Community Language Learning Research Articles

Negotiating communicative language learning in a traditional setting

Negotiating communicative language learning in a traditional setting

The Media: Catalysts for Communicative Language Learning

The Media: Catalysts for Communicative Language Learning

C.L.L. Revisited – addressing socio-cultural factors in language learning

Abstract This article deals with the methodology of Community Language Learning (C.L.L.) from a cultural and discourse perspective. It seeks to demonstrate how C.L.L. can be exploited effectively in the classroom as a means of addressing the socio-cultural dimension of language learning and teaching. The original C.L.L. model (Charles Curran’s) is examined, and a modified version described and analyzed. The central feature of counselling strategies is highlighted and illustrated, demonstrating the importance of negotiating rather than imposing meaning. The article then explores how C.L.L. is effective in reaching a number of short-term goals: e.g. text repair; learning about socio-cultural conventions and learning to use language appropriate to these conventions; exposing incidents of language failure and reasons for these. The importance of the teacher’s understanding of discourse conventions is underlined. Finally C.L.L. is reviewed in terms of both its weaknesses and strengths.

The Media: Catalysts for Communicative Language Learning

The Media: Catalysts for Communicative Language Learning

Recent Innovations in Language Teaching Methodology

Five innovative methodologies currently practiced in the teaching of foreign languages are discussed: the Silent Way, Suggestopedia, Community Language Learning, the Comprehension Approach, and the Communicative Approach. In order to understand how these methodologies are innovative, a discussion of teaching practices during the first half of the twentieth century is offered. Following the historical perspective, the five innovative methodologies are analyzed in terms of their goals, features of the teaching and learning process, characteristics of teachers and learners, and their views of language and culture. Then a summary of what they have in common is provided. The article concludes with the identification of questions concerning methodologies that need to be addressed in the field and with some specific recommendations for a national agenda for foreign language instruction.

Materials for Communicative Language Teaching and Learning

Surprisingly little has been written on the role of materials and the uses that teachers may make of them. General books in this area include Madsen and Bowen (1978), Cunningswoth (1984), and Sheldon (in press). The only references which particularly consider communicative langauge teaching are Grewer, Moston, and Sexton (1981), which incorprates a theoretically motivated taxonomy as well as much practical discussion, and apattison (1987), which is a practical handbook with materials in English, French, and German.

Communicative Competence and Foreign Language Learning

Recent developments in the teaching of foreign languages at school level have been primarily, if not exclusively, concerned with attempts to move away from the more academic form-focused views of language and language teaching that prevailed well into the 70s, towards the more practical and communicatively-oriented approaches in vogue today. Many projects have added useful insights in this areas, and it would be impossible to do justice to them all. It is proposed, therefore, to limit the scope of this chapter to the description of a rather as a subject rather than as a medium of instruction. It is hoped that these will be seen as representative of the much wider range of school foreign language teaching developments that have taken place across the world in recent years. First, however, a brief attempt will be made to outline the background from which these more communicatively-oriented approaches have emerged.

Which Method and for How Long?

