Audio-lingual
method
The audio-lingual method, Army Method, or New Key,[1] is a method used in teaching foreign languages.
It is based on behaviorist theory, which postulates that certain traits of living things, and in this case
humans, could be trained through a system of reinforcement. The correct use of a trait would receive
positive feedback while incorrect use of that trait would receive negative feedback.[2]
This approach to language learning was similar to another, earlier method called the direct method.[3]
Like the direct method, the audio-lingual method advised that students should be taught a language
directly, without using the students' native language to explain new words or grammar in target language.
However, unlike the direct method, the audio-lingual method did not focus on teaching vocabulary.
Rather, the teacher drilled students in the use of grammar.
Applied to language instruction, and often within the context of the language lab, it means that the
instructor would present the correct model of a sentence and the students would have to repeat it. The
teacher would then continue by presenting new words for the students to sample in the same structure. In
audio-lingualism, there is no explicit grammar instruction: everything is simply memorized in form.
The idea is for the students to practice the particular construct until they can use it spontaneously. The
lessons are built on static drills in which the students have little or no control on their own output; the
teacher is expecting a particular response and not providing the desired response will result in a student
receiving negative feedback. This type of activity, for the foundation of language learning, is in direct
opposition with communicative language teaching.
Charles Carpenter Fries, the director of the English Language Institute at the University of Michigan, the
first of its kind in the United States, believed that learning structure or grammar was the starting point for
the student. In other words, it was the students' job to recite the basic sentence patterns and grammatical
structures. The students were given only “enough vocabulary to make such drills possible.” (Richards, J.C.
et-al. 1986). Fries later included principles of behavioural psychology, as developed by B.F. Skinner, into
this method.
Oral drills
Drills and pattern practice are typical (Richards, J.C. et al., 1986):
Repetition: the student repeats an utterance as soon as he hears it.
Inflection: one word in a sentence appears in another form when repeated.
Replacement: one word is replaced by another.
Restatement: the student rephrases an utterance.
Examples
Inflection: Teacher: I ate the sandwich. Student: I ate the sandwiches.
Replacement: Teacher: He bought the car for half-price. Student: He bought it for half-price.
Restatement: Teacher: Tell me not to smoke so often. Student: Don't smoke so often!
The following example illustrates how more than one sort of drill can be incorporated into one practice
session:
“Teacher: There's a cup on the table ... repeat
Students: There's a cup on the table
Teacher: Spoon
Students: There's a spoon on the table
Teacher: Book
Students: There's a book on the table
Teacher: On the chair
Students: There's a book on the chair
etc.”[4]
Historical roots
The method is the product of three historical circumstances. For its views on language, it drew on the
work of American linguists such as Leonard Bloomfield. The prime concern of American linguists in the
early decades of the 20th century had been to document all the indigenous languages spoken in the US.
However, because of the dearth of trained native teachers who would provide a theoretical description of
the native languages, linguists had to rely on observation. For the same reason, a strong focus on oral
language was developed.
At the same time, behaviourist psychologists such as B.F. Skinner were forming the belief that all
behaviour (including language) was learnt through repetition and positive or negative reinforcement. The
third factor was the outbreak of World War II, which created the need to post large number of American
servicemen all over the world. It was, therefore, necessary to provide these soldiers with at least basic
verbal communication skills. Unsurprisingly, the new method relied on the prevailing scientific methods of
the time, observation and repetition, which were also admirably suited to teaching en masse. Because of
the influence of the military, early versions of the audio-lingualism came to be known as the “army
method.”[1]
In practice
As mentioned, lessons in the classroom focus on the correct imitation of the teacher by the students. The
students expected to produce the correct output, but attention is also paid to correct pronunciation.
Although correct grammar is expected in usage, no explicit grammatical instruction is given.
Furthermore, the target language is the only language to be used in the classroom.[1] Modern
implementations are more lax on this last requirement.
Fall from popularity
In the late 1950s, the theoretical underpinnings of the method were questioned by linguists such as Noam
Chomsky, who pointed out the limitations of structural linguistics. The relevance of behaviorist
psychology to language learning was also questioned, most famously by Chomsky's review (http://cogprint
s.org/1148/00/chomsky.htm) of B.F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior in 1959. The audio-lingual method was
thus deprived of its scientific credibility and it was only a matter of time before the effectiveness of the
method itself was questioned.
