Skip to main content

Get it right from the beginning or get it right in the end

Patsy Lightbown and Nina Spader, in their very readable book How Languages are Learned (OUP, 2011, third edition), make the distinction between two ways of looking at second language teaching. The label the first "get it right from the beginning" and the second "get it right by the end".

The "get it right from the beginning" position, they say, characterises a great deal of second language teaching practice. It is typical of the grammar-translation and audio-lingual approaches, but still features strongly as part of weaker communicative approaches. The idea is that you design your tasks with accuracy in mind, tightly control the input, moving from "easier" to "harder" and building up skills and knowledge as you might complete a jigsaw. Some writers call this (usually disparagingly) skill-building. You hope that these explicitly taught rules become internalised and enable students to produced spontaneous language.

Research suggests that many adult learners, notably those with good metalinguistic knowledge of their first language, enjoy this type of structural approach. Lightbown and Spada note, in addition, that learners' beliefs about the best type of instruction can influence their motivation and success. However, the authors also note that there is little classroom research which shows that students of varying motivation and aptitude in typical school classrooms benefit from this approach more than others. (Bear in mind that very able students will tend to make progress pretty much whatever the method.)

One reason that many students fail to make great progress with form-focused, accuracy-based methods of this type is that they feel inhibited and are reluctant to take chances when trying to communicate. Studies show that students benefit when they get a chance to communicate more freely. Other reasons, as critics of the approach point out, are that the language system is just to large and complex to be acquired in this fashion and that pupils are often not ready to internalise the items which we choose to teach them; they might understand structures, apply them in the short term, but then fail to make them part of their "mental representation" of the language. It is also fair to say that students are rarely given enough time and frequency of exposure to allow acquisition to occur at a high rate.

At the other end of the spectrum, proponents of the "get it right in the end" approach, although usually recognising that an attention to accurate form has a role, don't make the assumption that everything has to be "taught". They believe that many language features will be picked up naturally through exposure to meaningful language input. They view comprehension-based, content-based or task-based instruction as the crucial elements in teaching, perhaps aided by some focus on grammatical form and corrective feedback.

Lightbown and Spada go on to list research studies which aimed to support the "get it right at the end" position. They conclude that these studies "provide support for the hypothesis that form-focused instruction and corrective feedback within communicative and content-based second and foreign language programmes can can help learners improve their knowledge and use of particular grammatical features". They add a caveat, however, that the effects of the instruction may not be long-lasting.

Later on, in their summary, the authors reach the conclusion that a mixed diet of communication, focus on form and corrective feedback is superior to an approach which relies on comprehension, accuracy or fluency alone. This should not come as a surprise to most teachers working in school settings in the UK who attempt to provide that eclectic mix of communication and attention to grammar. How successful they are depends on their skill at implementing the approach, the amount of time they get to spend with students and the motivation of the students themselves which may depend to an extent on factors beyond the teacher's control.

When you teach, do you think you are lean towards the "get it right form the start" or "get it right by the end" position? For myself, and as we exemplify in The Language Teacher Toolkit, I would be happy to accept elements of both approaches. You can provide plenty of meaningful input in a structured fashion, with varying degrees of focus on form, thus, in a sense, killing two birds with one stone. In my own teaching I had the feeling that the more tightly "get it right form the start" approach worked better with beginners and low intermediates, whilst with advanced students I felt happier to accept that acquisition would occur more naturally provided the students received large amounts of input at or just above their level (think of Krashen's i +1).

Popular posts from this blog

The latest research on teaching vocabulary

I've been dipping into The Routledge Handbook of Instructed Second Language Acquisition (2017) edited by Loewen and Sato. This blog is a succinct summary of Chapter 16 by Beatriz González-Fernández and Norbert Schmitt on the topic of teaching vocabulary. I hope you find it useful.

1.  Background

The authors begin by outlining the clear importance of vocabulary knowledge in language acquisition, stating that it's a key predictor of overall language proficiency (e.g. Alderson, 2007). Students often say that their lack of vocabulary is the main reason for their difficulty understanding and using the language (e.g. Nation, 2012). Historically vocabulary has been neglected when compared to grammar, notably in the grammar-translation and audio-lingual traditions as well as  communicative language teaching.

(My note: this is also true, to an extent, of the oral-situational approach which I was trained in where most vocabulary is learned incidentally as part of question-answer sequence…

Dissecting a lesson: using a set of PowerPoint slides

I was prompted to write this just having produced for frenchteacher.net three separate PowerPoint presentations using the same set of 20 pictures (sports). A very good way for you to save time is to reuse the same resource in a number of different ways.

I chose 20 clear, simple, clear and copyright-free images from pixabay.com to produce three presentations on present tense (beginners), near future (post beginner) and perfect tense (post-beginner/low intermediate). Here is one of them:





Below is how I would have taught using this presentation - it won't be everyone's cup of tea, especially of you are not big on choral repetition and PPP (Presentation-Practice-Production), but I'll justify my choice in the plan at each stage. For some readers this will be standard practice.

1. Explain in English that you are going to teach the class how to talk about and understand people talking about sport. By the end of the lesson they will be able to say and understand 20 different sport…

Designing a plan to improve listening skills

Read many books and articles about listening and you’ll see it described as the forgotten skill. It certainly seems to be the one which causes anxiety for both teachers and students. The reasons are clear: you only get a very few chances to hear the material, exercises feel like tests and listening is, well, hard. Just think of the complex processes involved: segmenting the sound stream, knowing lots of words and phrases, using grammatical knowledge to make meaning, coping with a new sound system and more. Add to this the fact that in England they have recently decided to make listening tests harder (too hard) and many teachers are wondering what else they can do to help their classes.

For students to become good listeners takes lots of time and practice, so there are no quick fixes. However, I’m going to suggest, very concisely, what principles could be the basis of an overall plan of action. These could be the basis of a useful departmental discussion or day-to-day chats about meth…

GCSE and IGCSE revision links 2018

It's coming up to that time of year again. In England and Wales. Here is a handy list of some good interactive revision links for this level. These links are also good for intermediate exams in Scotland, Ireland and other English-speaking countries. You could copy and paste this to print off for students.

Don't forget the GCSE revision material on frenchteacher.net of course! How could you?

As far as apps for students are concerned, I would suggest the Cramit one, Memrise and Learn French which is pretty good for vocabulary. For Android devices try the Learn French Vocabulary Free. For listening, you could suggest Coffee Break French from Radio Lingua Network (iTunes podcasts).

Listening
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/french/ (Foundation/Higher) http://www.bbc.co.uk/languages/french/ (Foundation/Higher)
http://www.audio-lingua.eu/spip.php?rubrique1&lang=fr (Foundation/Higher) http://www.ashcombe.surrey.sch.uk/07-langcoll/MFL-resources/french/fr-video-index.shtml

How useful is learning verb conjugations?

I guess most of you out there have at some point got your students to study verb tables, chant or sing verb paradigms, or played games to practise endings - Battleships and the interactive site Conjugemos spring to mind. Many of us have also found ourselves at some point bemoaning students' lack of skill with verb inflections and wondered what we can do improve the situation.

Most of you probably assume that memorising verb tables will lead to improvements in spoken and written accuracy and fluency. Is this actually the case?

The case for 

Common sense might suggest that if you practise the small bits of a second language you should be able to build them up like lego into larger bits. By practising the micro skills, the component parts, you become better at the main game - think of the musician practising scales or the footballer doing shooting practice. These activities lead to improved performance. This is the basis of skill acquisition theory and it has its proponents in academi…