Theoretical Framework for Teaching EFL

by Dirk Cornelis Lourens Second Language Acquisition and Learning

Theoretical Framework for Teaching EFL In developing a personal theoretical framework for teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL), the writer frequently thought about the way that theories, methods, methodologies, and techniques are interwoven, although they are different parts of TEFL. While progressing through the reading for this course, it became clear that, like with methodology, there is not one perfect theory in second language acquisition (SLA). As Spolsky (1989a) stated, any theory of second language learning that leads to a single method must be wrong. Although the reference was made regarding methods of TEFL, the writer came to realize that some parts of different theories could be combined to develop a theoretical framework. Teachers need to keep in mind the individual needs of students and settings, and that language learning is complex, and that there is not only one way to teach all students. As Cook (2001) stated, to serve the unique needs of actual students, the teacher needs to do whatever is necessary, not just what is scientifically proven and based on abstract theory. Teachers should therefore combine parts of theories that best serve their students needs. This, however, is a daunting task. SLA is a very abstract and technical branch of TEFL. It is clear that teachers need to develop themselves professionally in order to understand SLA theory, or to select appropriate textbooks for classes if they are unable to study further. Textbooks follow different theories and methods. The writer is therefore of the opinion that parts of different theories should be used to best serve students needs when there is an absence of a one-size-fits-all theory, something which would be impossible anyway. This brings up the subject of a buzzword that has been around for decades in TEFL, the word being eclectic. It would be wise to heed the words of Widdowson (1990) that teachers who claim to be eclectic, but cannot clearly lay out the principles thereof, are not eclectic, but simply

confused. The author also points out that care must be taken when selecting parts of different theories. Teachers must make educated decisions, and not haphazard ones. Thus said, and having set the stage for developing a personal theoretical framework, the writer will now discuss specific points in detail. Components of SLA Theories When looking at the Table summary of theories for Assignment 2, as well as Mitchell and Myles (2004), it is clear that different components of some theories are used in the writers EFL classrooms in Taiwan. As the focus in Taiwan is both on form and on function, parts of the Universal Grammar (UG) theory are used for grammar instruction, as well as components of Krashens input hypothesis (IH) and Swains Output Hypothesis (OH) respectively (Krashen 1985; Swain 1985). In particular, components of UG are used for corrective input where the first language (L1) and second language (L2) differ, especially error correction, which will be discussed later in this paper. Components of the IH used by the writer include instruction or input that is slightly above the learners current level. This challenges the learners and keeps them moving ahead. The writer also strives to keep the learners affective filters low, as this has been proven to enhance the learning experience and to motivate learners. Components of the OH include noticing and negotiating for meaning, where L2 learners negotiate and reflect during the interlanguage stage (Mitchell & Myles, 2004). Both input and output are important in SLA. Theories that use communicative language activities are also important, for example the emergentist and pragmatic perspectives, but this belongs more under the heading of methodologies. How students learn a second language

According to the writer, based on these theories, students learn a second language through input that they can understand, as well as output and practicing the use of the L2. The input should also be slightly above their level at appropriate stages. Through the use of the L2, students learn from their mistakes and become able to correct themselves, or are corrected by their peers. Grammar instruction is not a thing of the past, and is important as well, especially when considering that form and function is important, depending on the needs of the students, the setting, and other individual factors (Cook, 2001). Negotiating for meaning helps the students to not merely repeat memorized phrases in a parrot-like style, but to use the language, to exchange vocabulary and sentence structures that they are familiar with, and to personalize the learning experience for them. The students can build up a picture of the L2 in their own minds, not merely repeat and memorize. Classroom Activities How are these components of theories reflected in the writers classrooms? Grammar activities include listening to famous pop songs and reading the text of the lyrics, podcasts, video clips, poetry, newspaper clips, and more. The four skills of listening, speaking reading, and writing are always combined in implicit or explicit grammar instruction. After the songs listening and reading activities, students are asked to do gap-fill, multiple-choice, information gap, true or false, or fill in the correct tense activities in pairs or groups. The activities that make classes interesting are endless. For comprehensible input, the writer also uses props, realia, pictures, computer generated images, and authentic material like newspapers, brochures, menus, recipes, and more to make input more vivid and clear. Again, the examples are numerous. In Taiwan, it is also expected of teachers to explicitly instruct grammar rules and structures, and oral and substitution drills are common in EFL classrooms. These are usually

