Index

1. Theoretical framework
1.1. The Importance of English
1.2. Methods and Approaches used in language teaching
1.2.1. The Grammar Translation Method
1.2.1.1. Advantages and disadvantages of The Grammar Translation
Method
1.2.2. The Direct Approach
1.2.2.1. Advantages and disadvantages of The Direct Method
1.2.3. The Reading Approach
1.2.3.1. Advantages and Disadvantages of The Reading Approach
1.2.4. The Audio-Lingual Approach
1.2.4.1. Advantages and Disadvantages of The Audio-Lingual Approach
1.2.5. The Communicative Approach
1.2.5.1. Advantages and Disadvantages of the Communicative Approach
1.3. Methodology used in English Teaching in Spanish Secondary Education
1.3.1. Equivalences between Spanish past tense and English past tense.
1.3.2. Interference of L1 in English learning acquisition.
1. Theoretical Framework
1.1. The Importance of English

English is one of the most important languages in the world. This is due to the amount
of English speakers in the world, therefore of great interest and usefulness for non-
native speakers. Crystal (1985) claims that it is estimated that English is spoken natively
by 1.4 billion additional people, behind Mandarin Chinese (1,797 million of speakers)
and Spanish (339 millions). Tapia (2010) argues, there are more people that speak
English as a second language than native speakers of this language. English is
considered an international language, and David Crystal (2003: 24) also emphasizes it
when he says that “there’s never before been a language that’s been spoken by more
people as a second language than a first”. Globalization has led to determine English as
the language for global communication and, consequently, the lingua franca in EU
affecting to countries that in the past had not much influence of it, such as Spain
(Caraker, 2016; Lasagabaster & de Zarobe, 2010).

Besides, “learning English is mandatory in several countries within secondary education

institutions, and so a number of EU Member States have close to 100% of pupils
learning this language already in primary education” (Eurostat Statistics Explained,
2015, July 1). Consequently, English became compulsory in the vast majority of
Schools in Europe. Although, as it is stated in the EU Eurostat: “the relative importance
of English as a foreign language may be further magnified because pupils tend to
receive more instruction in their first foreign language than they do for any subsequent
languages they (choose to) study”.

There are many two main reasons why English is important, socially and culturally. On
the one hand, socially it helps you communicate with people from other countries. In
case someone travel abroad, if he can speak English, he is much more accepted. It also
offers benefits nationally. A country whose president knows how to speak English is
less judged. It can even offer economic benefits because they can improve international
relations. On the other hand, when a citizen emigrates to another country, it is much
more difficult to find a job if he cannot speak English, because he does not know how to
communicate correctly with others.

All these factors made compulsory the introduction of English as a second language. In
addition, the number of bilingual schools in Spain grew. Students started to be taught
different subject in two different languages. It was a good way for children to have a
touchdown with a new language in the long term and thus acquire the language as soon
as possible.

1.2. The use of L1 and L2 in language teaching

English is one of the most widely taught languages in the world. There are teachers who
decide to teach this language in a communicative way. That is, speaking throughout the
class in English. However, there are also teachers who prefer to teach this language
using their mother tongue. Both options can cause problems for children to acquire a
foreign language, in this case, English. For example, in Spain, most of the students
cannot acquire the English language despite having studied long-term, from primary to
bachelor studies. Students spend over ten years on learning the language and yet it is not
enough for them to have achieved an acceptable level of English proficiency.

Since English was introduced in Spanish education, we were taught not to use our first
language (L1) in order to improve or, in other words, to learn faster a second language
(L2). This is done because teachers think that if we use more the L2, our knowledge
about it would increase more than if we use our L1. In fact, it is not considered
acceptable to use the mother tongue to teach any new language. It is even judged.
People tend to think that the more students and teachers use the L1 the less they will
interact and the less they will learn. The teacher is, generally, the primary source of
target language input and is therefore responsible for maximizing its use in the
classroom (Scott & De la Fuente, 2008).
Some researchers have argued, however, that using the L1 in the classroom may
facilitate L2 acquisition (Anton & DiCamilla, 1998; Artemeva, 1995; Cook, 1999,
2001; Levine, 2003). According to Atkinson (1993), the belief that L2 teachers and
learners should use only the L2 in the classroom is founded on the notion that
acquisition is better than learning. Obviously, when we are born, we begin to learn a
language and internalize it in our head unconsciously. We do not study any kind of
grammar rule. We simply learn it in a communicative way.

This bad reputation L1 earned in the teaching field led to second language learning to be
“treated unidimensionally”, as if there were two separate spheres of knowledge which
do not interact with each other (Koda, 1993: 490). However, Cook (2001: 418) argued
that the L1 may serve a useful purpose in FL teaching, particularly in task-based
learning approaches:
“Through the L1, they [students] may explain the task to each other, negotiate
roles they are going to take, or check their understanding or production of
language against their peers”.

So, we find that there are many researchers that find better to teach a language using the
L1 while there are others who think just the opposite. Scott and De la Fuente (2008)
showed in their study how some students who were studying Spanish and French, used
their L1 in order to do some exercises in group. They were twelve students, 6 of them
studied French and the other half studied Spanish. They were divided in two groups,
one group containing three students of Spanish and three of French, and the other group
with the same number of students. One of the groups was told to use only their L1 to
discuss and the other group was told only to use their L2. In the results, according to
Scott and De la Fuente (2008), learners use the L1 even when they appear to be
operating exclusively in the L2. When they are required to use the L2 during a
collaborative consciousness-raising, form-focused task, they talk to themselves in the
L1 as they translate the text, recall grammar rules, review the task, and plan what to say
in the L2 (Scott and De la Fuente, 2008).

1.3. Methods and Approaches used in language teaching

At this point, I will outline some approaches used for language teaching. In addition, I
will note the role the teacher is expected to fulfil in each approach or method.
 1.3.1. The Grammar Translation Method

Howatt (1984:98) points out that the Classical Method (Grammar Translation Method)
was originally associated with the teaching of Latin and –to a much lesser extent-
ancient Greek. Vermes (2010: 83-85) argues that we need to differentiate between
pedagogical and real translation. Pedagogical translation is used as a tool for students to
improve their L2. While real translation the translated text is the ultimate goal of the
translating process.
According to Cerce-Murcia (2001: 6), the key features of the Grammar Translation
Method are as follows:
a. Instruction is given in the native language of the students.
b. There is little use of the target language for communication.
c. Focus is on grammatical parsing, i.e, the form and inflection of words.
d. There is early reading of difficult texts.
e. A typical exercise is to translate sentences from the target language into mother
tongue (or vice versa).
f. The result of this approach is usually an inability on the part of the student to use
the language for communication.
g. The teacher does not have to be able to speak the target language.

In this line, we need to think that the translation method is not useful for every child.
We also need to consider their knowledge about the language. Duff (1989: 7) argues
that:

[d]epending on the students’ needs, and on the syllabus, the teacher can select
the material to illustrate particular aspects of language and structure with which
the students have difficulty in English (for instance, prepositions, articles, if-
clauses, the passive). By working through these difficulties in their mother
tongue, the students come to see the link between language (grammar) and
usage.

Many researchers do not agree about teaching by using the translation method. As cited
by Marqués Aguado and Solís-Becerra (2013), Lado considers that since translation is a
psychologically complex skill, it has to be taught after the L2 is mastered, “as a separate
skill, if that is considered desirable” (1964: 54). Duff, on the contrary, proposed using
translation as a “language learning activity” (1989: 8). In turn, Malmkjaer believed that
translation was not possible without the four skills, as it was “dependent on and
inclusive of them” (1998: 8).

1.3.1.1. Advantages and disadvantages of Grammar Translation

Method
Every teacher should consider all the advantages and disadvantages when using a
method. Gorzky (nd) mentioned as advantages that:
1. This method reduces the teacher stress. It requires less teacher involvement
since class activities or learning games are rarely necessary, as students are
translating text to another language directly.
2. It focuses on grammar, sentence structure and word meanings. GTM
focuses on the application of grammar and correct sentence structure. It can help
students to learn how to read and write in the target language.
Gorzky (nd) also mentioned some disadvantages:
1. Learner motivation and participation. The GTM approach involves no learner
participation and little teacher-student relationship. Students are required to learn
from a textbook and use the same method throughout their learning. Because
lessons using GTM are not interactive and engaging for students, they become
more likely to lose interest in their subject and less motivated to learn.
2. Unnatural and Inaccurate Pronunciation. Students are only taught how to
read and write the language. The mere application of grammar and sentence
structure cannot adequately prepare them for realistic conversations or verbal
communication, as no emphasis is given to spoken language in the GTM
approach.

