The following essay will speak about the advantages and disadvantages of using the Natural Approach to a specific educational context. First of all there will be a brief overview of the method, so a little description of the learning context so at the terminal it would be possible to see the pros and cons.
The Natural Approach is based on Terrell and Krashen ‘s theories about the realistic rules bing in the procedure of learning – larning a 2nd linguistic communication. It is based on the non – formal scenes where scholars get the first and 2nd linguistic communication, go forthing aside all grammatical and formal linguistic communication constructions. A successful schoolroom in SLA sing the Natural Approach, is the 1 that has its focal point on comprehension and meaningful communicating, plus the right comprehendible input, doing pupils pay attending and listen for a long period, before they start bring forthing the linguistic communication. “ Its greatest claim to originality lies non in the techniques it employs but in their usage in a method that emphasizes comprehendible and meaningful pattern activities, instead than production of grammatically perfect vocalization sentences ” ( Richards and Rodgers, 2001, p. 201 ) .
The instruction context, in which the late described method would be applied, is a first grade category of a private, non – bilingual school. Sing the English lessons, there are 30 male pupils between six and seven old ages. These kids are all from a high socio-economic degree, parents with superior instruction and professional rubric. In relation with the English background, most of the pupils are in a novice degree transporting merely the contents learned in Kinder. Get downing the school twelvemonth, they merely listen and understand some direction, but they can non organize complete sentences nor read or compose any word. Second semester they are in a more beforehand degree, where some of them could talk and organize basic grammar construction sentences. The lessons are based on a class book ( Playway to English, 2nd edition ) , which has the Pupil ‘s and the Activity Book. Besides, there is an Extraprogramme text, made by the English instructors that have different vocals verse forms and rimes related with the subjects from the class books. Important is to advert that all the pupils are Spanish native talkers.
Sing the educational context merely described, it is necessary to advert that the Natural Approach is quiet suited to it. To get down, the scholar ‘s function here is about pupils who are meant to get the linguistic communication by listening, mimiquing and reiterating. There is no haste for kids to bring forth the 2nd linguistic communication until they feels it is clip to make it. As Richard and Rodgers ( 2001 ) provinces, in the Natural Approach position scholar ‘s functions alterations harmonizing with their phase of lingual development. They besides add “ Cardinal to these altering functions are learner determinations on when to talk, what to talk about, and what lingual looks to utilize in speech production ” ( p. 187 ) . Therefore, kids could have batch of input, but there is no force per unit area for them to talk.
So the inquiry here is, how do we cognize if they are really larning if they do n’t bring forth any linguistic communication? The kids in the context described starts the twelvemonth cognizing really small of English and they pass through different phases geting new cognition and finishes the twelvemonth being capable of organizing sentences by their ain. Krashen and Terrell ( 1983 ) specified the types of activity to do sing the phase of lingual development. The pre – production phase they merely take part without holding to react in the L2. In the early – production phase kids respond with short sentences or individual words and utilize fix colloquial forms. The last phase is the address – emergent stage, where pupils produce more linguistic communication in role-plays, games or take parting in group job work outing. It is in grounds that the Natural Approach has its focal point on the acquisition procedure more than in the consequences of it. When we talk about kids with novice degree, these is what we need to prosecute them with the 2nd linguistic communication, traveling measure by measure giving them the necessary tools for the acquisition procedure.
The instructor ‘s function refering the Natural Approach method is really centered and has a batch of duty in the executing of the lessons. If we picture a lesson in which kids does non talk in the mark linguistic communication, the lone responsible of bring forthing all the input is the instructor adding the fact that pupils may non understand what is she or he stating. As a consequence, we should add to the changeless flow of input a changeless proviso of mimics and gestures to assist the kids to construe it. Visualizing this scene is inevitable to believe about how is it possible for one individual to be that multidynamic. Well, the reply is clear: batch of forbearance and bosom. English instructors for novices, specially for small kids, knows that learning that age is a difficult work and requires batch of attempt. To Nation and Newton ( 2009 ) , proposed four rules for learning hearing and speech production to ELLs novices:
State and Newton ( 2009 ) . Teaching ESL/EFL Listening and Speaking, p. 19
These rules make clear what it was said before about the instructor ‘s duties. The Natural Approach based its theories on the communicating being meaningful and comprehensive, merely what instructors of the described context demand to make for a better instruction pattern.
