Methods Synergistics

CURRENT TRENDS IN TEACHING

ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE

Author Unit Activities

Silent Way Natural Approach

Media Literacy

Multi-intelligencia

Total Physical

Response

Frerian Approach

Task Based Instruction

The Methodology of the new Millennium

• How is it done?

• Who are the target students?

• What are the roles of the teacher?

• What are the roles of the students?

• Advantages of this method

• Disadvantages of this method

• Changes in the Name

• What is MS?

• Who are the proponents of MS?

• Why was such method made?

• Why is it a need to use such method?

• What are the underlying principles of MS?

Methods Synergistics

1

1

4

Synergy

Changes in the Name Harold Palmer, 1922

The Father of Eclectic Way

Complete Method

The ‘Complete Method’ is not a compromise between `two

antagonistic schools;

It boldly incorporates what is valuable in any system or

method of teaching and refuses to recognise any conflict,

except the conflict between the good and the inherently

bad.

The ‘Complete method’ embodies every type of teaching

except bad teaching, and every process of learning except

defective learning.

Changes in the Name • The Complex Methods of the Arts of Eclectic, Including

Deliberation (Eisner, 1984; Schwab, 1969; 1971)

• New Eclecticism (Boswell, 1972)

• Planned eclecticism (Dorn, 1978)

• Effective or Successful Eclecticism (i.e., based on

specific outcomes) (Olagoke, 1982),

• Enlightened Eclecticism

(H. D. Brown, 1994; Hammerly, 1985),

• Technical Eclecticism (Lazarus & Beutler, 1993)

• Integrative Eclecticism (Gilliland, James & Bowman,

1994)

Changes in the Name • Systematic Eclecticism (Gilliland, James & Bowman,

1994)

• Informed or Well-informed Eclecticism (J. D. Brown,

1995; Hubbard, Jones, Thornton, & Wheeler, 1983;

Yonglin, 1995)

• Principled Eclecticism (Larsen-Freeman 2000)

• Mellow (2000; 2002) has used the term “Principled

Eclecticism” or “Unconstrained Pluralism” to describe

the “desirable, coherent, and pluralistic” approach

• Methods Synergistics or Disciplined Eclecticism

(Theodore “Ted” Rodgers, 2001)

Who are the proponents of Methods Synergistics?

1. Harold Palmer, The Father of

Eclectic Way, 1922

2. Schwab, 1969; 1971

3. Boswell, 1972

4. Dorn, 1978

5. Olagoke, 1982

6. Hubbard, Jones, Thornton, &

Wheeler, 1983

7. Eisner, 1984

8. Hammerly, 1985

9. Lazarus & Beutler, 1993

10. 7. H. D. Brown, 1994

11. Gilliland, James & Bowman,

1994

12. J. D. Brown, 1995

13. Yonglin, 1995

14. Larsen-Freeman, 2000

15. Mellow, 2000, 2002

16. Theodore “Ted” Rodgers,

2001

What is

Method Synergistics?

How is it defined?

• Crossbreeding elements from

various methods into a common

program of instruction seems an

appropriate way to find those

practices which best support

effective learning. (Rodgers)

How is it defined?

• Methods and approaches have

usually been proposed as

idiosyncratic and unique, yet it

appears reasonable to combine

practices from different approaches

where the philosophical foundations

are similar. (Rodgers)

How is it defined?

• Larsen-Freeman (2000) and

Mellow (2000) both have used

the term principled eclecticism

to describe a desirable,

coherent, pluralistic approach to

language teaching.

How is it defined?

• Eclecticism involves the use of a

variety of language learning

activities, each of which may have

very different characteristics and

may be motivated by different

underlying assumptions.

So, ‘disciplined eclecticism’, then, is the approach of

begging, borrowing and stealing ideas from as many

sources as possible – other educational theorists,

sure, but also artists and scientists and novelists and

engineers – and combining them into makeshift but

workable new tools to inquire into educational

situations in ways that are well adapted to both the

features of the situation and our educational

purposes.

The FAS of MS

Methods Synergistics

Flexibility

Sensitivity

Adaptability

Why was

such method

made?

• Mixed – ability classes

• Every learner has his own attitude towards the foreign

language

• Every learner needs a certain

type of motivation

• Every learner has his own

way of learning, forgetting,

unlearning…

• There has not been one best method any time [that

what is best depends on whom the method is for, in

what circumstances, for what purpose]

• To adopt any single method is to settle for much less

than one can get by adopting all or several of them.

