral Approach (United Kingdom)
  2. Pedagogical and historical origins of the ALM:
    1. Discontent with the G-T and the DM.
    2. Coleman Report (1929). “Reading Method”.
    3. American entry into World War II. The “Army Specialized Training Program” (ASTP) or “Army Method”. Language laboratories.
    4. The Cold War. Launch of Sputnik by Russia (1957). “National Defense Education Act” of the United States (1958).
  3. “From an art into a science” (Richards & Rodgers, 2001: 54):
    1. American Structuralist school of linguistics.
    2. Leonard Bloomfield. An Outline Guide for the Practical Study of Foreign Languages (1942).
    3. Contrastive analysis (application of structural linguistics to applied linguistics). Charles Fries. Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Language (1945).
    4. Audio-oral techniques coming from the Oral, Audio-oral or Structural approach of Fries (Michigan’s approach). Structural repetitive exercises / (pattern) drills.
    5. Behavioral psychology. Osgood & Skinner. Skinner’s Verbal Behaviour (1957).  Stimulus-response.
    6. “Audiolingual Method” (term coined by Professor Brooks in 1964)
  4.  Final organisation and methodological principles of the ALM.
    1. Moulton. “Five Slogans” (1961).
    2. Lado. Language Teaching. A Scientific Approach (1964).
  5. Most distinctive pedagogical features of the ALM: Mim-mem (mimicry-memorization) and drills. “Practice makes perfect”.
  6. Differences and similarities with other methods and approaches.
  7. Criticism of the ALM.
  8. Influence of the ALM on FLT in the 20th and 21st centuries.
  1. Clarification of terms: Structural-Situational Approach, Situational Approach, Situational Language Teaching Method (SLT).
  2. Pedagogical and historical origins of the SLT:
    1. Discontent with the G-T and the DM.
    2. Palmer. Founder of British Oral Approach.
    3. Scientific and rational systematization of linguistic content in the design of FLT materials:
      1. Lexical control: Frequency lists.
      2. Grammatical control: classification of the major grammatical structures into "sentence patterns". Substitution tables.
  3. Oral Approach to the SLT:
    1. British Structuralist Linguistics: Firth and Halliday. The importance of meaning, context and situation.
    2. Hornby: “The Situational Approach in Language Teaching”. English Language Teaching Journal, 1950.
    3. The influence of behavioral psychology (Skinner).
  4. Distinctive pedagogical features of the SLT: memorisation of patterns of linguistic structures used in situations; recursive exercises (drills).
  5. Differences and similarities with other methods and proposed methodological approaches.
  6. Criticisms of the SLT.
  7. Influence of the SLT on FLT in the 20th and 21st centuries.
  1. Pedagogical and historical origins of the AVSG:
    1. Finance from the French Ministry of Education to enhance the teaching of French as a foreign language.
      1. Creation of CREDIF (Centre de Recherche et Étude pour la Difussion du Français).
    2. Petar Guberina. SUVAG-LINGUA (Système universel verbo-tonal d'audition Guberina).
      1. The “French essential” corpus
      2. Emphasis on phonetics (pronunciation, intonation and rhythm).
      3. Pronunciation as a crucial factor to facilitate the overall understanding of the meaning of the situation, in preference to structures and vocabulary.
  2. Pedagogical principles for the development of textbooks. Audiovisual recourses: audiovisual projection of comic strips aids in the understanding of the situation. Tape recorder, language laboratory.
  3. Differences and similarities with other methods and proposed methodological approaches.
  4. Criticism of the AVSG.
  5. Influence of the AVSG on FLT in the 20th and 21st centuries.
  1. The importance of psychological factors in the success of foreign language learning: anxiety, emotion, affection, motivation.
  2. The concept of humanistic teaching.
  3. Humanistic teaching: difficulties in formal education.
  4. Influence of these methods on subsequent N-F Syllabuses and CLT: learner-centered teaching.
  1. The emergence of psychology inthe field of language teaching:
    1. The “trace theory”and its impact on learning.
    2. The two brain hemispheres and their role indata retention.
    3. Movement and its effect on language retention.
  2. Parallels between L1 learning and L2 learning. Need for exposure to language.
  3. Anxiety as affective filter and its negative effects on learning.
  4. Activities focused on exposure to the language, commands and movement.
  5. The role of the "stimulus-response" binomial and repetition in FLL.
  6. The role of the teacher in the class of the TPR.
  7. The influence of the TPR on CLT: From "method" to "activity" aimed at promoting oral understanding through physical actions.