Considering both the advantages and the disadvantages, GTM is not the best method for
teaching a foreign language. It helps to read and write, but it does not help to develop
one of the most important skills, the speaking. Furthermore, motivation is not crucial ,
but it is necessary to be understood when speaking.

1.3.2. The Direct Method

In reaction to the Grammar-Translation approach, and its failure to produce learners
who could communicate in the foreign language they had been studying, a new method
emerged: The Direct approach (Celce-Murcia, 2013: 6). Some features about this
approach were argued by Celce-Murcia (2013: 6):
a. No use of the mother tongue is permitted (i.e., the teacher does not need to know
the student’s native language).
b. Lessons begin with dialogues and anecdotes in modern conversational style.
c. Actions and pictures are used to make meanings clear.
d. Grammar is learned inductively.
e. Literary texts are read for pleasure and are not analysed grammatically.
f. The target culture is also taught inductively.
g. The teacher must be a native speaker or have nativelike proficiency in the target
language.
As Sánchez (2009: 51) was cited by Marqués Aguado and Solís-Becerra (2013) the
Direct method appeared as part of the so-called Natural approach, whose most
distinctive feature is the belief that languages other than the L1 are best learned
following the path of nature; that is, learning an L2 should resemble acquiring one’s L1
as much as possible. That is to say, this method basically was focused on oral
communication, which prevailed over written expression. (Martín Sanchez 2010: 145 in
Marqués Aguado and Solís-Becerra, 2013). As a consequence:
“grammar was largely left aside and prevalence was given to vocabulary,
situations and dialogues. Learning was inductive: it was practice, and not
grammatical explanations followed by reflections on the language, that created
the foundations for acquiring a language. So, there was no room for either
translation or students’ L1, which would be blamed for interference” (Marqués
Aguado and Solís-Becerra, 2013).
1.3.2.1. Advantages and disadvantages of The Direct Method

Every teacher should consider the advantages and disadvantages when using a method
in teaching a language. In Direct Method Advantages And Disadvantages (2015)
mention some benefits:

1. It gives the Pupils a Real Command of English Language. It facilitates in

understanding English by establishing a direct association between the word and
its meaning and it enables the student to grasp the sentence patterns he hears or
 reads in English. The student is able to express his thought and feelings directly
in English.
2. This Method makes the Study of English Interesting and Lively. Study of
language through this method becomes interesting, motivating, and active
participation because of its emphasis on the spoken idiom. The use of
illustrations, objects, use of audio-visual aids, demonstrations etc.
3. It Facilitates Reading and Students learn to speak fluently and to write fairly
quickly and correctly.
4. This Method is psychologically Sound. All the principles of modern education,
e.g., to proceed from particular to general is emphasized.
5. More emphasis is put on practice than on theory.
6. More interaction between the teacher and the student.

Some disadvantages are also discussed:

1. This Method does not Consider all Aspects of Language Teaching. It puts
much emphasis on speech and ignores other skills like reading, writing, hearing,
etc.
2. The dialogues and situations represented in the classroom were not very
likely to be encountered by students outside this environment. (Martín
Sánchez 2010: 145 in Marqués Aguado and Solís-Becerra, 2013).
3. There was no correction, which might eventually lead to the fossilisation of
errors. (Martín Sánchez 2010: 145 in Marqués Aguado and Solís-Becerra, 2013).

4. Lack of Standard Textbooks. We don’t have standard textbooks properly

graded in respect of grammar and composition.
5. There is Difficulty in Explanation. We usually follow four ways to explain the
words. Direct Method completely ignores translation. As a result, it becomes
difficult to explain the ideas.
6. This Method does not Consider all Aspects of Language Teaching. It puts
much emphasis on speech and ignores other skills like listening.

Despite the good advantages for acquiring the foreign language. This method was not
successful in European schools. However, teachers must value the student's speech. The
oral skill is one of the most important to improve the student's language proficiency.
Creating a communicative environment encourages the student to become involved in
the field of study. So, this method has been an influence in creating other methods,
taking into account all the positive and negative points.

1.3.3. The Reading Approach

Bibliography

Gorsky, Victoria. (nd). Advantages and Disadvantages of GTM. [online] available at

https://www.theclassroom.com/advantages-disadvantages-gtm-tefl-8059435.html
Retrieved March 25th 2020

"Direct Method Advantages And Disadvantage". Notes Read, 2015,

https://notesread.com/explain-briefly-direct-method-advantages-and-disadvantage/.
Accessed 26 Mar 2020.