Methods Synergistics


Published on

This is one of the newest ways on how to teach English as a second language.

The references will be added later.

Published in: Education, Technology
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Methods Synergistics

  2. 2. Total Physical Response Media Multi- Literacy intelligencia Task Based InstructionSilent Way Natural Approach Frerian ApproachAuthor Unit Activities
  3. 3. TheMethodologyofthenewMillennium
  4. 4. • Changes in the Name • How is it done?• What is MS? • Who are the target students?• Who are the proponents of MS? • What are the roles of the teacher?• Why was such method made? • What are the roles of the students?• Why is it a need to use such method? • Advantages of this method• What are the underlying • Disadvantages of this principles of MS? method
  5. 5. e o M th ds g sSyner istic
  6. 6. Synergy1 41
  7. 7. Changes in the Name Harold Palmer, 1922 The Father of Eclectic Way Complete Method The ‘Complete Method’ is not a compromise between `two antagonistic schools; It boldly incorporates what is valuable in any system or method of teaching and refuses to recognise any conflict, except the conflict between the good and the inherently bad. The ‘Complete method’ embodies every type of teaching except bad teaching, and every process of learning except defective learning.
  8. 8. Changes in the Name • The Complex Methods of the Arts of Eclectic, Including Deliberation (Eisner, 1984; Schwab, 1969; 1971) • New Eclecticism (Boswell, 1972) • Planned eclecticism (Dorn, 1978) • Effective or Successful Eclecticism (i.e., based on specific outcomes) (Olagoke, 1982), • Enlightened Eclecticism (H. D. Brown, 1994; Hammerly, 1985), • Technical Eclecticism (Lazarus & Beutler, 1993) • Integrative Eclecticism (Gilliland, James & Bowman, 1994)
  9. 9. Changes in the Name • Systematic Eclecticism (Gilliland, James & Bowman, 1994) • Informed or Well-informed Eclecticism (J. D. Brown, 1995; Hubbard, Jones, Thornton, & Wheeler, 1983; Yonglin, 1995) • Principled Eclecticism (Larsen-Freeman 2000) • Mellow (2000; 2002) has used the term “Principled Eclecticism” or “Unconstrained Pluralism” to describe the “desirable, coherent, and pluralistic” approach • Methods Synergistics or Disciplined Eclecticism (Theodore “Ted” Rodgers, 2001)
  10. 10. WhoaretheproponentsofMethodsSynergistics?
  11. 11. 1. Harold Palmer, The Father of 9. Lazarus & Beutler, 1993 Eclectic Way, 1922 10. 7. H. D. Brown, 19942. Schwab, 1969; 1971 11. Gilliland, James & Bowman,3. Boswell, 1972 19944. Dorn, 1978 12. J. D. Brown, 19955. Olagoke, 19826. Hubbard, Jones, Thornton, & 13. Yonglin, 1995 Wheeler, 1983 14. Larsen-Freeman, 20007. Eisner, 1984 15. Mellow, 2000, 20028. Hammerly, 1985 16. Theodore “Ted” Rodgers, 2001
  12. 12. What is MethodSynergistics?
  13. 13. How is it defined?• Crossbreeding elements from various methods into a common program of instruction seems an appropriate way to find those practices which best support effective learning. (Rodgers)
  14. 14. How is it defined?• Methods and approaches have usually been proposed as idiosyncratic and unique, yet it appears reasonable to combine practices from different approaches where the philosophical foundations are similar. (Rodgers)
  15. 15. How is it defined?• Larsen-Freeman (2000) and Mellow (2000) both have used the term principled eclecticism to describe a desirable, coherent, pluralistic approach to language teaching.
  16. 16. How is it defined?• Eclecticism involves the use of a variety of language learning activities, each of which may have very different characteristics and may be motivated by different underlying assumptions.
  17. 17. So, ‘disciplined eclecticism’, then, is the approach of begging, borrowing and stealing ideas from as many sources as possible – other educational theorists, sure, but also artists and scientists and novelists and engineers – and combining them into makeshift but workable new tools to inquire into educational situations in ways that are well adapted to both the features of the situation and our educational purposes.
  18. 18. The FAS of MS Adaptability Sensitivity Flexibility Methods Synergistics
  19. 19. Why was suchmethod made?
  20. 20. • Mixed – ability classes• Every learner has his own attitude towards the foreign language• Every learner needs a certaintype of motivation• Every learner has his ownway of learning, forgetting,unlearning…
  21. 21. • There has not been one best method any time [that what is best depends on whom the method is for, in what circumstances, for what purpose]• To adopt any single method is to settle for much less than one can get by adopting all or several of them.• Incorporates what is valuable in any system or method of teaching and refuses to recognize bad teaching or defective learning.
  22. 22. • There are strengths as well as weaknesses of single theory based methods.• Reliance upon a single theory of teaching has been criticized because the use of a limited number of techniques can become mechanic.
  23. 23. WhataretheunderlyingprinciplesofMS?
  24. 24. Eclectic Blend• Brown (1994) states the TESOL profession will finally become mature when we realize and admit the complexity of language learners requires an “eclectic blend of tasks each tailored for a particular group of learners”
  25. 25. Enlightened Eclectic• Brown (1994) insists that an “enlightened eclectic” teacher should take an approach that includes most [if not all] of the principles. That is, teachers ought to take all the principles in the respects of cognition, affection and linguistics in to consideration at the same time.
  26. 26. Students with Learning Styles• Rao (2001) suggests, from a broad perspective, perceiving the Chinese learners or even East Asian learners as a whole, that teaching and learning styles be matched to reduce teacher-student style conflicts, especially in foreign language instruction. She advises that an effective way is for teachers to provide a variety of activities to meet the needs of different learning styles, so that all students will have at least some activities that appeal to them based on their learning styles, and they are more likely to be successful in these activities.
  27. 27. Principled eclecticism enlightens teachers to adapt themselves to the dynamics of their classes on the basis of their collective knowledge of language learning and teaching, rather than to adopt a specific method or approach at hand.
  28. 28. Principled eclecticism can hardly offer specific directions for teachers to follow, so they have to find out for themselves by practical trials.Trial and Re-trial.
  29. 29. Language learning as a combined process of structural and communicative activities.
  30. 30. How is it done?
  31. 31. • Only teachers with enough theory and practice can become eclectic• No training [or a teacher who is given teaching recipes]A teacher with no theoretical thinking about the advantages and drawbacks of any approach so they follow their books slavishly.
  32. 32. • The use of eclecticism does not mean to mix up different approaches randomly.• There must have some philosophical backgrounds and some systematic relation among different activities. Usually it is recommended to mix structural approaches with communicative use of language.
  33. 33. Two-Dimensional Model – J. Dean Mellow
  34. 34. Form• Some activities largely focus on language as a structural system composed of forms such as phonemes (sounds), intonation patterns, morphemes (including inflectional suffixes), words, clauses, sentences, paragraphs, and turns (within a conversation).
  35. 35. FunctionOther activities largely focus on language as a system for expressing meanings, including past time, plurality, definiteness, reference (e.g., to entities such as books and teachers, and to actions such as speaking and eating), requests, commands, apologies, questions, politeness, respect, argumentation, and narration, among many others.
  36. 36. Construction• Some activities primarily assume that language learning is a process of active construction by the learner.• In other words, language learning is thought to result from the cognitive processing involved in attending to and comprehending extensive amounts of input (both written and spoken) and in attending to and producing extensive amounts of output (both in writing and speech), in the form of practice, drills, exercises, and other guided, negotiated, or corrected activities.
  37. 37. • These exercises may be either deductive or inductive, and may involve the metalinguistic discussion of pre-selected language forms, elements, and patterns.• In particular, the construction view assumes that new elements can be added to a learners internal language system as a result of extensive attention and processing: Input and output practice will result, over time, in the automatization or internalization of sounds, words, and form-meaning patterns.
  38. 38. • The construction assumption, with the emphasis on attention, practice, and automatization, is informed by theoretical positions such as those discussed in N. Ellis (1999), McLaughlin (1990), and Schmidt (1990).• The term construction is used to evoke the idea of a house being constructed through a variety of deliberate building processes.
  39. 39. Growth• The growth assumption maintains that the natural processing of meaningful language facilitates acquisition: “Language is thought to emerge best in response to the normal language use that occurs in contexts in which interlocutors are exchanging meaning.”• Within these activities, essential aspects of language learning are thought to result from innate cognitive abilities that only rely upon a subset of the input that a learner receives.
  40. 40. Hypotheses• First, language is hypothesized to emerge in a learner according to the learners own internal syllabus, largely as a result of innate, biological, language-specific predispositions. Following the influential work of Noam Chomsky, in the 1960s and 1970s these innate abilities were often referred to as the Language Acquisition Device (or LAD). Since about 1980, Chomsky and his colleagues have used the term Universal Grammar (or UG) to refer to the hypothesized innate abilities. Although originally proposed to account for first language acquisition, many researchers have explored or argued for the role of these innate abilities in SLA (e.g., Krashen, 1982, 1985; Pienemann & Johnston, 1987; cf. Larsen-Freeman & Long, 1991).
