Since GT M is known as a method of teaching dead language,
there are so many critics and research has done on it. Scholars and teachers
view GTM with a different perspective. Each other’s views are different from
one another due to their teaching experience and so on.
As we know, GTM method was well known to teach foreign
languages. Students are not thought spoken language but focusing too much on
grammar rules. according to Thiergen (1903) in (Jaworska, 2009), students who were taught foreign language or
second language using GTM will face difficulties in real life communication
especially when they are in overseas to studies. Author named Wilhelm Vietor
promoted teaching of spoken language and through pronunciation practice. Therefore,
translation, explanations of grammatical rules and the use of L1 has vanished
and change to Direct Method (DM). DM is
a way where the child learns his/her first language through observation, speaking,
listening, and building associations and limitations (Nueuner & Hunfeld). Students
could also get the wrong interpretation of their ability to learn. Many students fall into this gap in education
where they were ignored.
My view on GTM
Grammar translation method is very teacher centered. Learners
need to know the grammar rules, grammatical paradigms and verb conjunctions and
so on. But GTM does not allow students to create the meaning for English. It just
plainly requires students to translate from word to word. This is not training
students for nay of the skill. This is just purely translating. There are many
flaws in this method. For example, students can wrongly interpret the
information. Some students can translate but they are not able to orally communicate
or read or write. As Richards and Rodgers (1986) state, it is a method for
which there is no theory. There is no
literature that offers a rationale or justification for it that attempts to
relate it to issues in linguistics, psychology, or educational theory.
GTM emphasizes the written language at the expense of the
spoken. Being able to speak and understand the spoken language has the higher priorities
than reading and writing for most learners. Even there are many opportunities
to practice speaking; it will be good to include writing as a basic in a
regular lesson. Writing train students to be reflective, to experiment, see the
result of their attempts and to be critical on what they want to say. Students may
also consider of using grammar books, dictionaries. Sometimes teachers can specify
the content of writing exercises precisely, and on other occasions we can give
a more open-ended instruction such as: “Write some of the sentences that we've
been practicing (orally) in this lesson” or “Write a paragraph using some
vocabulary that was new for you in this lesson.”
Language is learned
by conscious memorization of grammar rules and vocabulary in GTM. But nowadays
memorization isn't highly regarded. Learning is about internalization through
exposure, experience and use is preferred and can make learning more meaningful.
As a future teacher, we know that people have different learning styles. Some students
like memorizing words, phrases, sentences, patterns and rules, and find that
they can draw productively on memorized material, at least in situations where
they have time to stop and reflect before speaking or writing.
In GTM the teacher explains, translates, conducts practice,
and corrects mistakes, and learners interact with the teacher, not with peers.
But nowadays it's widely recommended that the teacher should play a less
prominent role and guide learners to make their own discoveries, eliciting
language and get explanations from them, encouraging them to co-operate, help
and correct each other, and generally fostering learner independence. This is
where active learning environment occurs. Teachers talk should be minimal and
let students do the talking. Teachers can explain but not spoon feeding them.
References
·
Richards, J.C. and Rodgers, T.S. (1986).
Approaches and methods in language teaching: A description and analysis.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
·
Jaworska, S. (2009). The German language in
British higher education. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
No comments:
Post a Comment