One important issue confronting language educators today is not Which single method is best?, but, rather, Which of several methods are best employed at what stages of teaching/learning process? Thus it is not a question of whether James Asher's Total Physical Response (TPR) is superior to Tracy Terrell's Natural Approach (or whether either of these is superior, or inferior, to Canadianstyle immersion education, audiolingualism, grammar-translation, cognitive code, Community Language Learning, Silent Way, and whatever methodologies are to be derived from such currently popular emphases as communicative competence, functional/notionalism, and oral proficiency movement). The question is when to utilize what. Real-time empirical investigation that covers at least 500 hours of a large group of students' instructional experiences with a variable pick of methodologies variously sequenced has yet to be undertaken. But if it ever is, I predict that winning combination will feature following sequence: TPR first, then a natural approach, and, subsequently, a judicious mixture of subject matter taught via target language (immersion education), drill (audiolingual), grammar (with translation), communicative exercises, and especially functional/notionalism, whose usefulness at more advanced levels of instruction has yet to be appreciated. TPR's chief virtues are that it gives students an immediate sense of accomplishment and participation while keeping effective filter miraculously unclogged. Natural approaches ease students into producing simple speech sequences almost unconsciously. Immersion techniques provide learners with vast quantities of subject-matter input, which, if Stephen Krashen is right, will constitute stored material needed to foster oral production which in due course is prompted by conversationally-generative techniques whether communicatively competent, orally proficient, or functional. Grammar and drilling will doubtless have their place as well, since there is some support for notion that comprehensible input can be derived from sources of formal presentation as well as informal. In sum, our profession should be thankful that after so many years of invention and experimentation it is free to pick from and combine such a rich harvest of methods. Yet we must recall that many of these methods especially less traditionalwere brought to life as hopeful panaceas purportedly enabling their users to shave scores or even hundreds of hours off language-learning process. Though time-reduction has been achieved and efficiency enhanced, it is nevertheless crucial to pay close attention to some recent comments by Renate Schulz (Foreign Language Proficiency for Real World: Wedding Ideal to Reality, in John Joseph, ed., Applied Language Study ... [Lanham MD: University Press of America, 1984], pp. 3-17). Dr. Schulz, a professor of German and foreign language education at University of Arizona, is a leading expert in her fields and, for years, a well-known figure at many conventions. For Schulz, a major task faced by us as professionals is to change the totally unrealistic expectations of lay public regarding what it takes to gain proficiency in a second language. Our problem is a monumental lack of classroom time (the consecrated two years of high school remaining an all-too-typical average). Lack of time can only be circumvented by immersion experiences abroad and/or intensive hundreds-of-hours-on-track programs at home. Two eight to ten-week intensive summer courses could provide from 640 to 720 hours of language instruction, approaching minimum number that experts say is needed to obtain respectable 3 rating on government proficiency scale. Anything less is insufficient and (perhaps worse) self-deceptive. No method is immune from dictates of timepiece. As practitioners of natural approaches are discovering, their students fail to transcend an uninhibitedly fluent but flawed and fossilized learners' dialect unless their subsequent work in language is equivalent of an undergraduate major in it, preferably complemented by a year abroad. In his call for comments, Editor Sackett notes there is still another issue he wishes

Comprehension and Production in Interactive Language Teaching

IF WE LOOK BACK AT THE LAST FEW YEARS (FROM audiolingualism to the Natural Approach and the Communicative Approach, via the Silent Way, Community Language Learning, Suggestopedia, and other bypaths) it seems we are dancing around the act of communication, which is still central in our thinking. Should we listen a great deal? Should we chatter? Should we read and write? At present we are being told that all that is needed for developing communicative ability in the oral or graphic mode is that students should receive much comprehensible input, without attempts at production for some time, and the rest will follow structures will appear in an innate order and production (ability to express one's own ideas) will develop spontaneously in its own time.1 This viewpoint warrants careful examination. A number of methodologies in the history of language teaching have emphasized listening in the initial stages (direct method, audiolingual method, Gouin's action chains), but always with some production following closely on the listening experience. Here we are considering the necessity for prolonged intensive listening without expectations of production for some time. Terrell suggests a delay between the two of several months at the elementary school level, at least a month for high school students, and a week or so for college students, although he admits some of the latter seem to want to speak already after an hour or two.2 The proposal for an extended initial listening period represents, we are told, a natural approach, based on the learning of the first language by infants.

Alternatieve Wegen Voor Gevorderde Taalleerders

Alternative or humanistic approaches to foreign language teach-ing such as the Silent Way, Suggestopedia, Community Language Learning and Confluent Education, have been generated by scholars who are not linguists. An analysis of the ideas underlying the respective approaches leads to the conclusion that they are suitable for advanced students as well as for beginners. Although humanistic approaches are not based on empirical research, they have their roots in sound educational theories. If language teachers want to introduce these approaches into their teaching, they do not have to opt for any of them, but they can select elements from them. An example fo such an integrative approach is The Explorative-Creative Way. Research on processes which occur in second or foreign language classrooms, should be done in accordance with qualitative procedures as wellas with quantitative ones.

Benaderingen van het Taalgebruik in Schoolboeken; Mogelijkheden en Beperkingen

Research into the use of language in schoolbooks can be done from several angles: theory of verbal communication, teaching methodology, psychology (of education, of reading, of the reader). Being at the crossroads of so many different disciplines makes research difficult, and this is not conductive to ready application of any results in practice. In the border area between linguistics (in its wider sense) and educational science, publications with a practical dimension are few and far between, most of these resorting to generalities. The perennial problem is: should we opt for adaptation of Schoolbook texts, in other words for 'availability' , or rather for training pupils in reading comprehension (in which case texts may well be difficult)? To complicate matters, the place and function of the Schoolbook within the teaching and learning process are under discussion. The place and function of the Schoolbook are again strongly determined by the phasing of communicative situations or language learning situations. Thus the wheel has come full circle. The question remains, however, where all this leaves the use of language in schoolbooks. In this context the interplay between reader and text cou!d be declared to be the object. The text-approaching skills of the reader and any text processing could be viewed as an integrated approach to text comprehension and text 'availability'. This means that the focus is on the interaction between reader and text, on mobilising meta-cognitive skills and on the improvement of reading for comprehension at primary school level. In the Netherlands this view is represented by such people as Hennephof, Westhoff and Bol; in the Federal Republic of Germany by Groeben. A situationally determined and multilateral approach to the use of language in schoolbooks seems the only sensible one. 'Availability' is here used in the sense that it is easy to get access to what is in the text. It is not synonymous with 'readability', but rather with the German "Verständlichkeit'.