  1. Gattegno and the general principles of learning in the Silent Way.
  2. The principles of “natural” learning incorporated by Gattegno.
  3. The value and meaning of silence in the Silent Way.
  4. The role of the teacher in this method: Teach, test, get out of the way. (Stevick,1980: 56)
  5. The student as the star and responsible for learning.
  6. Main teaching techniques: exposure, repetition, use of realia and coloured rods (Cuisenaire rods), as a means of associating words and objects / things; Fidel’s charts as a technique to teach spelling, sound-color charts to teach pronunciation.
  7. Phrases and linguistic structures aimed at in the Silent Way.
  8. Analysis of the influence of the Silent Way on CLT.
  1. Lozanov and the psychological basis of his method: Suggestology.
  2. The possibilities of human learning. The potential of the human brain.
  3.  “(De)suggestion” and “emotional meaning” as catalysts for learning triggered by:
    1. music, relaxation, deep breathing, imagination
    2. “concert sessions”
    3. stress liberation
    4. activation of the active and conscious parts of the brain.
  4. Priority in the use of relaxation techniques (music, lighting, etc.). Stress on pronunciation and intonation
  5. The role of the teacher as a guide towards learning
  6. The role of the students: Pseudo-passive state and infantilization
  7. The role of instructional and classroom materials: Importance of texts with no traumatic topics and the arrangement of the furniture in the classroom
  8. Creation of the appropriate context for learning: model of a class using Suggestopedia.
  1. Charles A. Curran and the responses to his key questions:
    1. How do adults learn in contrast to children?
    2. What problems do they have to face when they begin learning a foreign language?
  2. How to avoid or eliminate the psychological barriers that interfere with language learning: linguistic and non-linguistic dimensions of language learning.
  3. “Counselling Therapy”: “If someone has a problem, a third party can help by giving advice, giving support and comforting them” (Translation from Sánchez, 2009: 230-231).
  4. The role of the teacher as a guide and counsellor in the learning process.
  5. Global and social learning. Language as an instrument of communication between people. Interactive view of language.
  6. Affective and stress-relieving factors.
  7. Objectives and activities in the classroom: priority of spoken language and interaction.
  1. Background on the design of the N-F Syllabuses.
  2. Towards peace through communication among peoples: socio-political factors involved in the rise of the need for knowledge of other languages.
  3. The Council of Europe:
    1. Objectives
    2. The Threshold Level and its impact on FLT
  4. Changes in underlying linguistic and pedagogical paradigms:
    1. From grammar to “concepts and language functions”. D. Wilkins (1976). Notional Syllabuses.
    2. Research into communicative needs as portrayed by language.
    3. Definition of the Threshold Level. Description and priorities involved regarding the teaching of language.
    4. N-F Syllabuses: a new methodological approach lacking adequate methodological precisions to achieve its targets.
  5. The first textbooks tailored to N-F Syllabuses.
  1. Communicative Approach or Method?
  2. Disciplines involved in the emergence of CLT:
    1. American sociolinguistics (Dell Hymes, John Gumperz, William Labov)
    2. British and American philosophy (John Austin and John Searle)
    3. SLA studies (Stephen Krashen, Michael Long, Merrill Swain)
    4. British discourse linguistics (John M. Sinclair, Malcom Coulthard)
    5. British functional linguistics (John R. Firth, Michael Halliday)
    6. British language teaching specialists: Council of Europe (N-F syllabuses and the Threshold Level); Christopher Brumfit, Christopher Candlin, Keith Johnson, Keith Morrow, Henry Widdowson, David Wilkins
  3. The notion of “communicative competence” (Hymes, 1971, 1972) and the emphasis on language as social behavior. Subsequent adaptations of a pedagogical nature by Canale & Swain (1980 and elsewhere), Bachman (1991); Bachman & Palmer (1996) and Celce-Murcia, Dörnyei & Thurrell (1997).
