Recent writings in second language acquisition and classroom methodology have raised important questions about language learning and teaching. The observation that many students fail to acquire communicative competence in the target language despite years of language instruction has prompted researchers, theoreticians, and teachers to question the effectiveness of our current approaches: traditional, grammar-based instruction has been widely criticized as being ineffective, and recent notional/ functional syllabuses, although proposed as potentially more viable curricular alternatives, are not without their critics.

In response to the perceived weaknesses of both structural and notional/functional syllabuses in producing communicatively competent speakers, the current literature stresses the importance of providing language learners with more opportunities to interact directly with the target language – to acquire it by using it rather than to learn it by studying it. It has been suggested that when language classrooms focus on task-oriented activities which give students experience in functioning in extended, realistic discourse in the target language, those students are able to learn not only appropriate language use, but real communicative processes as well. But a teaching approach which focuses on real communication also requires a classroom atmosphere in which communication can take place comfortably. Our roles as teachers and our students’ roles as learners therefore become significant considerations. Our particular students’ needs and the dynamics

of our particular classes become major factors in deciding what to teach and how to teach it.

(Slightly adapted from Teaching ESL: Incorporating a Communicative, Student-Centered Component, by Barry P. Taylor in Methodology in TESOL: A Book of Readings, by Michael H. Long and Jack C. Richards (eds.), Newbury House Publishers)

Question is based on the following excerpt from a website on Reflective Teaching.

Reflective practice

What is it? It means thinking about and learning from what happens in your classroom. Reflecting on what you do, why and how you do it, what the effects on your learners are, helps you to identify and take action on areas for improvement.

How to do it? Think about what went well or didn’t go well in a lesson. Think about the reasons why something went well. Think about how you can improve on the things which didn’t go well.

Finding out what your learners think, want, expect, and need helps you to understand how you can make your lessons more effective. Asking for their feedback involves them in the learning process and helps them to take responsibility for their learning. It encourages two-way reflection. You can also let your learners know when you try out something new and find out whether they felt it was successful. The focus is always on methodology, materials, tasks, activities etc and not on judging you as a teacher. Feedback can be anonymous depending on what is most appropriate for the context.

Question is based on the following excerpt from a website on Reflective Teaching.

Reflective practice

What is it? It means thinking about and learning from what happens in your classroom. Reflecting on what you do, why and how you do it, what the effects on your learners are, helps you to identify and take action on areas for improvement.

How to do it? Think about what went well or didn’t go well in a lesson. Think about the reasons why something went well. Think about how you can improve on the things which didn’t go well.

Finding out what your learners think, want, expect, and need helps you to understand how you can make your lessons more effective. Asking for their feedback involves them in the learning process and helps them to take responsibility for their learning. It encourages two-way reflection. You can also let your learners know when you try out something new and find out whether they felt it was successful. The focus is always on methodology, materials, tasks, activities etc and not on judging you as a teacher. Feedback can be anonymous depending on what is most appropriate for the context.

Recent writings in second language acquisition and classroom methodology have raised important questions about language learning and teaching. The observation that many students fail to acquire communicative competence in the target language despite years of language instruction has prompted researchers, theoreticians, and teachers to question the effectiveness of our current approaches: traditional, grammar-based instruction has been widely criticized as being ineffective, and recent notional/ functional syllabuses, although proposed as potentially more viable curricular alternatives, are not without their critics.

In response to the perceived weaknesses of both structural and notional/functional syllabuses in producing communicatively competent speakers, the current literature stresses the importance of providing language learners with more opportunities to interact directly with the target language – to acquire it by using it rather than to learn it by studying it. It has been suggested that when language classrooms focus on task-oriented activities which give students experience in functioning in extended, realistic discourse in the target language, those students are able to learn not only appropriate language use, but real communicative processes as well. But a teaching approach which focuses on real communication also requires a classroom atmosphere in which communication can take place comfortably. Our roles as teachers and our students’ roles as learners therefore become significant considerations. Our particular students’ needs and the dynamics

of our particular classes become major factors in deciding what to teach and how to teach it.

(Slightly adapted from Teaching ESL: Incorporating a Communicative, Student-Centered Component, by Barry P. Taylor in Methodology in TESOL: A Book of Readings, by Michael H. Long and Jack C. Richards (eds.), Newbury House Publishers)

Recent writings in second language acquisition and classroom methodology have raised important questions about language learning and teaching. The observation that many students fail to acquire communicative competence in the target language despite years of language instruction has prompted researchers, theoreticians, and teachers to question the effectiveness of our current approaches: traditional, grammar-based instruction has been widely criticized as being ineffective, and recent notional/ functional syllabuses, although proposed as potentially more viable curricular alternatives, are not without their critics.

