Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen
linguistlist.org>
In P. Llangoven's review of Larsen-Freeman's book "Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching", it would appear that 'techniques' are far more important than "principles". The question is then: "Does this represent the priorities in the actual book? Possibly it does but is it possible that she has produced a book concerned with the principles underlying methods without addressing the issues related to implicit-explicit learning, focus on form-focus on formS , the learning-acquisition dichotomy, attention and noticing - of which the reviewer makes no mention. At the very least, one has to relate any principle underlying a method to its position on the learning-acquisition dichotomy (Dulay et al., 1982). If one does not do so, the principle underlying the method remains rather unclear. Unfortunately, this is what has occurred in this review for in most cases the reviewer seldom makes very clear what are the underlying learning principles of each method. Does this also apply to the author? To take two examples, The Direct Method and CLT are partly based on some similarity between first language acquisition and SLA. Their underlying principle is, therefore, that exposure to meaningful language will trigger some form of the LAD and result in the internalisation of grammatical systems. Yet, the reviewer does not address this issue. He contends that "The chief tenets of this approach are: using authentic language, unravelling a speaker's or writer's intention, working with language at the discourse level , playing games..." These are certainly elements of the method..." but without the underlying principle, they mean little. This particularly applies to the strong version of CLT which the reviewer does not mention. Did Larsen-Freeman not deal with it either? As to task-based teaching, the reviewer makes no mention of Long's important contribution to the developing of the doctrinaire principles of this approach (Long, 1991; Long & Crookes, 1992). As Larsen-Freeman produced an important book on applied linguistics with him, (Larsen-Freeman & Long, 1991) it would be very surprising had she not mentioned his important role in TBT. As to "learning" as opposed to "acquisition", this again is a component of the principles underlying methods which it is essential to address. All methods ascribe either implicitly or explicitly some role to it. Defining this role is a necessary part of defining the underlying principles of any method. It is impossible to faithfully represent the principles of any method without making clear what that role is. As to the critical evaluation, it is surprising that the reviewer does not point out the imbalance in terms of representation of methods in the book. Methods which afford emphasis to learning as opposed to acquisition are under-represented. There appears to be no mention in the book of "cognitive-code learning" (Chastain, 1988) or "a skills-learning approach" (DeKeyser, 1998). This constitutes a major omission which seems difficult to explain. It is odd that the reviewer has not noted this, particularly as in spite of many innovations, most teachers in the world use exponents of these two related methods. Finally, to what I consider the most important aspect in any treatment of methods: their success in the classroom. Innovations have largely proved to be unsuccessful in terms of improvement in the effectiveness of classroom language learning (Adams & Chen, 1981; Fullan, 1982; Markee, 1993; Valette, 1991). Therefore, as it appears that Larsen-Freeman advocates innovation, I would have expected the reviewer to address this issue. The fact that he does not do so is consistent with the rest of the review. Refs: Adams, R. and Chen, D. (1981) The process of educational innovation: An international perspective. London: Kogan Page in association with the UNESCO Press. Chastain, K. (1988) Developing Second-Language Skills: Theory and Practice. New York: Harcourt Brace & Jovanovich. DeKeyser, R.M. (1998). "Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practising second language grammar" in C. Doughty & J. Wlliams (Eds.) Focus on Form in Classroom Language Acquisition, (pp. 42-63) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dulay, H., M. Burt & S. Krashen (1982) Language Two. New York: OUP. Fullan, M. (1982) The meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press. Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. H. (1991) An introduction to second language acquisition theory and research. London: Longman. Long, M. H. (1991) "Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology" In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.) Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39-52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Long, M.H., and Crookes, G. 1992. "Three approaches to task-based syllabus design". TESOL Quarterly 26/1, 27-56. Markee, N. (1993). "The diffusion of innovation in language teaching" Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 13, 229-243 Valette, R.M. (1991) "Proficiency and the prevention of fossilization - an editorial" The Modern Language Journal, 75/3, 325-336.Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue