the handbook for language teaching methodology

Maya Pentcheva Todor Shopov Whole Language, Whole Person A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology Viseu, 2003 Passagem Editores ISBN 972-98770-0-9 Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology Contents Foreword Chapter 1: Principles of Teaching 1.1 Cognitive Principles 1.2 Social Principles 20 1.3 Linguistic Principles 25 Chapter 2: Exploring Language Teaching Methods 35 2.1 Period I: Direct Language Teaching 35 2.2 Period II: Audio-lingual Teaching and the Innovative Methods of the 1970s 37 2.3 Period III: Communicative Language Teaching 41 Chapter 3: Paradigm Shift in Education 47 3.1 Changing the Focus of Education 47 3.2 A Teaching Paradigm to Meet Psychosocial Needs 3.3 Factors of Cooperative Learning 53 3.4 Cooperative Language Learning 56 50 Chapter 4: The Language Curriculum 59 4.1 Constructivism 60 4.2 The General versus Specific Course Conjecture 63 4.3 Random Access Instruction in Complex and Ill-structured Domains 65 4.4 Language Curriculum as a Knowledge Strategic Hypertext 66 4.5 Instead of a Conclusion 70 References 71 Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology Foreword This book is written within the framework of the Exchange to Change Project We have been trying the find out what the methodological implications of the awareness resulting from reflective mobility are Is there any “methodological value” added in result of the visiting and welcoming experiences of language teachers and learners in mobility? Our aim is to offer some orientation into the general educational concerns of the Project The task is formidable It is the focus of many different lines of exploration In his poem “Little Gidding”, No of Four Quarters, T S Eliot puts it in this way: We shall not cease from exploration And the end of all our exploring Will be to arrive where we started And know the place for the first time Yet, this is an optimistic book At some moments in history, professional spheres are susceptible to important change We believe that we want and can cross the threshold of “exchange to change” and step into the realm of educational promises fulfilled The title indicates our holistic approach to the analysis and synthesis of the concepts of language, personality, methodology, communication and intercomprehension, etc This approach emphasizes the priority of the whole over its parts We hold that language teaching and learning is a complex knowledge domain, characterized by network of relationships in a social and cultural context In addition, we believe that methodology is an interdisciplinary field, which cannot be understood in isolation Our perspective sees it in terms of its relations to other knowledge domains We shall look into a range of issues, which are not only interesting themselves, but also relevant to the objectives of the Project and, hopefully, to the Reader The nature and extent of the relevance is difficult, if not impossible, to determine a priori However, the book supplements the Project Modules and serves as a concise reference material on the theory of the teaching and learning of modern foreign languages Methodological literature is of course extensive, so we shall be pointing out some of the good books on the topics presented Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology We have just mentioned the term “foreign language”; throughout the book we shall use it interchangeably with the term “second language” Here, we shall consider them synonymous albeit we realize that they can be easily distinguished In the literature, “second language” usually refers to a target language that is being taught in the country where it is the dominant language, whereas “foreign language” usually refers to a target language that is being taught in the country where it is not the dominant language However, we not find this distinction quite relevant for the focus of this book A decade ago, N S Prabhu, the famous Indian methodologist, pointed out that language teaching faced three major problems, “(1) the measurement of language competence involves elicitation (in some form) of specific language behaviour but the relationship between such elicited behaviour and language competence which manifests itself in natural use is unclear, (2) given the view that the development of linguistic competence is a holistic process, there is not enough knowledge available either to identify and assess different intermediate stages of that development or to relate those stages to some table of norms which can be said to represent expectations, and (3) there is, ultimately, no way of attributing with any certainty any specific piece of learning to any specific teaching: language learning can take place independently of teaching intentions and it is impossible to tell what has been learnt because of some teaching, and what in spite of it” (Prabhu 1987, 8) Many things have happened in the field of language teaching methodology since then For example, the Common European Framework of Reference (Council of Europe 1996 and 1998) was published, European Language Council (http://www.fu-berlin.de/elc) was founded, European Language Portfolio (Scharer 1999) was launched and so on Nonetheless, Prabhu‟s claims are still valid We shall focus on a range of questions in the light of modern methodological developments trying to state the scientific facts Our own opinion emerges in the discussion now and then, though We hope our fortuitous academic bias will be understood The book is written in English and our examples come from English but we not intend to promote a lingua Adamica restituta We believe in plurilingualism and pluriculturalism and our inadequacy is only because of our teleological prudence The book is a collaborative effort but the responsibility of the authors is individual Maya Pencheva wrote Chapter and Todor Shopov prepared Chapters 2, and Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology Chapter offers a theoretical orientation into the philosophical foundations of methodology Cognitive and other principles of language teaching and learning are discussed It is claimed that the Picture of the World, which we all keep in our minds, determines the way we speak This relativistic perspective and other ideas have found different applications in teaching They are explored in Chapter It is a brief historical overview of teaching methods The three major periods of the development of methodology in the twentieth century are presented Chapter discusses the more specific theme of the approach level of teaching methods The authors argue that educational paradigm shift has had a pronounced impact on language methodology Particular plans for a language curriculum, which constitutes the relatively concrete design level of teaching methods, are made in Chapter The question of modern curriculum design and development is examined in it The book functions as a whole text We recommend that the reader speed-read the book first Then, the appropriate readings can be selected easily However, the reader can approach it as a compendium, browsing only through the relevant sections We want to acknowledge the encouragement and support extended to us by many people We have had the good fortune to work with Filomena Capucho of Universidade Catolica Portuguesa – Centro Regional das Beiras Polo de Viseu, PT, Project General Coordinator, and our Partners from Hogskolan Kalmar, SE, Centro de Professores y Recursos de Salamanca, ES, Centro de Professores y Recursos de Vitigudino, ES, Institut Universaire de Formation des Maitres d‟Auvergne, FR, Skarup Statsseminarium, DK and Universitat Salzburg, AT We also wish to acknowledge our deep sense of indebtedness to our colleagues at the Faculty of Classical and Modern Philology, Sofia University St Kliment Ohridski, BG Our work would have hardly been possible without the order introduced in the system by Alex Fedotoff We are especially grateful to Peter Hanenberg of Universidade Catolica Portuguesa – Centro Regional das Beiras Polo de Viseu, PT, who had the idea of this book first, for his example and help To all these people, many thanks Sofia, December 1999 Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology Chapter 1: Principles of Teaching In his Principles of Language Learning and Teaching, H Douglas Brown notes that there are “…best of times and worst of times” in the language teaching profession (Brown 1994a) We can safely say that this is the best of times for the foreign language teacher Today, we know much about foreign language acquisition, about child acquisition of language, about cognitive processes, etc It is also very important that we have come to an appreciation of the extreme complexity of this field This gives us cautious optimism to plunge even deeper into the problems Foreign language teachers and educators are often confronted with the question "What method or what system you use in teaching a foreign language?" Most often the answer does not come easily or if one gives a straightforward answer, he risks to be subjected to criticism Teachers always have to make choices These choices are motivated by the fact that they rest on certain principles of language learning and teaching Now that we know much more about human language and its various aspects, we can make the next step and formulate at least some of these principles, which are based on what we know about language itself Often, swept by fashionable theories or a desire to sound “scholarly”, we forget a simple truth – we, as human beings, teach a human language to human beings “Students and teachers of language”, says Osgood, “will discover the principles of their science in the universalities of humanness” (Osgood et al 1957, 301) A concise but true definition of man will probably include three major characteristics: (i) one who can reflect and interpret the world around him; (ii) one who can express feelings; and (iii) one who can use language These characteristics underlie three major principles of language teaching and learning Well known and novice teaching techniques can be subsumed under these three headings Multiplicity of techniques can be brought down to a number of methods and the methods reduced to a number of principles Mastering a great number of teaching techniques will not save you in new situations, “not predicted” by the theory but predictable It will not give you the all-important ability to rationalize what you are doing and why are you doing it To that one must be aware of deeper principles of language acquisition and use, stemming from the foundations of human language as such Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 1.1 Cognitive Principles We shall call the first set of principles “cognitive” because they relate to mental, intellectual and psychological faculties in operating with language It should be made clear, however, that the three types of principles described in this chapter, cognitive, social and linguistic principles, not exist as if in three watertight compartments but rather spill across each other to make up the most remarkable ability of man – the linguistic ability It is no wonder that the achievements of modern cognitive science have found such a warm and fast response in linguistics Some of the postulates of cognitive science today are crucial to our understanding of how language operates and how we acquire this ability, respectively Because one of the most difficult questions in foreign language acquisition and child acquisition of language is, How is it possible that children at an early age and adults, late in their life, can master a system of such immense complexity? Is it only a matter of memory capacity and automatic reproduction or is there something else that helps us acquire a language? Let us begin with some long established postulates of foreign language acquisition and see what