lassroom management is the linchpin that makes teaching and learning
C
achievable using the key components that affect success in the classroom.
Classroom management as the orchestration of classroom life covers planning
curriculum, organizing procedures and resources, arranging the environment to
maximize efficiency, monitoring student progress, and anticipating potential
problem.
BASIC FUNCTIONS OF CM
Planning: dealing with the ongoing activities and how they can be best organized
Communication: dealing with the necessity to tell students what is expected of
them Control: dealing with the need to maintain a very conducive classroom
atmosphere to learning
GOALS: Creating the best learning environment.
Developing students' responsibility and self-regulation.
Increasing students' engagement, decreasing disruptive behaviours, and enhancing
the use of instructional time, which will collectively improve students
achievement. Promoting students' motivation
TEACHER AS MANAGER:
The teacher should manage everything and everyone including herself within the
classroom. She or he should design classroom activities which promote students'
motivation, appeal their interest, and put them in collaborative and competitive
classroom interaction among the students and the teacher. He or She should keep
agreed classroom discipline and regulation that every body must commit
voluntarily.
TEACHER AS MOTIVATOR
Sustaining students' motivation by presenting materials with the appropriate level
of difficulty. The students feel that their teacher really cares about them, therefore,
they are more likely to be motivated to learn the subject. The students take some
responsibility for themselves and become the "doer' in the classroom.
CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT SKILLS: Managing Multicultural and
Multilingual Classrooms
Effectively managing multicultural and multilingual classrooms requires an
understanding of diverse learning styles and the implementation of inclusive
strategies. Students may have visual, auditory, kinesthetic, or reading/writing
preferences, and cultural backgrounds can influence their learning behaviors and
expectations. For instance, some cultures may encourage active participation, while
others value quiet observation. Being sensitive to these differences helps create a
more supportive and respectful environment.
In multilingual settings, language barriers can affect comprehension and
engagement. Teachers should incorporate visual aids, simplified instructions, and
gestures to enhance understanding. Group work that pairs students of different
linguistic abilities can promote peer learning and mutual support. Encouraging the
use of students' first languages as a bridge to English learning can also boost
confidence and participation.
Scenario-based strategies include setting clear, consistent rules that respect all
cultures, using multilingual classroom displays, and incorporating culturally
relevant materials. For example, a teacher might include global stories or celebrate
festivals from students' home countries. Differentiated instruction, such as using
tiered tasks or offering instructions in multiple formats, addresses varied
proficiency levels and learning needs.
To manage behavior constructively, positive reinforcement and clear
communication are essential. Teachers should model inclusive language and
behavior, fostering an atmosphere of mutual respect. Regular reflection and
feedback from students can guide improvements in classroom management
practices.
Ultimately, successful management of diverse classrooms depends on cultural
competence, flexibility, and a commitment to equity, ensuring that all learners feel
valued and have equal opportunities to succeed.
REAL-WORLD OR TARGET TASK
a piece of work undertaken for oneself or for others, freely or for some reward.
Thus examples of tasks include painting a fence, dressing a child, filling out a
form, buying a pair of shoes, making an airline reservation, borrowing a library
book, taking a driving test, typing a letter, weighing a patient, sorting letters,
making a hotel reservation, writing a cheque, finding a street destination and
helping someone across a road. In other words, by ‘task’ is meant the hundred and
one things people do in everyday life, at work, at play and in between (Long, 1985,
p. 89)
PEDAGOGICAL TASK:
a pedagogical task is a piece of classroom work that involves learners in
comprehending, manipulating, producing or interacting in the target language
while their attention is focused on mobilizing their grammatical knowledge in
order to express meaning, and in which the intention is to convey meaning rather
than to manipulate form. The task should also have a sense of completeness, being
able to stand alone as a communicative act in its own right with a beginning, a
middle and an end (Nunan, 2004, p. 4).
PRINCIPALS OF TASK BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING
● The class activities have a perceived purpose and a clear outcome.
● A pre-task, in which students work through a task that they will later do
individually, is a helpful way to have students see the logic involved in what
they are being asked to do. It will also allow the language necessary to
complete the task to come into play.
● The teacher breaks down into smaller steps the logical thinking process
necessary to complete the task. The demand on thinking made by the activity
should be just above the level which learners can meet without help.
● The teacher supplies the correct target form by reformulating or recasting
what the students have said.
● The teacher provides good models of the target language.
● This jigsaw task, where students have to piece together information they
need to complete a task, gives them an opportunity for interaction.
● The teacher should not necessarily interrupt the students when they are
focused on meaning.
● Repeating the language that they have been working on shows learners what
they can and what they cannot yet do.