In 1964, Wilga Rivers released a critique of the method in her book, The Psychologist and the Foreign
Language Teacher. Subsequent research by others, inspired by her book, produced results which showed
explicit grammatical instruction in the mother language to be more productive. These developments,
coupled with the emergence of humanist pedagogy led to a rapid decline in the popularity of
audiolingualism.
Philip Smith's study from 1965-1969, termed the Pennsylvania Project, provided significant proof that
audio-lingual methods were less effective than a more traditional cognitive approach involving the
learner's first language.[5]
In recent years
Despite being discredited as an effective teaching methodology in 1970,[5] audio-lingualism continues to
be used today although it is typically not used as the foundation of a course but rather has been relegated
to use in individual lessons. As it continues to be used, it also continues to be criticized. As Jeremy
Harmer notes, “Audio-lingual methodology seems to banish all forms of language processing that help
students sort out new language information in their own minds.” As this type of lesson is very teacher-
centered, it is a popular methodology for both teachers and students, perhaps for several reasons but
especially because the input and output is restricted and both parties know what to expect. Some hybrid
approaches have been developed, as can be seen in the textbook Japanese: The Spoken Language (1987–
90), which uses repetition and drills extensively but supplements them with detailed grammar
explanations in English.
Butzkamm and Caldwell have tried to revive traditional pattern practice in the form of bilingual semi-
communicative drills. For them, the theoretical basis, and sufficient justification, of pattern drills is the
generative principle, which refers to the human capacity to generate an infinite number of sentences from
a finite grammatical competence.[6]
Main features
Each skill (listening, speaking, reading, writing) is treated and taught separately.
The skills of writing and reading are not neglected, but the focus throughout remains on listening and
speaking.
Dialogue is the main feature of the audio-lingual syllabus.
Dialogues are the chief means of presenting language items. They provide learners an opportunity to
practice, mimic and memorize bits of language.
Patterns drills are used as an important technique and essential part of this method for language
teaching and learning.
The language laboratory was introduced as an important teaching aid.
Mother tongue was not given much importance, similar to the direct method, but it was not
deemphasized so rigidly..[7]
Techniques
Skills are taught in the following order: listening, speaking, reading, writing. Language is taught through
dialogues with useful vocabulary and common structures of communication. Students are made to
memorize the dialogue line by line. Learners mimic the teacher or a tape listening carefully to all features
of the spoken target language. Pronunciation like that of native speaker is important in presenting the
model. Through repetition of phrases and sentences, a dialogue is learned by the first whole class, then
smaller groups and finally individual learners.
Reading and writing are introduced in the next stage. The oral lesson learned in previous class is the
reading material to establish a relationship between speech and writing. All reading material is introduced
as orally first. Writing, in the early stages, is confined to transcriptions of the structures and dialogues
learned earlier. Once learners mastered the basic structure, they were asked to write composition reports
based on the oral lesson.[7]
Emphasizing the audio
The theory emphasizes the listening-speaking-reading-writing order.
Listening is important in developing speaking proficiency and so receives particular emphasis. There are
strong arguments, both physiological and psychological, for combining speaking practice with training in
listening comprehension.
Speaking is effective through listening. By hearing the sounds, articulation is more accurate, with
differentiation of sounds, memorization and internalization of proper auditory sounds images.
Development of a feel for the new language gains interest for the language.
There has been practically no study or experiments to determine how much time should be taken
between listening experience and speaking practice.
Listening comprehension is most neglected in language learning. It is generally treated as incidental to
speaking rather than as a foundation for it. Texts, guides and course of study contain tests for evaluating
progress in listening comprehension, but they rarely contain specific learning materials designed for the
systematic development of this skill.
Here are some materials that can be adapted for improving listening comprehension:
The dialogue should be presented as a story, in the foreign language, using simple language.
The meaning of some of the new words and expressions that will appear in the dialogue should be
explained through gestures, visual aids, synonyms, etc. The idea is to teach the content in the story.
Different role-plays can be used to present the dialogue.
Without stopping, the dialogue can be gone through to hear how the entire conversation sounds at
normal speed.
True and false activity can improve comprehension.
The entire dialogue can be repeated at normal rate speed. The student can close his eyes to eliminate
distractions and increase his listening concentration.
A listening comprehension test can be given.
Listening comprehension practice can be given using dialogues from other courses of
study or recorded materials that contain most of the language that has previously been learned by the
students. The speaking practice would begin after listening comprehension. The students will be ready to
speak at this time. Speaking practice can proceed according to sequence.