  4. Phases of CLT: classic CLT (1970-1990) and current CLT (1990 until nowadays) (Richards, 2006)
  5. The “weak” and “strong” versions of CLT (Howatt, 1984).   Description and essential defining features.
  6. The learning theory underlying CLT.
  7. Principles of communicative teaching (Morrow, 1981):
    • Principle 1: Know what you are doing.
    • Principle 2: The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
    • Principle 3: The processes are as important as the forms. Principle 4. To learn it, do it.
    • Principle 5. Mistakes are not always mistakes
      • 3.1. Information gap.
      • 3.2. Choice.
      • 3.3. Feedback.
  8. The roles of teacher and student in CLT. Student-centered teaching.
  9. The great pedagogical contribution of CLT: its underpinning on the notion of “communicative competence”; a wide range of kinds of activities to attain such competence; emphasis on the message.
  10. Spin-offs from CLT.
  11. Criticisms of CLT. Towards an Integrative Method and the Postmethod concept.
  1. Distinction between the Natural Approach by Krashen and Terrell and the Natural Approach and the DM from the 19th century.
  2. Background of Krashen and Terrell’s Natural Approach. Studies of psycholinguistics and language acquisition in the 1960s and 1970s.
    1. Reaction to Skinnerian behaviorism: Chomsky (1965): Aspects of the Theory of Syntax.
    2. Corder: the treatment of errors and hypothesis testing.
    3. “Pre-determined” order  in the acquisition of different linguistic elements (morphology, syntax). A First Language: The Early Stages (Brown, 1973).
  3. Krashen’s research (1981, 1982, 1985, 1992, 1997):
    1. The dichotomy “acquisition” and “learning”.
    2. Importance of exposure to language learning: input, intake.
  4. The organisation of the Natural Approach by S. Krashen (1981, 1982, 1985, 1992, 1997). The five learning hypotheses:
    1. The Acquisition-Learning Hypothesis.
    2. The Monitor Hypothesis.
    3. The Natural Order Hypothesis.
    4. The Input Hypothesis (i+1).
    5. The Affective Filter Hypothesis.
  5. Favoured activity types: array from existing types of other methods
  6. The impact of Krashen's theory in the formation of CLT and its implementation and dissemination.
  1. The communicative function of language. Language as an action that is carried out.
  2. The perspective of teaching and syllabus design: (i) from the point of view of products or final objectives (product-syllabuses), or (ii) from the viewpoint of the processes and procedures leading to them (processes-syllabuses/learner-centred syllabuses and procedural syllabuses/learning-centred syllabuses). TBLT inclined towards processes-syllabuses and procedural syllabuses.
  3. Real tasks vs. pedagogical tasks. Tasks encompassing a beginning, a sequence of actions and a final objective.
  4. Origins of TBLT for L2 learning purposes: The Bangalore Project or procedural syllabus (Beretta & Davies, 1985; Prabhu, 1987, Beretta, 1990). Types of tasks implemented: information-gap, reasoning-gap and opinion-gap.
  5. Subsequent pedagogical contributions to TBLT by J. Willis, D. Willis (D.Willis & J. Willis, 2007; J. Willis, 1996 and elsewhere)
  6. Tasks as the unit of syllabus design (Long & Crookes, 1992, 1993) and tasks as the unit of classroom teaching or lesson planning (Estaire & Zanón, 1990; D.Willis & J. Willis, 2007; J. Willis, 1996 and elsewhere). Important issues to consider:
    1. Parameters for task sequencing in syllabus design.
    2. Implementation of tasks as units of lesson planning: pre-task, task, post-task.
  7. Criticisms targeted at TBLT:
    1. The organization of teaching materials for tasks: language requirements for “doing something in the language you learn” and problems of implementation of tasks in the classroom.
    2. The balance between content and linguistic forms.
    3. Language proficiency levels and most appropriate areas of language to implement TBLT in the classroom.
  1. CBI or CLIL? Terminological clarification
  2. The precedents and origins of CLIL/CBI (Richards & Rodgers, 2001):
    1. Bilingual programs in Canada (1960s). Language immersion courses.
    2. Language across the Curriculum (United Kingdom. 1970s).
    3. Immigrant On-Arrival Programmes (Australia, 1990s).
    4. Programs for Students with Limited English Proficiency (SLEP)
    5. Language for Specific Purposes (LSP)
  3. Principles of CLIL/CLIL:
    1. In order to learn a second or foreign language successfully, we must not regard language as an end in itself but as a means of acquiring information.