• Incorporates what is valuable in any system or

method of teaching and refuses to recognize bad

teaching or defective learning.

• There are strengths as well as weaknesses of single

theory based methods.

• Reliance upon a single theory of teaching has been

criticized because the use of a limited number of

techniques can become mechanic.

What are the underlying principles of MS?

Eclectic Blend

• Brown (1994) states the TESOL profession will

finally become mature when we realize and

admit the complexity of language learners

requires an “eclectic blend of tasks each

tailored for a particular group of learners”

Enlightened Eclectic

• Brown (1994) insists that an “enlightened

eclectic” teacher should take an approach that

includes most [if not all] of the principles. That

is, teachers ought to take all the principles in

the respects of cognition, affection and

linguistics in to consideration at the same time.

Students with Learning Styles

• Rao (2001) suggests, from a broad perspective, perceiving

the Chinese learners or even East Asian learners as a

whole, that teaching and learning styles be matched to

reduce teacher-student style conflicts, especially in foreign

language instruction. She advises that an effective way is

for teachers to provide a variety of activities to meet the

needs of different learning styles, so that all students will

have at least some activities that appeal to them based on

their learning styles, and they are more likely to be

successful in these activities.

Principled eclecticism enlightens teachers to

adapt themselves to the dynamics of their

classes on the basis of their collective

knowledge of language learning and teaching,

rather than to adopt a specific method or

approach at hand.

Principled eclecticism can hardly offer

specific directions for teachers to

follow, so they have to find out for

themselves by practical trials.

Trial and Re-trial.

Language learning as a combined

process of structural and

communicative activities.

How is it done?

• Only teachers with enough theory

and practice can become eclectic

• No training [or

a teacher who is given teaching

recipes]

A teacher with no theoretical

thinking about the advantages and

drawbacks of any approach so they

follow their books slavishly.

• The use of eclecticism does not

mean to mix up different

approaches randomly.

• There must have some

philosophical backgrounds and

some systematic relation among

different activities. Usually it is

recommended to mix structural

approaches with communicative

use of language.

Two-Dimensional Model – J. Dean Mellow

Form

• Some activities largely focus on language as a

structural system composed of forms such as

phonemes (sounds), intonation patterns,

morphemes (including inflectional suffixes),

words, clauses, sentences, paragraphs, and

turns (within a conversation).

Function Other activities largely focus on language as a system

for expressing meanings, including past time,

plurality, definiteness, reference (e.g., to entities

such as books and teachers, and to actions such as

speaking and eating), requests, commands,

apologies, questions, politeness, respect,

argumentation, and narration, among many others.

Construction

• Some activities primarily assume that language learning is

a process of active construction by the learner.

• In other words, language learning is thought to result from

the cognitive processing involved in attending to and

comprehending extensive amounts of input (both written

and spoken) and in attending to and producing extensive

amounts of output (both in writing and speech), in the form

of practice, drills, exercises, and other guided, negotiated,

or corrected activities.

• These exercises may be either deductive or inductive, and

may involve the metalinguistic discussion of pre-selected

language forms, elements, and patterns.

• In particular, the construction view assumes that new

elements can be added to a learner's internal language

system as a result of extensive attention and processing:

Input and output practice will result, over time, in the

automatization or internalization of sounds, words, and

form-meaning patterns.

• The construction assumption, with the emphasis on

attention, practice, and automatization, is informed by

theoretical positions such as those discussed in N. Ellis

(1999), McLaughlin (1990), and Schmidt (1990).

• The term construction is used to evoke the idea of a house

being constructed through a variety of deliberate building

processes.

Growth

• The growth assumption maintains that the natural

processing of meaningful language facilitates acquisition:

“Language is thought to emerge best in response to the

normal language use that occurs in contexts in which

interlocutors are exchanging meaning.”

• Within these activities, essential aspects of language

learning are thought to result from innate cognitive abilities

that only rely upon a subset of the input that a learner

receives.

• First, language is hypothesized to emerge in a learner according to the

learner's own internal syllabus, largely as a result of innate, biological,

language-specific predispositions. Following the influential work of Noam

Chomsky, in the 1960s and 1970s these innate abilities were often

referred to as the Language Acquisition Device (or LAD). Since about

1980, Chomsky and his colleagues have used the term Universal

Grammar (or UG) to refer to the hypothesized innate abilities. Although

originally proposed to account for first language acquisition, many

researchers have explored or argued for the role of these innate abilities

in SLA (e.g., Krashen, 1982, 1985; Pienemann & Johnston, 1987; cf.

Larsen-Freeman & Long, 1991).

Hypotheses

• Second, language development is hypothesized to

result only partially from the learner's general

cognitive operations. For example, it is claimed that

syntactic patterns are not learned with processes

such as generalization, deduction, and

automatization. Consequently, deliberate, deductive

practice and exercises are thought to contribute only

minimally to development.

Hypotheses

• In sum, the growth assumption de-emphasizes practice and

automatization. Instead, it emphasizes innate abilities and

learning as a consequence of exchanging meanings in

communicative contexts. The growth assumption is

informed by theoretical positions such as those discussed

in Chomsky (1986), Goodman et al. (1987), Krashen (1982,

1985), and Prabhu (1990).

• The term growth is used to evoke the idea of a plant

growing as a result of natural processes.

• Third, language development is hypothesized to rely

only partially on the linguistic environment (e.g., the

environment does not provide sufficient information

for a learner to construct a knowledge of language)

or responds only to certain types of linguistic

environments (e.g., deductive instruction and

correction of forms do not contribute to

development).

Hypotheses

WHAT ARE THE

ROLES OF

THE TEACHER?

• The teacher decides what

methodology or approach

to use depending on the

aims of the lesson and the

learners in the group.

• We consider teacher as a director

[or facilitator]: who facilitates the

learner,

• as a guide: who guides the

students,

• as a slightly higher rank official:

who uses his authority to conduct

the class and make the process of

teaching and learning systematic.

Who are the target students?

WHAT ARE THE ROLES OF THE STUDENTS?

• Learner is seen by us as the center

of teaching learning activities.

•His participation is very important.

• So teacher will always try to

involve the learners.

• As well as the learner's role in class

should be cooperative and they will be

allowed to communicate, self correct

each other and ask questions about the

substance provided for teaching

learning activities.

Criticisms: Disadvantages

of this

method

Stern (1983) doubted about eclecticism

for “there is no agreement as to what

the different methods precisely stand

for, nor how they could be satisfactorily

combined” ; and for it does not “provide

any principles by which to include or

exclude features which form part of

existing theories or practices” (1992)

Cannot Be Combined

Marton (1988) argued that “practical

eclecticism does not meet the criterion

of efficiency, while theoretical

eclecticism is suspicious on logical and

theoretical grounds”

Inefficient

A Chinese opponent (Dai, 2002) argues

that the fault of eclecticism in language

teaching lies in that it attempts to make

a kind of all-purpose language teaching

out of the existing methods and

approaches and to persuade that

eclecticism is the only right idea in

foreign language teaching

methodology.

The only method?

Widdowson (1990) argues:

“It is quite common to hear teachers say that they

do not subscribe to any particular approach or

method in their teaching but are ‘eclectic’. They

thereby avoid commitment to any current fad

that comes up on the whirligig of fashion. This

might be regarded as prudent common sense.

But if by eclecticism is meant the random and

expedient use of whatever technique comes

most readily to hand, then it has no merit

whatever. It is indeed professionally

irresponsible if it is claimed as a pedagogic

principle.”

Expedience

Johnson (1998, 1999) noted that

“eclecticism’s strength is recognition of

diversity, its weakness a tendency to

vagueness and lack of principle”.

Vagueness

…has often been criticized because it

may be arbitrary, atheoretical,

incoherent, naïve, uncritical,

unsystematic, and lacking in

philosophical direction (e.g., Glascott &

Crews, 1998; Lazarus & Beutler, 1993;

Schwab, 1971). The NOTs

In a relevant critique of communicative

language teaching, Allen (1983) has

argued that “in the absence of a well-

defined theory, there is a danger that

the development of communicative

language teaching materials will be

guided not so much by principle but by

expedience, rule-of-thumb, and the

uncoordinated efforts of individual

writers."

Danger

Advantages of

this method

It has the potential of keeping

the language teacher open

to alternatives. In this

way, it can even be seen

as an antidote to becoming

complacent about one’s

language teaching

practices. Alternatives

Some to Ponder on

• The complex circumstances of teaching and learning languages - with different kinds of pupils, teachers, aims and objectives, approaches, methods and materials,

classroom techniques, and standards of achievement - make it inconceivable that any single method could achieve optimum

success in all circumstances.

• Peter Strevens, 1977.

• We need to offer a variety in teaching which will give equal opportunities to people with

different styles.

• Alan Maley (1983)

•Rather than fish in one linguistic stream, we should cast our pedagogical net in all

waters that might bring us in a profitable catch.

•Girard, 1972

FIN