DIRECT METHOD

  DIRECT METHOD

 Also known as Reform Method / Natural Method / Phonetical Method / Anti-grammatical Method All reformers were vehemently opposed to teaching of formal grammar and aware that language learning was more than the learning of rules and the acquisition of imperfect translation skills. Vietor ('Die Sprachunterricht muss umkehren' 1882) "This study of grammar is a useless torture. It is certainly not understood; therefore it can have no effect as far as the moulding of the intellect is concerned and no-one could seriously believe that children could learn their living German tongue from it." Instead grammar should be acquired inductively by inducing the rules of how the language behaves from the actual language itself. "Never tell the children anything they can find out for themselves." (Jesperin 1904) Direct Method based on belief that: 1 Knowing a language was being able to speak it! Primacy of spoken word. New method laid great stress on correct pronunciation and target language from outset. Advocated teaching of oral skills at expense of every traditional aim of language teaching. 2 Second language learning must be an imitation of first language learning, as this is the natural way humans learn any language, and so MT has no place in FL lesson. (Baby never relies on another language to learn its first language). 3 Printed word must be kept away from second language learner for as long as possible (same as first language learner, who doesn't use printed word until he has good grasp of speech). 4 The written word / writing should be delayed until after the printed word has been introduced. 5 The learning of grammar/ translating skills should be avoided because they involve the application of the MT. 6 All above items must be avoided because they hinder the acquisition of a good oral proficiency. Disadvantages of Direct Method 1 Major fallacy of Direct Method was belief that second language should be learned in way in which first language was acquired - by total immersion technique. But obviously far less time and opportunity in schools, compared with small child learning his mother tongue. 2 Is first language learning process really applicable to second foreign language learning at later stage First language learning is essential part of child's total growth of awareness of world around him. He starts off with blank sheet, then starts collecting/selecting organising the experience of a totally new world, perceived through his senses, by formulating a variety of pre-verbal concepts. Subsequently part of the process of learning how to live is the acquisition of skills to verbalise his desires and aversions and to label his concepts, so as to make living more sufficient and secure. Effectiveness of these verbalising skills depends on maturation level of the child / on type of environment on intelligence. Language is part of an intrinsic process through which child learns to recognise/ deal with new situations. 3 Compare learning of second language • At 11 years of age, child is not interested in recognition of new living situations, child has normally learned the basic concepts and can handle situations for ordinary living purposes. So as far as 'learning to live' is concerned, no similarities between two processes of learning. (not the case for immigrant children - they need to learn English for survival purposes - therefore motivating force is totally different). • Older child has already at his disposal a first language, which is securely fixed to the universe of things; (s)he is equipped with this advantage; first language learner does not have this. • Older child is more mature and it would seem nonsensical to imitate first language learning processes totally for learning additional language. (think of contact hours needed) this is argument for using MT (anti Direct Method). • What does foreign language learner wish to know first? to know the FL equivalent of MT sentences/ words used in hitherto familiar situations. • To learn how to handle certain known/ recurring situations through the medium of the FL. He doesn't wish to handle completely new situations in FL terms. 4 The Direct Method rejects use of the printed word - but this objection is illogical since second language learner has already mastered his reading skills. Does printed word interfere with FL pronunciation? -In fact experiments show that the printed word is of real help to consolidate the FL and actually reinforces retention (ef 'Je ma pel') - leaves mental imprint, image of shape of word. 5 Later disciples of Direct Method took it to extremes and refused to speak a single word of English in lessons. To avoid translating new words, they searched for an association between new words and the idea it stood for: 'Voilà un livre, voici une craie'. Extreme Direct Methodists had cupboards full of realia. Explanations became cumbersome and time-consuming. (Definition type explanations UN meunier est UN homme qui travaille dans UN moulin' / 'court est le contraire de long'). Teachers would be jumping over desks flapping fins, rather than say that the English for 'saumon' is 'salmon'. Concepts like cependant'/ 'néanmoins' - obviously need immediate translation! 6 Successful teacher of the Direct Method needed competence in his language / stamina/ energy/ imagination/ ability and time to create own materials and courses - beyond capacity of all but gifted few. "The method by its very nature presupposes a teacher of immense vitality, of robust health, one endowed with real fluency in the modern language he teaches. He must be resourceful in the way of gesture and tricks of facial expression, able to sketch rapidly on the board and in the language teaching day, he must be proof against linguistic fatigue". 7 Also Direct Methodists failed to grade and structure their materials adequately - no selection, grading or controlled presentation of vocabulary and structures. Plunged pupils into flood of living language - quite bewildering for pupils. However, many teachers did modify the Direct Method to meet practical requirements of own schools, implemented main principles, i.e teaching through oral practice and banning all translation into target language. Obviously compromise was needed.