In response to the perceived weaknesses of both structural and notional/functional syllabuses in producing communicatively competent speakers, the current literature stresses the importance of providing language learners with more opportunities to interact directly with the target language – to acquire it by using it rather than to learn it by studying it. It has been suggested that when language classrooms focus on task-oriented activities which give students experience in functioning in extended, realistic discourse in the target language, those students are able to learn not only appropriate language use, but real communicative processes as well. But a teaching approach which focuses on real communication also requires a classroom atmosphere in which communication can take place comfortably. Our roles as teachers and our students’ roles as learners therefore become significant considerations. Our particular students’ needs and the dynamics

of our particular classes become major factors in deciding what to teach and how to teach it.

(Slightly adapted from Teaching ESL: Incorporating a Communicative, Student-Centered Component, by Barry P. Taylor in Methodology in TESOL: A Book of Readings, by Michael H. Long and Jack C. Richards (eds.), Newbury House Publishers)

Question is based on the following excerpt from a website on Reflective Teaching.

Reflective practice

What is it? It means thinking about and learning from what happens in your classroom. Reflecting on what you do, why and how you do it, what the effects on your learners are, helps you to identify and take action on areas for improvement.

How to do it? Think about what went well or didn’t go well in a lesson. Think about the reasons why something went well. Think about how you can improve on the things which didn’t go well.

Finding out what your learners think, want, expect, and need helps you to understand how you can make your lessons more effective. Asking for their feedback involves them in the learning process and helps them to take responsibility for their learning. It encourages two-way reflection. You can also let your learners know when you try out something new and find out whether they felt it was successful. The focus is always on methodology, materials, tasks, activities etc and not on judging you as a teacher. Feedback can be anonymous depending on what is most appropriate for the context.

Recent writings in second language acquisition and classroom methodology have raised important questions about language learning and teaching. The observation that many students fail to acquire communicative competence in the target language despite years of language instruction has prompted researchers, theoreticians, and teachers to question the effectiveness of our current approaches: traditional, grammar-based instruction has been widely criticized as being ineffective, and recent notional/ functional syllabuses, although proposed as potentially more viable curricular alternatives, are not without their critics.

In response to the perceived weaknesses of both structural and notional/functional syllabuses in producing communicatively competent speakers, the current literature stresses the importance of providing language learners with more opportunities to interact directly with the target language – to acquire it by using it rather than to learn it by studying it. It has been suggested that when language classrooms focus on task-oriented activities which give students experience in functioning in extended, realistic discourse in the target language, those students are able to learn not only appropriate language use, but real communicative processes as well. But a teaching approach which focuses on real communication also requires a classroom atmosphere in which communication can take place comfortably. Our roles as teachers and our students’ roles as learners therefore become significant considerations. Our particular students’ needs and the dynamics

of our particular classes become major factors in deciding what to teach and how to teach it.

(Slightly adapted from Teaching ESL: Incorporating a Communicative, Student-Centered Component, by Barry P. Taylor in Methodology in TESOL: A Book of Readings, by Michael H. Long and Jack C. Richards (eds.), Newbury House Publishers)

Recent writings in second language acquisition and classroom methodology have raised important questions about language learning and teaching. The observation that many students fail to acquire communicative competence in the target language despite years of language instruction has prompted researchers, theoreticians, and teachers to question the effectiveness of our current approaches: traditional, grammar-based instruction has been widely criticized as being ineffective, and recent notional/ functional syllabuses, although proposed as potentially more viable curricular alternatives, are not without their critics.

In response to the perceived weaknesses of both structural and notional/functional syllabuses in producing communicatively competent speakers, the current literature stresses the importance of providing language learners with more opportunities to interact directly with the target language – to acquire it by using it rather than to learn it by studying it. It has been suggested that when language classrooms focus on task-oriented activities which give students experience in functioning in extended, realistic discourse in the target language, those students are able to learn not only appropriate language use, but real communicative processes as well. But a teaching approach which focuses on real communication also requires a classroom atmosphere in which communication can take place comfortably. Our roles as teachers and our students’ roles as learners therefore become significant considerations. Our particular students’ needs and the dynamics

of our particular classes become major factors in deciding what to teach and how to teach it.

(Slightly adapted from Teaching ESL: Incorporating a Communicative, Student-Centered Component, by Barry P. Taylor in Methodology in TESOL: A Book of Readings, by Michael H. Long and Jack C. Richards (eds.), Newbury House Publishers)

The excerpt states that