● ‘Listen-and-do’ tasks promote acquisition of new vocabulary and provide a
good model for grammatical form. This task follow-up can enhance the
learning that has taken place earlier.
TECHNIQUES
Information-gap Task: exchange of information among students in order to
complete a task.
Opinion-gap Task: students express their personal preferences, feelings, or
attitudes in order to complete the task.
Reasoning-gap Task: A reasoning-gap activity requires that students derive some
new information by inferring it from information they have already been given.
Unfocused Tasks: Unfocused tasks are tasks designed to provide learners with
opportunities for communicating generally.
Focused Tasks: Focused tasks are tasks designed to provide opportunities for
communicating using some specific linguistic item, typically a grammar structure.
Input-providing Tasks : Input-providing tasks engage learners with the receptive
skills of listening and reading. We saw in the lesson in this chapter that the students
completed a schedule with the content that the teacher provided. Input-providing
(e.g. ‘listen and do’ tasks) not only work on the receptive skills, but also give
teachers an opportunity to introduce new language.
Output-prompting Tasks: Output-prompting tasks stimulate the students to write
or speak meaningfully. In our lesson, there was an output-prompting task when
students had to share the information on their cards so that their group members
could complete a schedule.
Error correction is a vital part of language teaching as it helps learners become
aware of their mistakes, improve accuracy, and build confidence in
communication. However, how and when correction is done greatly affects
students’ motivation and learning outcomes..
1. SELF-CORRECTION Teacher must encourage students to correct themselves,
as it promotes learner independence.Use gentle prompts or ask guiding questions
to allow them to notice and fix their own errors.
2.PEER CORRECTION: Peer correction is recommended when students feel
comfortable with one another. It encourages collaborative learning, reduces teacher
dependence, and allows students to learn through observation and explanation.
3. REFORMULATION (RECASTING) Rather than directly correcting the
student, teacher reformulate the error in a natural way during conversation. Harmer
supports this as it provides a model while keeping the communication flowing:
Student: He go yesterday.
Teacher: Oh, he went yesterday? Where did he go?
4. PROMPTING (ELICITATION) Often pause and raise intonation or ask
questions to elicit the correct form from the student.this method helps learners
engage more actively in monitoring their output.
5. DELAYED CORRECTION For fluency-based activities, avoiding immediate
correction. Instead,take notes during the activity and provide group feedback
afterward.this reduces pressure & allows focus on communication during the task.
6. USING ERROR CORRECTION CODES (for Writing) Use correction codes
in students’ written work (e.g., “S” for spelling, “T” for tense). This encourages
learners to reflect on their mistakes
7. EXPLICIT CORRECTION When dealing with systematic or serious errors
(especially those affecting meaning), directly point out the error and explain the
correct form. this is appropriate when subtle correction might not be enough.
8. USING THE BOARD OR VISUAL FEEDBACK Sometimes write common
errors on the board after an activity (anonymously), then discuss corrections with
the class. This promotes awareness without singling out individuals.
Conclusion: Error correction should be thoughtful, flexible, and learner-centered.
By combining techniques such as elicitation, peer correction, and delayed
feedback,
(A ) What types of errors do language learners generally make? Language
learners make several types of errors. Interlingual errors arise from interference of
the first language (L1) in learning the second language (L2). Intralingual errors
occur due to incomplete or incorrect learning of the target language, such as
overgeneralization or simplification. Errors are also classified as overt, where the
mistake is clearly visible (e.g., I runned all the day), and covert, where the sentence
appears correct but fails to convey the intended meaning (e.g., I was stopped)
(b) Which language errors need to be corrected? Errors that impede
communication, cause misunderstanding, or are fossilized (repeated without
self-correction) should be addressed. Focus should be on systematic errors rather
than occasional slips. Errors affecting core grammar, pronunciation, or meaning are
priorities. However, teachers should balance correction with fluency development.
Errors that interfere with learner goals (e.g., exam preparation or professional
communication) also warrant attention. In contrast, minor errors that do not affect
comprehension may be ignored in early fluency-focused stages.
(c) Who needs to correct the errors? Error correction can be done by the teacher,
peers, or the learners themselves. Teachers are often best positioned to model
correct usage, especially for new or complex structures. However, peer correction
encourages collaboration and active learning. Self-correction is ideal, as it
promotes learner autonomy and reflection. The choice depends on learner
proficiency, context, and classroom dynamics. A balanced approach, where
learners are guided to notice and correct their own or others’ errors, is most
effective.
(d) How should the errors be corrected? Errors should be corrected using
constructive, supportive, and context-sensitive methods. Techniques include
elicitation, recasting, explicit correction, and metalinguistic clues. During fluency
tasks, delayed correction is preferable to maintain flow. In accuracy-focused
activities, immediate correction may be more suitable. Teachers should avoid
over-correction, which can discourage learners. Instead, fostering an environment
where mistakes are seen as learning opportunities encourages risk-taking and
growth. Correction should always be clear, respectful, and encouraging.