followed or preceded by the activities mentioned above. Output activities include using the target language in whole class, pair, group, and individual activities. The component of pushing, as set out in the OH, is not a big part of these activities, as the students need to take part in these output activities with a high affective filter and in a positive, motivational atmosphere. L1 and SLA Mitchel and Myles (2004) pointed out that research has shown that neither the L1 nor the target L2 always accounts for errors in the learners language use, but that it is also part of what is called the interlanguage. Apart from that, L1 does have an influence on SLA, for example grammar structures or direct translation from the L1 to L2. In Taiwan, most students L1 is Mandarin Chinese. At beginner and intermediate levels, it is quite common to hear learners use L1 sentence structures in L2 conversation. This is not a problem, and it is to be expected, unless it leads to fossilization. As L1 plays a role in SLA, it is up to teachers to make sure it mainly has a positive influence. The writer incorporates L1 in class during instruction, but only when necessary or to clarify important points. At beginner levels, L1 is used more frequently during the silent stage. Vocabulary is sometimes explained using the L1, mainly for abstract terms that cant be explained using realia. L1 should play a role in SLA; teachers should use it selectively and embrace it. It should not be seen as something negative that should be done away with altogether. It was interesting reading what Cook (2001) had to say about SLA affecting the L1, especially amongst some Spanish speakers, who incorporate L2 in their L1. Motivation, attitudes, and feelings in SLA The above factors all play an important role in SLA. What Krashen (1985) termed as the affective filter, others called affect. Dornyei (1994) and other researchers found that motivation

is a determining factor for SLA, but mentioned that it is changing in nature. Learners attitudes and feelings are important. Therefore the writer recognizes these important factors, and also the intrinsic and extrinsic motivation of learners, whether they want to study by choice or whether they do it for other reasons. The writer has reward systems in place in all his classrooms, and the students always have a say when designing class rules, or topics of lessons, or other parts of classroom activities. Personalization of lessons is also a high priority, as is building up a good rapport with learners. Getting to know your students and their needs, likes, and dislikes are very important. Error Correction Methods Mitchell and Myles (2004) points out that many researchers view error correction as irrelevant, while others see it as useful if it is used to correct major errors relating to what is currently being taught. The writer uses error correction in the form of the finger method as described by Harmer (2007), but slightly modified. Also, the use of gestures and body language such as facial gestures are used. Explicit correction is only used occasionally, and only at the end of the lesson, if it is a major error. The goal is to motivate learners, especially the shy ones, to try out the new language and to use it, and constant error correction would be counterproductive. Peer correction is encouraged only at intermediate and advanced levels. Correction also depends on the aims of the lessons. If the aim is accuracy, then errors might be corrected during the lesson or after. If the aim is fluency, correction will be minimal, if at all. Paraphrasing is another technique that is used by the writer, as it is less demotivational than others. The writer also tries to adjust lessons, methods, and techniques if errors occur frequently, as they might be indicating shortcomings regarding the teachers approach. Self-

assessment, peer assessment, and learner assessment of a teacher is very important. Challenging Aspects of L2 Learning Building up and establishing motivation is very challenging indeed, but maintaining motivation is even more challenging. Nowadays, the use of technology in classrooms are propagated everywhere as a motivational tool, and it will definitely change the face of traditional classrooms. However, personal experience has shown the writer that maintaining motivation, especially with teenagers, is difficult. Even iPads will be a changing fad in classrooms applying technology. Why? Because students soon realize that it is learning disguised in the form of technology. Teachers should therefore not use these as an alternative form of instruction, but use it to enhance classroom activities. Building up a good rapport with students and designing lessons that are personalized will go a long way towards meeting the challenges of motivation. Another challenge is to enable learners to take responsibility for their own learning, or a part of it. Learning should not be restricted to classrooms. It should extend to learners homes, private lives, and daily interactions. The writer tries to face this challenge by encouraging reading amongst all students, young and old. Reading opens up world of possibilities and offers a wealth of information. It teaches about other cultures and enables the reader to become more globally aware. Reading is a great way of learning in your spare time. Conclusion SLA is a wide, varied and complicated area of language. Research is often inconclusive, but this does not mean that it is useless for teachers. It points to a dynamic area of research and it means that many researchers and educators are trying to find answers to problems. Older theories are being streamlined and updated, and the quest is on to find new ones. All of this is for the benefit of learners of second languages.

References Cook, V. (2001). Second language learning and language teaching. New York, NY: Oxford University Press Inc. Dornyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 78(3), 273-284. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/330107 Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching (4th ed.). England: Pearson Longman. Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Harlow: Longman. Mitchell, R., & Myles, F. (2004). Second language learning theories (2nd ed.). London, UK: Hodder Arnold. Spolsky, B. (1989a). Conditions for second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition, 235-253. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Widdowson, H.G. (1990). Aspects of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.