cognitive theory has to say about them (1) Automaticity of Acquisition No one can dispute the fact that children acquire a foreign language quickly and successfully This ease is commonly attributed to children‟s ability to acquire language structures automatically and subconsciously, that is, without actually analyzing the forms of language themselves They appear to learn languages without “thinking” about them This has been called by B McLaughlin “automatic processing” (McLaughlin 1990) In order to operate with the incredible complexity of language both children and adult learners not process language “unit by unit” but employ operations in which language structures and forms (words, affixes, endings, word order, grammatical rules, etc.) are peripheral The Principle of Automaticity, as stated above, aims at an “automatic processing of a relatively unlimited number of language forms” Overanalyzing language, thinking too much about its forms tend to impede the acquisition process This leads to the recommendation to teachers to focus on the use of language and its functional aspects But focus on use and functionality presupposes Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology meaningful learning, which is in strong contradiction with automaticity What is more, one major characteristic both of child acquisition and adult learning of foreign languages is the phenomenon called hypercorrection Again hypercorrection cannot exist without meaningful analysis of language structures and their “classification” into “regular patterns” and “exceptions” with respect to a language function (2) Meaningful Learning Meaningful learning “subsumes” new information into existing structures and memory systems The resulting associative links create stronger retention “Children are good meaningful acquirers of language because they associate…words, structures and discourse elements with that which is relevant and important in their daily quest for knowledge and survival” (Brown 1994b, 18) We must pay special attention to this sentence of H D Brown, especially the last words, underlined here It will be relevant in our argument in favor of the cognitive principles of language acquisition One of the recommendations for classroom application of Meaningful Learning is also of relevance to our further argument in this direction It states “Whenever a new topic or concept is introduced, attempt to anchor it in students‟ existing knowledge and background so that it gets associated with something they already know” Some thirty-five years ago, a new science was born Now called “Cognitive Science”, it combines tools from psychology, computer science, linguistics, philosophy, child psychology, and neurobiology to explain the workings of human intelligence Linguistics, in particular, has seen spectacular advances in the years since There are many phenomena of language that we are coming to understand Language is not a cultural artifact that we learn the way we learn to tell the time Instead, it is a distinct characteristic of our brains Language is a complex, specialized skill, which develops in the child For that reason cognitive scientists have described language as a psychological and mental faculty The idea that thought is the same thing as language is an example of what can be called a conventional absurdity Now that cognitive scientists know how to think about thinking, there is less of a temptation to equate it with language and we are in a better position to understand how language works Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology In essence, to reason is to deduce new pieces of knowledge from old ones But “knowledge” is something complex, the product of social and cultural experience from living in a particular “world” In his Philosophy of Language, Wilhelm von Humboldt claims that speaking a language means living in a specific conceptual domain Acquiring a foreign language means entering a new conceptual domain This statement poses a major problem or perhaps the major problem of acquiring a foreign language – are these conceptual domains so different that they are incompatible? Or there are certain mechanisms by which we can make transitions from the one into the other? We shall present arguments in support of the second decision The pivotal question is how we interpret Humboldt‟s conceptual domains We will refer to them by the term Picture of the World, initially used in analyzing mythology and today employed by cognitive science The word “picture”, though usually used metaphorically, expresses truly the essence of the phenomenon – it is a picture, not a mirror reflection, or a snapshot of the world around us Like any other picture, it presupposes a definite point of view or the attitude of its creator It involves interpretation, representations of the world from various angles (the so- called “facet viewing”) This of course implies the possibility to have a number of different pictures of one object What is important here is that our conceptualization of the world is not “an objective reflection of reality”, but a subjective picture, which reflects our views, beliefs, and attitudes “Subjective” in the sense of the collective interpretation or point of view of a society or cultural and linguistic community This picture explicates the relativity of human cognition In semiotics it goes under the name of “passive” cultural memory Cognitive science, however, rejects the qualification “passive” and claims that Pictures of the World are actively and currently structured by common cognitive models In connection with Humboldt‟s statement, it is possible to pass from one picture of the world into another by means of a set of universal cognitive mechanisms This is crucial for explaining foreign language acquisition But what are those mechanisms? And what is the nature of the evidence? Our conceptual system or Picture of the World is not something that we are normally aware of But human