Secondly, direct method (DM) is an outcome of a response against grammar-translation method. It is based on the principle that a TL should be learned more like the L1. Hence, DM uses a slow build-up of skills paired with a lot of vocabulary repetition in context to help students learn to communicate from the beginning without teaching the underlying grammar rules explicitly. In particular, DM employs only the TL as the language of instruction. The following is an exemplar of lesson using DM approach.
In DM, students are given opportunity to practise saying a phrase or structure in a highly controlled environment. At this point, the teacher presents the tenses orally without any explicit explanation of grammatical rules and students internalise its usage as they go, partially through imitation and partially by trial and error. Most students discover that the present continuous tense is the combination usage of “be” and “verb + ing” through direct and spontaneous use of TL. Also, repetitive production of correct sentences indirectly helps building up the students' confidence and form a habit. Through this method, fluency of speech and good pronunciation are properly developed.
Next, communicative language teaching (CLT) is a language teaching approach that emphasises on communication or interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of learning a language (Richards & Rodgers 2001). In particular, CLT promotes the development of real-life language skills by engaging students in contextualised, meaningful, and communicative-oriented learning tasks. Therefore, it requires the active involvement of the student in the production of the TL. In addition, CLT is an umbrella term for some other communicative teaching methods, such as the presentation, practice and production method (PPP) and task-based language teaching (TBLT). The following is an example of a CLT lesson using PPP method which focuses on the learning of English prepositions.
In contrast, TBLT advocates the use of specially designed instructional tasks as the basis of learning. Furthermore, students need to apply communicative and problem solving strategies in order to accomplish the task. For instance,
Based on the two classroom activities above, CLT is appeared to imply new roles for the teachers and students. Students had to participate in classroom activities that were based on a cooperative rather than individualistic approach to learning. Due to the presence of information gaps, students have to become comfortable with listening to their peers in group work or pair work tasks, rather than relying on the teacher for a model. Also, more authentic communication occurs when students go beyond practice of language forms for their own sake and use their linguistic and communicative resources in order to express their real-life experience and to obtain information.
In my opinion, I suppose that CLT offers a broader concept than that of grammatical competence which the two methods did not comprise. One of the most obvious advantages of CLT is it helps to foster students’ communicative competence through social interaction, either between teacher and students or amongst students and their peers. Communicative competence refers to the ability to use language appropriately for different communicative purposes such as making requests, giving advice, and so forth. In fact, to be communicatively competent is significantly important nowadays as accuracy and fluency in English are always a prerequisite for success and advancement in many fields of employment (Richards 2006). Therefore, instead of making use of activities that demanded accurate repetition and memorisation of grammatical patterns which grammar translation and direct method suggest, CLT introduces activities that require students to negotiate meaning and to interact meaningfully as well as purposefully with each other. Moreover, students would learn to make some changes in their language when they interact in order to avoid communicative breakdown. In this way, the interaction functions like a catalyst that promotes language acquisition. As a result of the CLT approach, students are technically well-prepared to become excellent speakers who possess good language fluency and accuracy. They manage to handle various kinds of dialogues and conditions tactfully.
Next, CLT classroom is able to build up a more entertaining and positive atmosphere for language learning over the other two methods because CLT involves a lot of pair work and group discussions. These discussions increase students’ talk time (STT) and allow them to use a greater variety of English to express what they really want to communicate. On the contrary, for the grammar-translation method, there has virtually no class time allocated to allow students to produce their own sentences. Therefore, students might get bored easily due to the tedious learning environment. Moreover, being individually instructed by the teacher to stand up and answer a question in front of their peers in the grammar-translation classroom can be a frightening experience. Also, the atmosphere might get worst if students do not know the answer as anxiety can occur and usually dead silence is the result. In CLT, on the other hand, students work in a small group or as part of a pair. There is a sense of security because they are working with their classmates to come up with an answer or accomplish the task. There is no pressure on one solitary student given that a group or pair shares responsibility for their work. Also, students are allowed the freedom to come up with answers that reflect their own thinking. This kind of positive atmosphere can minimise the fear of making errors. In turn, students are encouraged to take risks and try out their own sentence structures.
Unlike grammar-translation method and direct method, an instructional practice promoted by CLT is the extensive incorporation of authentic materials in the syllabus. Some of the examples of authentic materials are maps, brochures, magazine articles, songs, and other teaching resources that were not particularly prepared for pedagogical purposes (Richards & Rodgers 2001). Since the language classroom is intended as a preparation for survival in the real world and since real communication is an essential characteristic of CLT, the use of authentic materials can be really helpful in providing a link between the classroom and students’ needs in the real world. This is because most of the materials contain authentic language and reflect real-world language use. Therefore, students’ interest could be aroused by the link because they can apply and practise the linguistics knowledge that they learn in the classroom into real-life situations.
In conclusion, CLT is definitely a functional teaching method as it borrows teaching practices from a wide range of methods such as grammar-translation and direct method, which have also been found workable. However, effective teaching is not about which method is used. It is, in fact, about understanding and implementing principles of learning. Therefore, it is important to note down that no language teaching approach can be the only best one. Lastly, teachers have to be open-minded, trying to adapt to the most appropriate teaching practice depends on topics preferred and different factors such as students’ ability and teacher’s effectiveness in order to deliver language to students successfully.
Bibliography
Nunan, D. & Lamb, C. (1996). ‘Classroom Talk. In The self-directed teacher:
managing the learning process. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
98-100.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language
Teaching. Second Edition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative Language Teaching Today. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