Reflection in the Context of Community Language Learning

Reflection in the Context of Community Language Learning Get access PAUL G. LA FORGE PAUL G. LA FORGE Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar ELT Journal, Volume XXXIII, Issue 4, July 1979, Pages 247–254, https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/XXXIII.4.247 Published: 01 July 1979

Uses of Social Silence in the Interpersonal Dynamics of Community Language Learning

Japanese, American, and Spanish CLL (Community Language Learning) groups engage in foreign language learning with a different reaction to silence. These reactions may be due to cultural or other causes, but the focus of this article is on silence as a psychodynamic phenomenon, what goes on inside and between folks (Stevick 1976: 119). The purpose of this article is to show how teachers can use social silence to promote speaking ability. Social silence in the interpersonal dynamics of CLL refers to silence on the part of the teacher, students, or when called for by the CLL contract, for example, during reflection periods. First, affective binds connected with social silence are shown in three types of CLL group conversation experiences. Second, some CLL constructs are explained in order to show how teachers can use social silence to help their students. Third, it is argued that the use of social silence leads to the solution of affective binds and progress through the five CLL language learning stages. Teachers who are unable to use CLL should become aware of psychodynamic factors, such as social silence, in the teaching relationship. The result will be a more effective learning relationship with the students.

Some Limitations of C-L/CLL Models of Second Language Teaching

Several years ago language teachers were introduced to a new and bold concept of teaching a second language (L2) in the counseling-learning (C-L), whole-person model of education, and more specifically, community language learning (CLL). Language teachers have benefited and will continue to benefit from the insights of the C-L/CLL model. It has focused our attention on the whole person, on the affective domain, and on revolutionary methods of teaching. But language teachers need to be aware of the limitations of the C-L and CLL model, which, like any method, is not a panacea, but rather one more set of tools for the language teacher to interpret and adapt. Some of the major limitations that need to be considered are: (1) Curran's particular interpretation of the role of a counselor in a counselor-client relationship; (2) the host of affective variables (social, cultural, personality) operating within any one learner, thus making it difficult to generalize about what type of approach is optimal for each learner; (3) the suitability of CLL considering the variety of cognitive styles utilized by learners; (4) the inadequacy of relying on inductive, learner-initiated responses; and finally (5) the budgetary and curricular difficulties of carrying out a CLL approach. Special attention to these five limitations should enable language teachers to adapt and modify CLL effectively in a variety of language teaching situations.

REVIEW

DEVELOPING SECOND‐LANGUAGE SKILLS: THEORY TO PRACTICE, by Kenneth Chastain.PATTERNS OF ENGLISH PRONUNCIATION. J. Donald Bowen.RESEARCH PROFILES WITH COMMUNITY LANGUAGE LEARNING, by Paul G. LaForge.

COMMUNITY LANGUAGE LEARNING: A PILOT STUDY

In the face of scepticism regarding the value of modern psychology for language teaching, attempts have been made by some psychologists to adopt a group approach to language learning which takes into account personality, motivational, and emotional factors. Both a theory of language learning and a practical methodology for language teaching can be gathered from the research of Curran (1961, 1966). “Community Language Learning” (CLL) emerged as an application of the group counseling process to language teaching and learning. Five demonstrations of CLL at the University of Michigan suggested the emergence of a theory of human learning. Practical results were: (i) quick apprehension of the phonology of an inflected, but not of a tone language; (ii) difficulties and insights experienced by both client and counselor; and (iii) positive motivational factors.

Counseling-learning/community language learning: A method of learner directed language teaching

The philosophy behind Community Language Learning and its implementation in the classroom are examined to show how the teacher using this method relinquishes control over three of the four traditionally teacher-directed variables, syllabus, materials production, and evaluation, to the learners, and maintains control only over methodology.

Increased Communication in Language Learning

There is little opportunity for the individual student to speak in class. The ratio of speaking time to the time of other language activities is improper. The speaking time of the individual can be prolonged many times over in a 2-way communication model, based on the principle of paired learning with planned partner rotation and the teacher acting as a supervisor with special functions. This communication model provides the individual learner with a maximum of speaking time under controlled conditions.