language is an important source of evidence for what a picture of the world is like On the basis of linguistic evidence we can say that most of our everyday conceptual system is metaphorical in nature Cognitive science explains the essence of metaphor as understanding Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology and experiencing one thing in terms of another The first thing is called Target Domain (what we want to express) and the second one is called Source Domain (by means of which we express the first) We can use, as an example, the way we conceive of time in our everyday life Let us have the following linguistic expressions: You are wasting my time This gadget will save you hours How you spend your time? That flat tyre will cost me an hour I’m running out of time The central postulate of cognitive science is that metaphorical transfer is not just a matter of language, of mere words Human thought processes are largely metaphorical Metaphor means metaphorical concepts And these are specifically structured If we generalize the examples above, we come up with the metaphor /TIME IS MONEY/ This metaphor entails the treatment of time as a limited resource and a valuable commodity The examples demonstrate one type of metaphorical transfer – structural metaphor On the more linguistic side of the problem, when metaphorical concepts become lexicalized, they help a variety of people understand what the concepts mean In other words, they have a certain didactic role Metaphors in computer terminology, for example, aid users speaking different languages but using English to understand and remember new concepts At the same time they allow users to associate unfamiliar concepts with old ones, thereby helping to palliate technostress “User friendliness” of computer metaphorical terms can be illustrated by the numerous examples found in the vocabulary of user interfaces – e.g desktop, wallpaper, and menu, to mention just a few It appears that conceptual domains are shaped by several themes The domain of the Internet features several conceptual themes Most of these are based on the functions that the Internet is perceived to have: (1) helping people “move” across vast distances; (2) facilitate communication; and (3) send and store data The following metaphorical domains can present these themes: Transportation Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 10 In conclusion, we claim that the implications for language curriculum design are quite straightforward One is that content cannot be predetermined Perhaps learning objectives cannot be pre-specified either The curriculum developer cannot define the boundaries of what may be relevant All he or she can is plan authentic, real-world tasks, which will provide the necessary and sufficient contexts for the learners to realize their objectives and construct their knowledge This can be achieved by providing a collaborative learning environment based on communicative interaction containing sufficient comprehensible language input and output 4.2 The General versus Specific Courses Conjecture In the early seventies, Anthony Howatt stated, “Special courses have fairly specific objectives and are rather simpler to discuss General courses tend to be diffuse in their aims and take their overall shape more from tradition, contemporary fashion and the vague but powerful influences exerted by the social attitudes and economic needs of the community” (1974) In fact, the distinction is embedded in the objectivist tradition of language teaching It is best expressed by William Mackey (1965) in his famous claim that there is no language teaching without “selection, gradation, presentation and repetition” of the content In that period, techniques like frequency, coverage and availability were applied in the process of choosing common everyday language for “communicative syllabi” In addition, the notion of “appropriate language” was used as a criterion of usefulness The organization of the course was based on a priori decisions on the order in which “new teaching points should come” and on “how much to teach” The method of needs identification was developed by a Swiss scholar, Rene Richterich (Richterich & Chancerel 1977) A British linguist, John Munby (1978), elaborated the theory and methodology of language needs analysis and curriculum design Language courses for specific purposes (e.g English for Specific Purposes or “ESP”) were represented by their proponents as an alternative to general courses The English in Focus series of “specialist English materials for students who use English as the medium of instruction for the subject they are studying” was published in England in the seventies (e.g Allen & Widdowson 1994) Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 64 The authors wrote, “The series assumes that students have already completed a basic course in English and that they have some knowledge of their specialist subject This course is therefore intended for students […] who already know how to handle the common English sentence patterns and who need to learn how these sentences are used in scientific writing to convey information…” (op cit.) The course had a great success because the approach adopted was new Peter Strevens outlined the “new orientations in the teaching of English” and of any language for that matter in the mid-seventies Some ten years before, he had published one of the most successful audio-lingual textbooks, English 901 (see Section 1.2.) The times had changed though Strevens argued, “Broadly defined, ESP courses are those in which the aims and the content are determined, principally or wholly, not by criteria of general education (as when „English‟ is a foreign language subject in school) but by functional and practical English language requirements of the learner” (Strevens 1977, 90) This was certainly new a quarter of a century ago but today we find the conjecture rather misleading It seems to