Some myths of modern Ukrainian methodology of foreign language teaching as a science

Abstract


 
 
 
 The paper gives evidence that the modern Ukrainian theory and methodology of foreign language teaching is quite rapidly developing as a science; however, its onward progress is somewhat “braked” by certain ungrounded convictions (“myths”), some of which originate from the times of the former Soviet Union. Three such myths were analyzed in the article as the ones that to the greatest extent retard the progressive development of the Ukrainian methodology: the myth that “methodology is exercises,” this is why every methodological research must necessarily be completed with elaborating a system (or subsystem) of relevant exercises; the myth that whatever is developed in a methodological study should be within the borders of one, and only one, broad, substantiated, and more or less universally recognized methodological approach; and the myth that only the most recent professional literature should be quoted and serve as the foundation for whatever methodological research. In the paper the distinction is drawn between learning activities in language learning and exercises as standardized and auxiliary components in the relevant teaching / learning system, and it is proven that every methodological research has to be completed with some practical result to be used in this system but that result may not necessarily be a system of exercises or even of learning activities. It is also demonstrated that the approaches elaborated in a methodological study do not obligatorily have to be within the framework of only one broad and recognized approach but, on the contrary, may combine the features of different approaches, even opposing each other, as long as they meet the principles of the principled pragmatism theory - those principles that allow to combine such features harmoniously. Finally, it is proven that the theory and methodology of language teaching is a science in which new knowledge does not abolish the preceding knowledge as obsolete. New knowledge is “built into” the preceding knowledge, thus creating a new system together with it. That is why in all the methodological studies it is impossible to use as the foundation only the recent research. The works published even decades ago must be taken into account (and quoted). The conclusion is made that getting rid of the existing “methodological myths” will considerably accelerate and improve the development of the Ukrainian system of language education.