    2. Optimal attention must be given to the needs of students learning a second or foreign language. E.g. immigrants (improvement at work).
  4. Parallellism of CLIL/CBI with (the strong version of) CLT: “emphasis on meaning / content, not form”.
  5. Learning of lexical and grammatical forms in context. The four skills and their presence in CLIL/CBI.
  6. The relationship of CLIL/CBI to learning languages ​​for specific purposes, for example, English for Specific Purposes (ESP), English for Occupational Purposes (EOP), English for Academic Purposes (EAP). 
  7. Types of CLIL/CBI according to context.
    1. Immersion programmes. Especially targeted at primary and secondary education.
    2. Sheltered content instruction. University level.
    3. Adjunct language instruction. Elementary, secondary and university levels.
    4. Theme-based language instruction. Elementary, secondary and university levels.
  8. Pedagogical aspects: The definition of the syllabus, types of activities and the role of the teacher. Problems involved.
  1. The social character of language and language learning. The importance of interaction.
  2. Definition of CLL objectives. Learner-centered teaching and collaborative learning.
  3. Cooperative learning, learner autonomy and responsibility.
  4. Effect of CLL on the three following key variables in SLA: input, output and context of learning.
  5. Key pedagogical issue in CLL: Group work. Principles to make it successful:  Positive interdependence, group formation, individual accountability, appropriate use of teamwork skills, structuring and structures, face-to-face interaction, group formation or regular self-assessment of team functioning    
  6. Adequacy and suitable arrangement of classroom for cooperative learning and teaching.
  1. The Lexical Approach: “focus on meaning”.
  2. The importance of the lexical component in language use both in L1 and L2 language use.
  3. The origins of the Lexical Approach. Important names associated to the Lexical Approach: D. Willis (1990), Nattinger & DeCarrico (1992), Lewis (1993, 1996, 1997)
  4. Distinction between traditional vocabulary (single words) and lexis (strings of words which go together). Prefabricated units or lexical chunks: Collocations, institutionalized utterances, sentence frames and heads.
  5. The Lexical Approach and its connections with Krashen’s Natural Approach and “acquisition” concept.
  6. The role of prefabricated units in achieving fluency.
  7. Corpus linguistics, frequency lists and their influence on shaping the Lexical Approach. Authentic language vs. scripted/pedagogical language.
  8. The syllabus in the Lexical Approach:
    1. Prefabricated units as the backbone of the lexical syllabus.
    2. Criteria for the sequencing of prefabricated units in syllabus design.
    3. Criteria for the sequencing of activities in a Lexical-Approach class.
    4. Corpus linguistics: an inexhaustible source for the lexical syllabus.
  9. Types of activities which promote lexical learning.
  1. Cognitive complexity and learning.
  2. Unitary/general intelligence vs. plurality of the intellect.
  3. Intelligence(s) vs. learning styles and aptitude
  4. Gardner (1983, 1993, 2006, 2007) and his “MI model”. Description of each type of intelligence.
  5. Connection between learning styles and MI.
  6. Pedagogical implications of MI for FLT.
  7. Language learning activities that suit the development of each type of intelligence.
  8. Challenges for the teacher implementing a MI approach in FLT: focusing on language learning, mixed-intelligence classes, assessment procedures, etc. 

 

  1. The complexity of learning:
    1. Factors intrinsic to the learner: psychological, emotional, neurological, etc. Multiple Intelligences.
    2. Factors extrinsic to the learner: learning context.
  2. The application of a "unique method": limitation of teaching and learning potential.
  3. Brief reference to the limitations of some of the main methods of the 19th and 20th century: G-T, DM, ALM, Humanistic Methods.
  4. Eclecticism versus integration.
  5. The Integrative Method: a spin-off of the “weak version” of CLT. A more complex and comprehensive method than CLT.
  6. The integration of elements and activities in the Integrative  Method:
    1. Formal and content aspects.
    2. Oral and written skills.
    3. Context and situation.
    4. L2 culture.
    5. Varieties of the language taught.
    6. Cognitive and affective factors involved in L2 learning.
    7. Learners’ characteristics.
    8. Varied typology of activities. Access to authentic texts and materials.
  1. The search for the “best method” in FLT during the 19th and 20th centuries.
  2. Conceptual, scientific, pedagogical and political reasons for the “death of methods” and the demise of the concept of language teaching method in FLT.
  3. The shortcomings of CLT and TBLT in addressing contextual factors in FLT: the fallacy of a universal, “one-size-fits-all” approach or method.
  4. From method-based pedagogy to Postmethod pedagogy. The emergence of Critical Pedagogy in FLT: language teaching as an ideological construct.
  5. The method concept as a construct of marginality (Kumaravadivelu, 2003).
  6. Three proposals to counteract the disillusionment with methods: Allwright’s “Exploratory Practice” (1991a, 2002, 2005), Bax’s “Context approach to language teaching” (2003) and Kumaravidelu’s “Macrostrategic framework, located within the “Postmethod condition” (1994, 2003, 2006a, 2006b, 2012a, 2012b).
  7. Pedagogical implications of Kumaravidelu’s “Postmethod condition”.
  8. Criticisms of Postmethod pedagogy.
  1. The origins of the CEFR: the work of the Council of Europe after WWII. The first initiatives (1957).
  2. From the Threshold level to the CEFR.
  3. The principle of language as a communication and as a “twinning” tool between individuals and societies.
  4. The concept of plurilingualism in the CEFR.
  5. The new operationalization of levels of language proficiency. The search for a common reference “framework” to facilitate the measurement of comparable language levels. Assessment and evaluation in the CEFR.
  6. The view of language in the CEFR: Language as a communication tool. Context, domains, themes, communicative tasks and purposes, language activities, language processes, texts, strategies.
  7. The approach to language use and learning: An “action-oriented approach” framed within the concept of language as a communication tool.
  8. The competences to be mastered by an L2 learner:
    1. General competences: declarative knowledge (savoir), skills and abilities (know-how), existential competence (savoir-être), ability to learn (savoir-apprendre).
    2. Language communication competences: language competencies, sociolinguistic competencies and pragmatic competencies.
  9. The CEFR: A flexible framework with no-prescriptive teaching methodologies.

Section 6.1. COGNITIVE FACTORS IN LANGUAGE TEACHING

  1. Declarative and procedural knowledge in general and applied to language learning.
  2. The importance of automatization in language learning.
  3. The application of J. R. Anderson’s “model of skill acquisition” or ACT-R (Anderson, 1982, 1983, 1987, 2005; Anderson & Fincham, 1994; Anderson, Fincham & Douglas, 1997; Anderson & Lebiere, 1998; Anderson et al., 2004; Taatgen, 2003; Taatgen & Anderson, 2008) to language learning. From declarative to procedural knowledge and the attainment of automatization.
  4. The two possible paths to language mastery in instructed second language acquisition: DECPRO and PRODEC. Association between Krashen’s dichotomy “learning” vs. “acquisition” and DECPRO-PRODEC and PRO respectively.
  5. PRO as an alternative to DECPRO and PRODEC. Dangers of PRO: fossilization.
  6. Pedagogical implications of the distinction between declarative and procedural knowledge in language teaching methods, especially from the 19th century onwards: Form-focused methods vs. message-focused methods. Advantages and disadvantages of each focus.

Section 6.2. AFFECTIVE FACTORS IN LANGUAGE TEACHING

  1. Main affective variables: motivation, anxiety, self-esteem
  2. Research into the affective domain in language learning, with special emphasis on motivation. Three main phases of L2 motivation research: 
    • a) The social psychological period (1959-1990). Gardner & Lambert (1972), Gardner 1985 and elsewhere.
    • b) The cognitive-situated period (during the 1990s), with work drawing on cognitive theories in educational psychology (Brown, 1990; Crookes & Schmidt, c) 1991; Dörnyei, 1994; Skehan, 1990; Tremblay & Gardner, 1995; Williams & Burden, 1997)
    • c) The process-oriented period (since the late 1990s). Interested in the study of motivational change (Dörnyei, 2000; Dörnyei & Ottó, 1998; Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2010, etc.)