us, at this junction, that the methodological opposition of “general purposes” to “specific purposes” in language teaching is inadequate and inappropriate We not think that “the aims and the content are determined” a priori by any criteria They cannot be precompiled or prepackaged We can discern two arguments in the literature to support this strong claim One refers to the fact that language teaching is a complex process characterized by network of relationships in a social and cultural context and the other to the idea that language teaching is an ill-structured knowledge domain We claim that a holistic approach, which emphasizes the priority of the whole over its parts, can solve the problem of curriculum design In that respect, an improvement on the theory of curriculum design has been offered by Rand Spiro and his colleagues at the University of Illinois in their theory of Random Access Instruction (Spiro et al 1992) We shall discuss this theory in the next section Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 65 4.3 Random Access Instruction in Complex and Ill-Structured Knowledge Domains Random Access Instruction is a theory, which accounts for the complexity of the process of language learning and the ill-structuredness of the domain of language knowledge and/or proficiency Eve Sweetser and Gilles Fauconnier (1996) maintain that “The initially overwhelming complexity of linguistic usages is, then, not an independent and autonomous complexity It is a reflection of the complex – and economically interrelated – structure of cognition” Eric Lenneberg sees language proficiency as a process of “(a) extracting relations from (or computing relations in) the physical environment, and (b) of relating these relationships” (Lenneberg 1975, 17) Continuous, not discrete, cognitive and physiological processes produce those relationships Lenneberg argues persuasively that “These deeper continuities [the continuous cognitive and physiological processes] are reflected in the “fuzzy” nature of semantic, syntactic and phonological categories, making sharp, formal distinctions and decisions difficult” (op cit., 17) He concludes that “everything in language is of relational nature and what has to be learnt in language acquisition is how to relate, or how to compute a relationship upon given physical data” (op cit., 32) Constructivists hold that “Characteristics of ill-structuredness found in most knowledge domains (especially when knowledge application is considered) lead to serious obstacles to the attainment of advanced learning goals (such as the mastery of conceptual complexity and the ability to independently use instructed knowledge in new situations that differ from the conditions of initial instruction) These obstacles can be overcome by shifting from a constructive orientation that emphasizes the retrieval from memory of intact preexisting knowledge to an alternative constructivist stance which stresses the flexible reassembling of preexisting knowledge to adaptively fit the needs of a new situation Instruction based on this new constructivist orientation can promote the development of cognitive flexibility using theory-based hypertext systems that themselves possess characteristics of flexibility that mirror those desired for the learner” (Spiro et al 1992, 59) Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 66 Complex and ill-structured domains have two properties: “(a) each case or example of knowledge application typically involves the simultaneous interactive involvement of multiple, wide-application conceptual structures (multiple schemas, perspectives, organizational principles and so on), each of which is individually complex (i.e the domain involves concept- and case-complexity); and (b) the pattern of conceptual incidence and interaction varies substantially across cases nominally of the same type (i.e the domain involves across-case irregularity)” (Spiro et al 1992, 60) For example, basic grammar is well structured, while the process of applying grammar rules in real-world communication is ill structured Random Access Instruction can be represented by the metaphor of a rhizome, spreading in all directions It was first used by Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari in the book On the Line as a method of organizing information (quoted in Burbules 1997) Seppo Tella uses it to describe open learning environments based on a communal educational value system He maintains that “it [rhizome] transmits the idea of something growing, something developing, yet it gives ample scope for individual action and decision-making” and suggests that “a rhizome is a rhizome is a rhizome…” (Tella et al 1998, 132) Nicholas Burbules (1997, 3) holds that “Each particular step or link within a rhizomatic whole can be conceived as a line between two points, but the overall pattern is not linear, because there is no beginning and end, no center and periphery, to be traced” Random Access Instruction is a rhizomatic system It can be applied in the design of nonlinear learning environments, which we shall present in the next section 4.4 Language Curriculum as a Knowledge Strategic Hypertext What is “knowledge” and what does “knowledge strategy” mean? Tella (Tella et al 1998, 26) maintains that knowledge is to be “understood as mental information structures modified by the individual on the basis of thinking and earlier knowledge” Clearly, knowledge is not simply data and information Tella defines knowledge strategy as the “long-term methodical reflection […], which finds concrete expression as operational procedures or tactical measures, slogans, goals, forms of operation, working methods Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 67 arising from discussion about values, and evaluation measures connected with them” He emphasizes the view that “instead of simply reforming their curriculum, we think schools and municipalities should progress towards developing