Although instructors are meant to hold all those maps in the instruction procedure, there is a batch of outlook in what he or she could make with the 2nd linguistic communication acquisition of the pupils. All of this could hold bad effects during the lessons because of all the force per unit area put on the pedagogue ‘s function. Richard and Rodgers ( 2001 ) , conclude about the instructor ‘s duties by stating “ aˆ¦ the Natural Approach instructor has a peculiar duty to pass on clearly and compellingly to pupils the premises, organisation, and outlooks of the method, since in many instances these will go against pupils positions of what linguistic communication acquisition and learning supposed to be ” ( p. 188 ) .
It is indispensable to look up for the types of activities proposed by the Natural Approach and see if they are suited in the described context. Krashen and Terrell ( 1983 ) , proposed different types of techniques that could be used to learn an L2 utilizing familiar constituents of Situational Language Teaching and Communicative Language Teaching. So what they did is to propose types of activities that provides comprehendible input, but does non necessitate “ production of responses or minimum responses in the mark linguistic communication ” ( Richard and Rodgers, 2001, p. 188 ) . Related to the learning context, these activities are absolutely appropriate for seven twelvemonth old novices because of their dynamic and simple construction. State and Newton ( 2009 ) , support this stating “ To keep scholar ‘s involvement, activities need to be short and varied, and to affect the scholars in reacting to or utilizing the linguistic communication ” ( p. 20 ) . The chief intent of the Natural Approach activities, in mention to Richard and Rodgers ( 2001 ) , is to “ let comprehendible input about things in the here – and – now, concentrating on intending non in the signifier ” ( category handout stuff ) . For these grounds, most of them are based on the TPR theoretical account, which its activities are fundamentally responses from the scholars to bids, inquiries and ocular cues. They have batch of fluctuations and could be used in the different lingual phases. State and Newton ( 2001 ) , explained that TPR activities “ aˆ¦ can go speaking activities with the scholars stating what to make and the instructor or another scholar making the action ” ( p. 21 ) .
The of import thing of be aftering the different activities is non fring the chief intent of the lesson: encourage communicating and comprehension. Many different stuffs are needed for the course of study suggested by Krashen and Terrell, what makes the instructor ‘s occupation more complicated as she or he has to fix everything. The disadvantage here for the context described, is that instructors have more than one category and there are 30 kids per category. Fixing stuff for each category for all those kids could be to much excess work for the pedagogue. Richard and Rodgers agree stating “ The choice, reproduction, and aggregation of stuffs topographic points a considerable load on the Natural Approach Teacher ” ( p. 188 ) . However, there many activities suggested and they do non necessitate excessively much readying. If the lesson planning is with clip, possibly the instructor could fix all the stuffs at the clip for the different categories she had.
Having in head the pros and cons explained through the essay, it is more than clear that the Natural Approach is perfectly suited in the educational context described at the beginning. These first class kids have the motive and the attitude for larning the 2nd linguistic communication, and this attack gives the necessary tools for them to larn. The instructor ‘s function is indispensable and really demanding, but the school has a large and well-conformed English section that could assist in the aggregation of stuffs.
Richard and Rodgers ( 2001 ) coatings concluded about the Natural Approach learning procedure: “ Teaching the Natural Approach is therefore evolutionary instead tan evolutionary in its processs. Its greatest claim to originality lies non in the technique it employs but in their usage in a method that emphasizes comprehendible and meaningful pattern activities, instead than production of grammatically perfect vocalizations and sentences ” ( 201 ) .
Maria Paz Wolleter
By and large well-researched, demonstrates some reading & A ; contemplation with elements of critical analysis but finally fails to do sufficient connexion despite the inclusion of some really good points.
By and large well-written & A ; presented although there are a twosome of minor oversights in coherency and one or 2 faux pass in understanding some elements of the attack in relation to the support stuff ( see instructor ‘s function ) .
Weak debut and concluding paragraph besides detract from the purpose of the essay.
No bibliography and slightly under-length.
