Talk:Direct Method

These are some notes I made on the Direct Method. They are rather fuller than the present entry,

If there are no objections in the next couple of weeks, I'll format them and put them in as the entry.--gramorak 21:09, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

The Direct Method (also known as the Natural Method[footnote: Not to be confused with Krashen’s Natural Approach} ) Towards the end of the 19th century, in a reaction against what they considered to be the short-comings of the Grammar-Translation Method, a number of linguists and teachers, including Gouin, Berlitz and de Sauzé, developed versions of what came to be known widely as the Direct Method. The Direct Method is based on the idea that learning L2 must imitate the natural way humans learn any language, the child’s learning of L1, which takes place without the interference of any other language. The primary goals of the method were for learners to communicate and to think in L2. Practitioners of this method use L2 exclusively and never use translation. Everyday vocabulary and structures are taught, and grammar is learnt inductively by generalising from examples. Oral communication skills are taught by question and answer exchanges between teachers and learners, all new learning points being introduced orally. Concrete vocabulary is taught through realia, pictures and demonstration, abstract vocabulary by association of ideas. Emphasis is placed on correct pronunciation. Self-correction of errors is encouraged, The role of the teacher is to direct class activities, but students and teacher are partners in the learning process, and there is Learner-Learner interaction Advantages of the method seen by its advocates include;

•	It follows the natural order in which a child learns L1, listening, speaking, reading, writing. •	It lays great emphasis on speaking, the most important skill for many learners. •	It avoids the unnatural block of translation in the communication process. •	Learners learn the language, not about the language. •	Learners have an active role. •	Lively classroom procedures motivate the learner. •	The learning is contextualised. •	The emphasis on speech make it attractive for those who need real communication in L2. •	The teaching of vocabulary through realia brings authenticity into the classroom. Some of the disadvantages observed by critics include:

•	Learning L2 is not like learning L1. The child learning L1 has no previous language-learning experience, but the learner learning L2 does. •	There is little systematic structural practice. •	Learners run the risk of inducing incorrect rules. •	The method can be effectively used only by teachers who are native speakers. •	The learner is confronted with unstructured situations too soon. •	A great deal of teacher-energy is required.

Variations of the method are used in schools today, though more commonly in the private than in the public sector. Many of the techniques, use of realia, emphasis on speech, complete or partial absence of translation, self-correction, etc, have been taken up by followers of later methods and approaches.
 * Looks fine to me.--Bob M 19:27, 1 April 2011 (UTC)