    • a) Schumann’s neurobiological approach (1997, 1998, 1999)
    • b) Self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Vallerand, 1997; Noel, Clément & Pelletier, 1999).
  3. Plus other lines of research in L2 motivation.
  4. The consideration of affective factors in language teaching: how to foster adequate levels of anxiety plus encouragement of motivation and self-esteem.
  5. Application of Sánchez’s (1993) and Brown’s (2002) scales for measuring the motivational potential of activities.

Section 6.3. CULTURE IN LANGUAGE TEACHING

  1. The concept of culture. Culture with a capital “C” –civilisation and refinement of the mind– and a small “c” –way of life or life style.
  2. The relationship between language and culture. The Sapir-Whorf linguistic relativity hypothesis Sapir (1958) and Whorf (1956).
  3. The teaching approach to culture in the main methods from the 19th century onwards.
  4. Culture as the fifth skill in FLT.
  5. Lado (1957). Linguistics Across Cultures. First attempt to explicitly integrate the teaching of culture in the FL classroom: “Elementary meaning units” (EMUs).
  6. Culture goals in FLT: proficiency, cognitive, affective and behavioural.
  7. Contents of a culturally based syllabus in FLT. Cultural units as teaching operative units. The teaching of culture through language.
  8. The position of the CEFR on culture and language teaching:
    1. Plurilingual, pluricultural and intercultural competences
    2. Cultural knowledge vs. intercultural awareness
    3. Distinctive characteristics of a European society
  9. Cultural teaching units:
    1. Lexicon or EMUs (e.g. breakfast, paella, tapas, tea, etc.).
    2. Beyond isolated lexical units:
      1. Elements pertaining to culture with a small “c”.
      2. Elements pertaining to Culture with a big “C”
      3. Cultural scripts (Criado, 2009)
      4. Paralanguage (pitch, rhythm and intonation)
      5. The non-verbal dimension of culture: kinesics, chroxemics and proxemics
  10. The dilemma language vs. culture teaching in the FL classroom: how to adequately balance language and culture objectives.
  11. Pedagogical techniques to teach culture in the FL classroom.

Section 6.4. ACTIVITY SEQUENCING IN LANGUAGE TEACHING

  1. The concept of sequencing in general
  2. The concept of sequencing as applied to FLT:
    1. Distinguishing between content sequencing (the what or language units of teaching) and activity sequencing (the how of teaching)
    2. Distinguishing between sequencing and gradation
  3. The importance of activity sequencing in FLT as rooted in cognitive and motivational issues
  4. Key issues when studying activity sequencing
    1. Pedagogical and cognitive focus
    2. Teaching new language or revising previously acquired language
    3. Other parameters 
  5. Some activity sequencing patterns discussed in the FLT literature. Pedagogical and cognitive analysis:
    1. The classical model of activity sequencing: Presentation-Practice-Production (PPP)
    2. Test-teach-test (TTT)
    3. Brumfit’s (1979) “post-communicative model” and Johnson’s (1982) “deep-end strategy”
    4. Littlewood’s (1981) proposal: Pre-communicative and communicative activities
    5. TBLT (J. Willis, 1996 and elsewhere; D. Willis & J. Willis, 2007)
    6. O-H-E (Lewis, 1993, 1996, 1997)
    7. Communicative Processes-based model of activity sequencing (CPM) (Criado, 2009, 2010, 2012a; Sánchez, 1993, 2001)
    8. Other activity sequencing patterns found in the FLT literature
      1. Nunan’s “psycholinguistic processing approach” based sequence (1985, 1988, 1989, 2004)
      2. Di Pietro’s “scenarios” (1987)
      3. Scrivener’s  Authentic (use)-Restricted (use)-Clarification (ARC) (1994, 1996)
      4. McCarthy & Carter’s (I)llustration, (I)nteraction, (I)nduction (1995)
      5. Harmer’s Engage-Study-Activate (ESA) (1996, 2001)
  6. Prevailing activity sequencing pattern in current FLT textbooks: “The contemporary FLT materials version of the PPP” (Criado, 2010, 2013).