A Brief History of English Language Teaching

Numerous anthologies and articles about the history of modern English teaching methodology
describe a sequence of teaching approaches and methods (e.g., H. D. Brown, 2007b; Celce-
Murcia, 2001; Howatt, 2004; Larsen-Freeman, 2000; Nunan, 1991; J. C. Richards and Rodgers,
2001). The methods and approaches frequently discussed are Grammar-Translation Method,
The Direct Method, The Reading Approach, Audiolingualism, The Cognitive Approach, The
Affective-Humanistic Approach, The Comprehension-based Approach, and communicative
approaches. Of these methods and approaches, GTM was a primary means of L2 instruction
prior to and in the early nineteenth century. However, as Richards and Rodgers (2001) pointed
out, it is a method without theoretical basis and has no advocates. Instruction in GTM is mainly
in students' native language, focusing on grammatical parsing, reading difficult texts, and
translating sentences into and out of the target language (Celce-Murcia; J. C. Richards and
Rodgers).

The Direct Method arose as a reaction to GTM. Theoretically based on the natural language
earning principle of a direct link between forms and meanings (Franke, 1884 as cited in J. C.
Richards and Rodgers, 2001), the Direct Method featured the exclusive use of the target
language in classroom instruction, text materials in conversational style, and meanings
conveyed in demonstration, pictures, and realia (Celce-Murcia, 2001; J. C. Richards and
Rodgers). Then, in reaction to the shortcomings and limitations of the Direct Method, the
Reading Method was advocated mainly with the recommendation of Coleman Report (J. C.
Richards and Rodgers). During that time this method viewed reading as the most useful foreign
language skill to acquire primarily due to the fact that few people traveled to the target
environment to use the language learned, and that not many teachers used the target language
well enough to teach it in the Direct

Method classroom. The Reading Method emphasized reading comprehension; vocabulary was
controlled at beginning and then gradually expanded, and only the grammar related to reading
comprehension was taught; and translation again was an important part of classroom procedure
(Celce-Murcia, year?).

Based on structuralism in linguistics and behaviorism in psychology, the Audiolingual Method

was a major trend in L2 teaching during the period from mid-1940s to 1960s in reaction to the
lack of listening and speaking skills of The Reading Method. Audiolinguism used mimicry and
memorization techniques and prevented learner errors from the beginning of language learning
process based on the assumption that language was a habit formation. In the Audiolingual
Method, language skills were sequenced—listening and speaking were primary; therefore, oral
proficiency was stressed in the first place whereas reading and writing were postponed.
Language materials usually started with dialogues and were manipulated through various drills
in structural patterns regardless of meaning or context (Celce-Murcia, 2001; Larsen-Freeman,
2000). These L2 teaching methods above shared a common thread that, except GTM, each
individual method reacted to the inefficiency and insufficiency of the prior method in language
pedagogy, respectively and reflected the then-current linguistic, pedagogical and/or
psychological thinking of the era.
In the late twentieth century, with the influence of Noam Chomsky's linguistic work,
humanistic perspectives of linguistics and cognitive psychology on the language pedagogy,
arose various "innovative" L2 teaching methodologies and approaches as those described in
Blair (1991), Celce-Murcia (2001), Larsen-Freeman (2000), and Richards and Rodgers (2001).
These methods and approaches include Community Language Learning, the Silent Way,
Suggestopedia, Total Physical Response, the Natural Approach, the Functional-Notional
Approach, the Lexical Approach, Content-Based Instruction, and Task-Based Instruction. The
first four methods were commonly featured as humanistic methods for language learning and
teaching (Stevick, 1990 as cited in Howatt, 2004; Kumaravadivelu, 2006) but were called
"designer nonmethods" by Kumaravadivelu in a critical view, "because none of them...deserves
the status of method" (p. 94). These four methods no longer exist as prominent L2 language
pedagogy, whereas others such as the Lexical Approach, Content-Based Instruction and Task-
Based Instruction remain as L2 language approaches under the umbrella of Communicative
Language Teaching (CLT).

Communicative Language Teaching was fundamentally based on broader theories of language.

Richards and Rodgers (2001) summarized four theorists of CLT. First, Hymes’ theory of
communicative competence was defined as what a language learner needed to know to be
competent in communication within a language society. Second, Holliday's theory of the
functions of language use, which was concerned with the study of the speech acts through
which to focus on all the functions of language and all the components of meaning. Third,
Widdowson's view of the linguistic systems in relation to the communicative values of
language, particularly the underlying ability of the communicative acts in using language for
different purposes in various contexts. Last, Canale and Swain's application of communicative
competence to second language pedagogy, which consists of grammatical competence,
sociolinguistic competence, discourse competence, and strategic competence. In addition,
Howatt (1984) differentiated between the "strong" and "weak" versions of CLT in the English
language teaching. The weak version focused on providing opportunities for learners to use the
learned English in communication. The strong version emphasized acquiring language through
communication, thus stimulating the development of the language system. The former was
described as learning to use English; the latter, using English to learn it.

Students in the CLT classroom often work in pairs or small groups negotiating meaning, and
engage in role play, dramatization or language games to use the target language in different
social contexts. Language skills are usually integrated from the beginning, and materials are
often authentic to reflect the real-world situations (Celce-Murcia, 2001; Larsen-Freeman,
2000). Concisely summarizing the modern foreign language teaching history, Wilson (2008b)
divided the development of L2 language teaching into three eras: pre-communicative,
communicative, and post-communicative eras. The pre-communicative era includes GTM, the
Direct Method, and Audiolingualism. The communicative era contains methods such as the
Natural Approach, the Functional-Notional Approach, Total Physical Response,
Suggestopedia, The Silent Way, and Community Language Learning. In the post-
communicative era, in addition to the Lexical Approach, Content-Based Instruction and Task-
Based Instruction, Wilson added in Focus on Form, a current trend of L2 pedagogy but not
introduced in most volumes on L2 teaching methods and approaches such as those by Richards
and Rodgers (2001) and Larsen-Freeman (2000). The theoretically prominent importance and
empirical evidence of Focus on Form asL2 pedagogy are discussed in the section on Theories
and Constructs of Focus on Form.
References

https://www.Wikipedia.com