1. Pattern practice can be based on material taken from the dialogue.
2. Mimicking can practice the dialogue itself.
3. Performance of the dialogue in front of class and at the seats with the students changing roles and
partners from time to time.
4. Dialogue can be adapted.
Memorization of techniques suggested represent an approach that will enable student to memorize larger
segments at a time and perform dialogues as a whole with more confidence. In the meantime, if teachers
are willing to use their imagination and experiment with new techniques, many ways can be found to
emphasize the audio in the method.[8]
Aims
Oral skills are used systematically to emphasize communication. The foreign language is taught for
communication, with a view to achieve development of communication skills.
Practice is how the learning of the language takes place. Every language skill is the total of the sets of
habits that the learner is expected to acquire. Practice is central to all the contemporary foreign
language teaching methods. With audio-lingual method, it is emphasized even more.
Oral learning is emphasized. Stress is put on oral skills at the early year of the foreign language course
and is continued during the later years. Oral skills remain central even when, later, reading and writing
are introduced. Learners are asked to speak only what they have had a chance to listen to sufficiently.
They read only the material used as part of their practice. They have to write only that which they have
read. Strict order of material, in terms of the four skills, is followed.[9]
Advantages
Listening and speaking skills are emphasized and, especially the former, rigorously developed.
The use of visual aids is effective in vocabulary teaching.
The method is just as functional and easy to execute for larger groups.
Correct pronunciation and structure are emphasized and acquired.
It is a teacher-dominated method.
The learner is in a directed role; the learner has little control over the material studied or the method of
study.
Disadvantages
The behaviorist approach to learning is now discredited. Many scholars have proven its weakness. [10]
It does not pay sufficient attention to communicative competence.
Only language form is considered while meaning is neglected.
Equal importance is not given to all four skills.
It is a teacher-dominated method.
It is a mechanical method since it demands pattern practice, drilling, and memorization over functional
learning and organic usage.
The learner is in a passive role; the learner has little control over their learning.[11]
References
1. Wilfried Decoo, "On The Mortality of Language Learning Methods" (http://www.didascalia.be/mortality.ht
m) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20180215231414/http://www.didascalia.be/mortality.htm) 2018-
02-15 at the Wayback Machine. Speech November 8, 2001.
2. Reimann, Andrew (January 2018). Behaviorist Learning Theory. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English
Language Teaching. pp. 1–6. doi:10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0155 (https://doi.org/10.1002%2F978111878423
5.eelt0155) . ISBN 9781118784228.
3. Felder, Richard (March 1995). "Foreign Language Annals". Learning and Teaching Styles in Foreign and
Second Language Education. 28, Issue1: 21–31.
4. Harmer, Jeremy. The Practice of English Language Teaching. 3rd Edition. pg. 79-80. Essex: Pearson Education
Ltd., 2001
5. James L. Barker lecture (http://webh01.ua.ac.be/didascalia/mortality.htm) Archived (https://web.archive.org/w
eb/20090112010049/http://webh01.ua.ac.be/didascalia/mortality.htm) January 12, 2009, at the Wayback
Machine on November 8, 2001 at Brigham Young University, given by Wilfried Decoo.
6. Butzkamm, Wolfgang; Caldwell, J.A.W. (2009). The bilingual reform. A paradigm shift in foreign language
teaching. Tübingen: Narr Studienbücher. ISBN 978-3-8233-6492-4.
7. Nagaraj (2005) [sixth since 1996]. English Language Teaching:Approaches, Methods, Techniques. Hyderabad:
Orient Longman Private Limited.
8. Allen, Harold B; Campbell, Russell N (1972) [1965]. Teaching English as a Second Language (Second ed.). New
York: McGowan-Hill, Inc. pp. 98–100.
9. Joseph C., Mukalel (1998). Approaches to English language teaching. Delhi: Discovery Pulshing House.
10. Chomsky, Noam (1959). “A Review of B. F. Skinner’s Verbal Behavior”
11. Diane Larsen, Freeman (2000). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford University Press.
External links
Saskatchewan Schools' Audio-lingual method page (https://web.archive.org/web/20060427121227/htt
p://www.saskschools.ca/curr_content/hutt/esl/almethod.htm)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Audio-lingual_method&oldid=1050786202"
Last edited 17 days ago by SporkBot
Wikipedia
Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless
otherwise noted.