their knowledge strategic thinking” (Tella et al 1998, 25) We define the Knowledge Strategic Hypertext (KSH) as a nonlinear and non-sequential language curriculum model based on constructivist epistemology and the idea of knowledge strategy (Figure 3) The term model is employed here somewhat loosely It is a way to make clear how our hypothesis hangs together to make a coherent explanation As far as the components of the KSH are concerned, their number is unlimited That reflects the complexity and ill-structuredness of the language proficiency domain In such a nonlinear and non-sequential learning environment, each element is related to all other elements The KSH is a network model, which allows the user to move from node to node following the links between them Nodes store linguistic, etc., information and links represent semantic associations between the nodes Learning is seen as a process that modifies the information structures in specified ways under specified conditions The semantic nature of the links in the KSH forms the basis of the model This is supported by scientific research, which has shown that the mind holds memories semantically, according to meaning (Fauconnier & Sweetser) The model accommodates two conditions for learning, which are necessary and sufficient The first is the automatic processing passively invoked by the incoming data And the second is the active control of the incoming data Thus, the KSH can predict what parts of the input would be accepted and what would be tuned out The constructive process leads the user “beyond the information given” (Perkins 1992) by reconstructing information itself In Figure 3, we present our KSH language curriculum model including communicative language competence, language activities, domains, etc It has been developed under the LAC 2000 Project (Shopov 1999) The model contains components derived from the definition of language behaviour in Modern Languages: Learning, Teaching, and Assessment: A Common European Framework of Reference (CEF) It is publicly accessible on the web-site http://culture.coe.fr/lang The CEF provides: Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 68 “(a) A descriptive scheme, presenting and exemplifying the parameters and categories needed to describe, first, what a language user has to in order to communicate in its situational context, then the role of the texts, which carry the message from producer to receiver, then the underlying competences, which enable a language user to perform acts of communication, and finally the strategies, which enable the language user to bring those competences to bear in action; (b) A survey of the approaches to language learning and teaching, providing options for users to consider in relation to their existing practice; (c) A set of scales for describing proficiency in language use, both globally and in relation to the categories of the descriptive scheme at a series of levels; (d) A discussion of the issues raised for curricular design in different educational contexts, with particular reference to the development of plurilingualism in the learner” (Trim 1999, 9) In the CEF, the general competences of the individual are defined by “the knowledge, skills and existential competence (savoir-etre) he or she possesses, and the ability to learn” Three components constitute communicative language competence They are the linguistic component, the socio-linguistic component and the pragmatic component Language activities are the actual behaviors in which language is used They are reception, production, interaction or mediation (in particular interpreting or translating) in oral or written form, or both The domains, in which activities are contextualized, are the public domain, the personal domain, the educational domain and the occupational domain Tasks, strategies and texts complete this model of language use and learning All these constructs are defined in Chapter of the CEF Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 69 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Starting level of L2 proficiency ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Personal domain Pragmati c compone nt Receptio n Linguisti c compone nt Educatio nal domain Socioling uistic compone nt Productio n Empty because model is open Public domain Interactio n Occupati onal domain Mediatio n ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Starting level of L2 proficiency ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Figure 3: The KSH curriculum model, including the nodes and links of communicative language competence, language activities, domains, etc Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 70 This is obviously a comprehensive and exhaustive model However, with its 18 elements in categories, it is a complex one Stochastic theory estimates the possible combinations of the elements at 163 (18 times 17, divided by time 2) These 163 combinations produce an infinite number of concrete instances of language use Therefore, in our opinion, only a KSH approach to curriculum design can guarantee quality in second language development The model proposed is based on the idea of whole language development The KSH includes language styles and registers incorporating them into “a form of metalinguistic, interlinguistic or so to speak „hyperlinguistic‟ awareness” (CEF, 97) This leads to a better perception of what is general and what is specific concerning the linguistic organization of the target language So each component of the model may become the starting point for the use of the KSH 4.5 Instead of a Conclusion “Whatever the style, there are ample opportunities to orient instruction toward higher levels of understanding, introduce and exercise languages of thinking, cultivate intellectual passions, seek out integrative mental images, foster learning to learn and teach for transfer The smart school makes the most of these opportunities It informs