  41. 41. Hypotheses• Second, language development is hypothesized to result only partially from the learners general cognitive operations. For example, it is claimed that syntactic patterns are not learned with processes such as generalization, deduction, and automatization. Consequently, deliberate, deductive practice and exercises are thought to contribute only minimally to development.
  42. 42. • In sum, the growth assumption de-emphasizes practice and automatization. Instead, it emphasizes innate abilities and learning as a consequence of exchanging meanings in communicative contexts. The growth assumption is informed by theoretical positions such as those discussed in Chomsky (1986), Goodman et al. (1987), Krashen (1982, 1985), and Prabhu (1990).• The term growth is used to evoke the idea of a plant growing as a result of natural processes.
  43. 43. Hypotheses• Third, language development is hypothesized to rely only partially on the linguistic environment (e.g., the environment does not provide sufficient information for a learner to construct a knowledge of language) or responds only to certain types of linguistic environments (e.g., deductive instruction and correction of forms do not contribute to development).
  45. 45. • The teacher decides what methodology or approach to use depending on the aims of the lesson and the learners in the group.
  46. 46. • We consider teacher as a director [or facilitator]: who facilitates the learner,• as a guide: who guides the students,• as a slightly higher rank official: who uses his authority to conduct the class and make the process of teaching and learning systematic.
  47. 47. Who are the target students?
  49. 49. • Learner is seen by us as the center of teaching learning activities.• His participation is very important.• So teacher will always try to involve the learners.
  50. 50. • As well as the learners role in class should be cooperative and they will be allowed to communicate, self correct each other and ask questions about the substance provided for teaching learning activities.
  51. 51. Criticisms:Disadvantages of this method
  52. 52. Stern (1983) doubted about eclecticism for “there is no agreement as to what the different methods precisely stand for, nor how they could be satisfactorily combined” ; and for it does not “provide any principles by which to include or exclude features which form part of Cannot Be existing theories or practices” (1992) Combined
  53. 53. Marton (1988) argued that “practical eclecticism does not meet the criterion of efficiency, while theoretical eclecticism is suspicious on logical and theoretical grounds” Inefficient
  54. 54. A Chinese opponent (Dai, 2002) argues that the fault of eclecticism in language teaching lies in that it attempts to make a kind of all-purpose language teaching out of the existing methods and approaches and to persuade that eclecticism is the only right idea in foreign language teaching The only methodology. method?
  55. 55. Widdowson (1990) argues:“It is quite common to hear teachers say that they do not subscribe to any particular approach or method in their teaching but are ‘eclectic’. They thereby avoid commitment to any current fad that comes up on the whirligig of fashion. This might be regarded as prudent common sense. But if by eclecticism is meant the random and expedient use of whatever technique comes most readily to hand, then it has no merit whatever. It is indeed professionally Expedience irresponsible if it is claimed as a pedagogic principle.”
  56. 56. Johnson (1998, 1999) noted that “eclecticism’s strength is recognition of diversity, its weakness a tendency to vagueness and lack of principle”. Vagueness
  57. 57. …has often been criticized because it may be arbitrary, atheoretical, incoherent, naïve, uncritical, unsystematic, and lacking in philosophical direction (e.g., Glascott & Crews, 1998; Lazarus & Beutler, 1993; Schwab, 1971). The NOTs
  58. 58. In a relevant critique of communicative language teaching, Allen (1983) has argued that “in the absence of a well- defined theory, there is a danger that the development of communicative language teaching materials will be guided not so much by principle but by expedience, rule-of-thumb, and the uncoordinated efforts of individual Danger writers."
  59. 59. Advantages of this method
  60. 60. It has the potential of keeping the language teacher open to alternatives. In this way, it can even be seen as an antidote to becoming complacent about one’s language teaching practices. Alternatives
  61. 61. Some to Ponder on
  62. 62. • The complex circumstances of teaching and learning languages - with different kinds of pupils, teachers, aims and objectives, approaches, methods and materials, classroom techniques, and standards of achievement - make it inconceivable that any single method could achieve optimum success in all circumstances. • Peter Strevens, 1977.
  63. 63. • We need to offer a variety in teaching which wil give equal opportunities to people with dif erent styles. • Alan Maley (1983)
  64. 64. •Rather than fish in one linguistic stream, we should cast our pedagogical net in all waters that might bring us in a profitable catch. •Girard, 1972
  65. 65. FIN
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.