The direct method which was popular through the end of the nineteenth century is still popular today, especially amongst private language schools. The direct method which is also known as the oral or natural method is based on the active participation of the learner, in both speaking and listening to the new language in realistic everyday situations. Lessons would begin with a dialogue in the target language through the use of pictures, or realia “There is to be a direct connection between concepts and the language to be learned”. (Larsen-Freeman 1986). This would allow the students to stay motivated, but also it would link the actions or pictures directly to L1, without having to use it.
The direct method is more teacher based than student centered as the teacher plays a crucial role in the class. The teacher is a leader of the classroom who initiates all the learning and models the target language, the student’s role was to respond to the teacher and actively learn the vocabulary presented in the classroom.
Successful teacher of the direct method needed competence in their language, stamina, energy. Imagination, ability and time to create own materials and courses - beyond capacity of all but a gifted few.
Richards and Rodgers (2001) summarized the principles of the direct method. All classroom instruction was conducted purely in the target language, and only sentences and vocabulary that is used in everyday life was taught. Also, oral communication skills were built carefully in an organized question and answer session between teachers and students in small intensive groups. In addition, grammar was taught inductively.
Richards and Rodgers (2001) also stated that any new teaching points were taught through practice, vocabulary was taught through realia and demonstrations. In addition to this, both speech and listening comprehension were taught and finally, correct pronunciation and grammar were emphasized.
Diane Larsen-Freeman ( 1986 )suggests that to enable the students to successfully learn the language there were a few techniques the teacher would put into practice: reading out aloud either sections of paragraphs, or role plays, conversation practice where the teacher would talk to student, or students would talk and ask questions to each other, gap fill exercises using only the target language and inductive grammar, dictation where the teacher reads a small paragraph and students write down what they hear, other techniques included paragraph writing and self-correction.
There are clear advantages and disadvantages with any teaching methods and the direct method was not without its problems, as Brown (1994) points out “it did not take well in public education where the constraints of budget, classroom size, time and teacher background made such a method difficult to use”. As a result, the direct method only became popular in private language schools, because of smaller class sizes.
In addition to this, the direct method relies solely on learning the target language as the first language is learnt but is this really valid for second language learning? In first language learning we begin with a clean slate, nothing to influence us whereas learning a second language in this way would not be as successful as we are already aware of the concept of language and we also have another language to rely on.
Another disadvantage to the method was the role of the teacher; to be a successful teacher they would need a lot of time, and imagination to be able to create their own material. They would need to be skillful with their demonstrations and gestures. This along with the other criticisms of the method made it difficult to use.
When compared to other methods such as the grammar translation method-which is probably the oldest language teaching method, which was used to teach Latin and Greek, the direct method gives the learner the widest range of communication skills in understanding the language and being able to hold a conversation in realistic situations. The grammar translation method relies mostly on the learner understanding the structure of the language, hence listening and speaking skills suffer because of this.
Also in comparison with the grammar translation method, the speed of learning with the direct method is a lot faster as there is little use of mother tongue when learning, and it is based more on oral learning whilst the grammar translation method concentrates on grammar rules and translation “tests of grammar rules and of translations are easy to construct and can be objectively scored. Many standardized tests of foreign languages still do not attempt to tap into communicative abilities, so students have little motivation to go beyond grammar analogies, translations and rote exercises”(Brown,1994).
Alternatively, the grammar translation method has a few
advantages over the direct method, one is that the learners reading comprehension is more advanced than that of someone who is learning the direct method way, as in the grammar method reading of difficult texts is started early on, the other advantage is the writing capability, there is much more emphasis on understanding the structure of the language which helps with reading and writing comprehensions. Also the learner’s vocabulary and grammar skills are more developed as students are taught to memorise long lists of vocabulary and grammar.
Another method we can compare it to is the audio lingual method which is based loosely on the direct method as well as being based on behavioral psychology which made it more popular, as Brown (1994) stated “this method had its roots firmly grounded in linguistic and psychological theory”.
In comparison with the audio lingual method, which is based on the repetition of phrases and structured sentences, drills and pronunciation. The method allows the learner to communicate quickly, just like the direct method, in spite of this the audio lingual method lacks in writing, reading, grammar and listening skills.
To summarise, the direct method seems to have a greater influence on language learners, however for it to be a success you would need small class sizes, successful teachers and motivated learners. On the other hand there are other learners who would respond well to grammar translation with the safety of the mother tongue, and the repetition drills of the audio lingual method.
The conclusion that ca be made is their is no method which has dominance over another. All methods have their individual advantages and disadvantages. The importance for teachers is to observe their learners process in learning and then employing a method, to meet their objectives and goals which could be to use the direct method or a combination of all three methods.
References
Brown, H. Douglas. (1994) Teaching by Principles: An interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. Prentice Hall
Howatt, A. (1984) A History of English Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Larsen-Freeman, Dianne (1986) Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New York: Oxford University Press
Larsen-Freeman, Dianne (2000) Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Richards, Jack & Rodgers, Theodore (1986) Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press
Richards, Jack & Rodgers, Theodore (2001) Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Second Edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Stevick, W. Earl (1982) Teaching and Learning Languages. Cambridge University Press.