and energizes teaching by giving teachers time and support to learn about the opportunities and by arranging curriculum, assessment and scheduling to encourage tapping them.” (Perkins 1992, 130) Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 71 References Abbs, Brian, Vivian Cook and Mary Underwood, 1968, Realistic English, London: Oxford University Press Alatis, James E., Howard B Altman and Penelope M Alatis, 1981, The Second Language Classroom: Directions for the 1980s, New York: Oxford University Press Allen, J P B and S Pit Corder (Eds.), 1973 - 1977, The Edinburgh Course in Applied Linguistics, Volume – 4, Oxford: Oxford University Press Allen, J P B and H G Widdowson (Eds.), 1973 - 1977, English in Focus, Oxford: Oxford University Press Asher, James, 1977 (Second Edition 1982), Learning Another Language through Actions: The Complete Teacher‟s Guidebook California: Sky Oak Productions Bednar, Anne, D Cunningham, T M Duffy and J D Perry, 1992, Theory into Practice: How Do We Link? In Duffy and Jonassen 1992 Blair, R W (Ed.), 1982, Innovative Approaches to Language Teaching, Massachusetts: Newbury House Bligh, D., 1972, What‟s the Use of Lectures Middlesex: Penguin Books Ltd Bloomfield, Leonard, 1933, Language, New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston Bloomfield, Leonard, 1942, Outline Guide for the Practical Study of Foreign Languages, Baltimore: Linguistic Society of America Brown, Roger, 1974, A First Language: The Early Stages, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Hadvard University Press Brown, H Douglas, 1994a, Principles of Language Learning and Teaching, Third Edition, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents Brown, H Douglas, 1994b, Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents Burbules, Nicholas, 1997, Aporia: Webs, Passages, Getting Lost, and Learning to Go On, Web-site http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/PES/97_docs/burbules.html Burton, J, D Moore and S Magliaro, 1996, Behaviorism and Instructional Technology, In D H Jonassen 1996 Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 72 Cazden, C B and R Brown, 1975, The Early Development of the Mother Tongue, In Lenneberg and Lenneberg 1975 Chamot, Anna Uhl and J Michael O‟Malley, 1994, The CALLA Handbook Implementing the Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company Chomsky, N., 1966, Topics in the Theory of Generative Grammar, The Hague: Mouton Chomsky, N., 1968, Langauge and Mind, New York: Harcourt, Brace and World Clark, John L., 1987, Curriculum Renewal in School Foreign Language Learning, Oxford: Oxford University Press Cook, Vivian, 1989, University of Essex, Personal Communication Corder, S Pit, 1982, Introducing Applied Linguistics, Harmondsworth: Penguin Books Cummins, Jim, 1994, Knowledge, Power and Identity in Teaching English as a Second Language, In Genesee 1994 Curran, Charles, 1976, Councelling-Learning in Second Languages, Apple River, Illinois: Apple River Press Dewey, John, 1938, Experience and Education, New York: Macmillan Duffy, Thomas M and David H Jonassen (Eds.), 1992, Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction: A Conversation, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers Dulay, Heidi and Marina Burt, 1974, Natural Sequences in Child Second Language Acquisition, Language Learning 24, 37-53 Eckman, F R., L Bell and D Nelson, 1988, On the Generalization of Relative Clause Instruction in the Acquisition of English as a Second Language, Applied Linguistics, Vol 9, No 1, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1-20 Sweetser, Eve and Gilles Fauconnier (Eds.), 1996, Spaces, Worlds, and Grammar, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press Fries, C., 1945, Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Language, Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press Gardner, Howard, 1991, The Unschooled Mind, New York: Basic Books Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 73 Gattegno, Caleb, 1972, Teaching Foreign Languages in Schools: The Silent Way Second Edition, New York: Educational Solutions Genesee, Fred (Ed.), 1994, Educating Second Language Children, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Goodlad, John I and Pamela Keating (Eds.), 1990, Access to Knowledge, New York: The College Board Goodman, K., L Bird and Y Goodman, 1991, The Whole Language Catalog, Santa Rosa, California: American School Publishers High, Julie, 1993, Second Language Learning through Cooperative Learning, California: Kagan Cooperative Learning Howatt, Anthony, 1984, A History of English Language Teaching, Oxford: Oxford University Press Hymes, D., 1971, On Communicative Competence, In Pride and Holmes 1972 Johnson, D W and R Johnson, 1989, Cooperation and Competition Theory and Research, Minnesota: Interaction Book Co Johnson, D W., R Johnson and K Smith, 1991, Active Learning, Minnesota: Interaction Book Co Jonassen, D H (Ed.), 1996, Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology, New York: Simon and Schuster Macmillan Kagan, Spencer, 1992, Cooperative Learning, California: Kagan Cooperative Learning Kansanen, Pertti, 1995, The Deutsche Didaktik and the American Research on Teaching, In Kansanen (Ed.) 1995 Kansanen, Pertti, (Ed.), 1995, Discussions on Some Educational Issues VI, Research Report 145, Helsinki: University of Helsinki Karp, D and W Yoels, 1987, The College Classroom, Sociology and Social Research, 60 Kelly, Louis, 1969, 25 Centuries of Language Teaching, Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House Krashen, Stephen, 1997, Foreign Language Education The Easy Way, California: Language Education Associates Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 74 Krashen, S., V Sferlazza, L Feldman and A Fathman, 1976, Adult Performance on the SLOPE Test, Language Learning, 26, 1, 145 – 151 Krashen, Stephen and Tracy Terrell, 1983, The Natural Approach, New Jersey: Alemany Press Regents/Prentice Hall Lakoff, George, 1987, Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What They Reveal about the Mind, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press Larsen-Freeman, Dianne, 1986, Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching, Oxford: Oxford University Press Larsen-Freeman, D and M H Long, 1991, An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research, London: Longman Lenneberg, E., 1975, The Concept of Language Differentiation, In Lenneberg and Lenneberg 1975 Lenneberg, Eric H and Elizabeth Lenneberg (Eds.), 1975, Foundations of Language Development: A Multidisciplinary Approach, Volume 1, Paris: The UNESCO Press Lozanov, Georgi, 1978, Suggestology and Outlines of Suggestopedy, New York: Gordon and Breach Mackey, William F., 1965, Language Teaching Analysis, London: Longman McLaughlin, B., 1990, 'Conscious' versus 'Unconscious' Learning, TESOL Quarterly, 24 McLeod, A., 1986, Critical Literacy: Taking Control of Our Own Lives, Language Arts, 63, 37-50 Mikes, G., 1970, How To Be an Alien, Harmondsworth: Penguin Books Mowrer, Don, 1996, Arizona State University, Tempe, Personal Communication Munby, John, 1978, Communicative Syllabus Design, London: Cambridge University Press Naisbitt, John, 1982, Megatrends, New York: Warner Books Osgood, C E., G J Suci and P H Tannenbaum, 1957, The Measurement of Meaning, Urbana: University of Illinois Press Perkins, David, 1992, Smart Schools, New York: The Free Press Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 75 Perkins, K and D Larsen-Freeman, 1975, The Effect of Formal Language Instruction on the Order of Morphee Acquisition, Language Learning, 25 Pica, T., 1983, The Role of Language Context in Second Language Acquisition, Review Article, Interlanguage Studies Bulletin, Prabhu, N S., 1987, Second Language Pedagogy, Oxford: Oxford University Pres Pride, J and J Holmes (Eds.), 1972, Sociolinguistics Selected Readings, Middlesex: Penguin Books Ltd Pulliam, John D., 1987, History of Education in America, Fourth Edition, Columbus, Ohio: Merrill, A Bell & Howell Information Company Reich, Peter A., 1986, Language Development, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Richard-Amato, Patricia A., 1988, Making It Happen, New York: Longman Richards, Jack C and Theodore S Rogers, 1986, Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Richterich, R and J.L Chancerel, 1977, Identifying the Needs of Adults Learning a Foreign Language, Strasbourg: CCC/Council of Europe Roberts, John, 1973, The LAD Hypothesis and L2 Acquisition, Audio-Visual Language Journal, Vol XI, Selinker, L., 1969, Language Transfer, General Linguistics, Vol IX, 67 - 92 Sharer, Rolf (Responsabile di redazione per il tema), 1999, European Language Portfolio, Babylonia, 1, Council of Europe Shopov, T and A Fedotoff, 2000, An Analysis of Student Course Evaluation Reports, Sofia: Koreana Shopov, T., 1999, The LAC 2000 Project, Tempus Phare JEP 13533-98, Torino: European Training Foundation Skinner, B F., 1957, Verbal Behavior, New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts Spiro, R J., P J Feltovich, M J Jacobson and R L Coulson, 1992, Cognitive Flexibility, Constructivism and Hypertext; Random Access Instruction for Advanced Knowledge Acquisition in Ill-Structured Domains, In Duffy and Jonassen 1992 Stern, H H., 1983, Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching, Oxford: Oxford University Press Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 76 Strevens, Peter, 1964, English 901, New York: The Macmillan Company Strevens, Peter, 1977, New Orientations in the Teaching of English, Oxford: Oxford University Press Tella, Seppo (Ed.), 1998, Aspects of Media Education Strategic Imperatives in the Information Age, Media Education Publication 8, Helsinki: University of Helsinki Tella, Seppo and Marja Mononen-Aaltonen, 1998, Developing Dialogic Communication Culture in Media Education: Integrating Dialogism and Technology, ME Publications 7, Helsinki: University of Helsinki Thomas, J and W Stock, 1988, The Concept of Happiness, International Journal of Aging and Human Development 27 Toffler, Alvin, 1985, The Adaptive Corporation, New York: McGraw-Hill Trim, John L M., 1980, In Van Ek 1980 Trim, John L M., 1999, Common tools to promote linguistic and cultural diversity, respect, tolerance and understanding in Europe, Babylonia, 1, Council of Europe Van Ek, J., 1975, The Threshold Level in a European Unit/Credit System for Modern Language Teaching by Adults, Strasbourg: Council of Europe Van Ek, J and L G Alexander, 1980, Threshold Level English, Oxford: The Pergamon Press Webster‟s New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, 1988, New York: Simon and Schuster, Inc West, Michael, 1953, The Teaching of English: A Guide to the New Method Series London: Longman White Paper on Education and Training, 1996, European Commission, Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities Widdowson, Henry G., 1979, Explorations in Applied Linguistics, Oxford: Oxford University Press Widdowson Henry G and Christopher J Brumfit, 1981, Issues in Second Language Syllabus Design, In Alatis, Altman and Alatis 1981 Wittgenstein, L., 1953, Philosophical Investigations, New York: Macmillan Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 77 Yule, George, 1985, The Study of Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 78 ... is the child’s father? but not *Who is the child’s daddy? because the ideal implies caring for the family and being married to the child‟s mother In the „mother‟ concept the biological and the. .. Mother is the one who gives birth to a child (ii)Genetic Mother is the one who carries the embryo (iii)Breeding Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology 14 Mother... some of the good books on the topics presented Whole Language, Whole Person: A Handbook of Language Teaching Methodology We have just mentioned the term “foreign language ; throughout the book