EFFECTIVENESS OF CLT: Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) has
been widely adopted for its emphasis on authentic communication and
learner-centered interaction. Its effectiveness lies in fostering fluency and
functional language use by engaging students in meaningful tasks such as role
plays, group discussions, and problem-solving. CLT promotes communicative
competence over mere grammatical accuracy, aligning with real-world language
use and the needs of global learners.
CHALLENGES OF CLT: Despite its strengths, CLT presents several challenges.
One major issue is its reliance on teachers’ proficiency in English and their ability
to facilitate dynamic interaction. In many contexts, especially in developing
countries, teachers may lack sufficient training or confidence to implement CLT
effectively. Furthermore, large class sizes, limited resources, and rigid curricula can
hinder the communicative approach, making it difficult to manage student-centered
activities. Another criticism is the potential neglect of formal grammar instruction,
which may result in learners developing fluency at the expense of accuracy.
Adaptations of CLT: To address these limitations, CLT has undergone various
adaptations. One such adaptation is the integration of form-focused instruction
within communicative tasks, helping learners develop both accuracy and fluency.
Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT), a branch of CLT, emphasizes language
use through real-life tasks while allowing structured language input. In contexts
with limited resources, modified CLT approaches incorporate more controlled
practice alongside communicative activities to balance interaction with practical
classroom constraints.
CONCLUSION: While CLT is effective in promoting real-life communication
skills, its implementation must be context-sensitive. Teachers require adequate
training, and curricula should be flexible to accommodate communicative
methodologies. By blending CLT with traditional methods and adapting it to local
constraints, educators can enhance its practicality and ensure that learners not only
communicate effectively but also develop a solid foundation in the target language.
FORMATIVE ASSESSMENT: Formative assessment is an ongoing process used
during instruction to monitor student learning and provide feedback for
improvement. It is not typically graded, as its purpose is to support learning rather
than evaluate it. Teachers use formative assessment to identify students' strengths
and areas of difficulty, allowing them to adjust instruction to better meet learners'
needs. Examples include classroom discussions, quick quizzes, exit tickets, peer
feedback, and observations. Because it occurs during the learning process,
formative assessment helps both teachers and students stay aware of progress and
make timely changes to improve outcomes.
SUMMATIVE ASSESSMENT: Summative assessment occurs at the end of a
learning period, such as a unit, term, or course. Its primary purpose is to evaluate
student learning against specific standards or objectives. Unlike formative
assessment, it is usually graded and used for reporting performance to parents,
schools, or external bodies. Common examples include final exams, standardized
tests, research projects, and end-of-term papers. Summative assessment provides a
summary of what students have learned and is often used to make high-stakes
decisions, such as course placement or graduation eligibility.
DIRECT ASSESSMENT: Direct assessment involves the evaluation of actual
student work or performance. It provides observable and measurable evidence of
learning. Examples include written essays, oral presentations, math problems,
portfolios, science experiments, and performances. Direct assessment is considered
highly reliable because it shows exactly what students can do. It allows educators
to assess specific skills or knowledge and align the results with learning outcomes.
INDIRECT ASSESSMENT: Indirect assessment collects data about student
learning in ways that do not involve evaluating actual work. Instead, it focuses on
students’ perceptions, attitudes, or experiences. Examples include surveys,
interviews, reflective journals, course evaluations, and focus groups. Although
indirect assessment does not directly measure skills or knowledge, it offers
valuable insight into how students feel about their learning and the effectiveness of
instruction. It is most effective when used alongside direct assessment to provide a
more complete picture of student learning and engagement.
Teaching English through the eclectic approach in Pakistan presents both
promising prospects and significant challenges, influenced by the country's diverse
socio-cultural, linguistic, and educational contexts.
Prospects (Advantages):
1. Cultural and Linguistic Diversity :Pakistan is a multilingual country with
diverse educational backgrounds. The eclectic approach allows teachers to adapt
their methods according to the local context, using a mix of techniques to bridge
the gap between students’ native languages and English.
2. Adaptability to Varied Educational Settings: Pakistani classrooms range from
elite private schools to under-resourced public institutions. The flexibility of the
eclectic method allows teachers to tailor instruction to suit urban or rural
environments, large or small class sizes, and differing levels of student proficiency.
3. Student-Centered Learning: Traditional rote learning has dominated education
in Pakistan. The eclectic approach shifts focus toward interactive and
communicative methods, encouraging critical thinking, creativity, and
participation—key skills for modern learners.
Problems ( Disadvantages )
1. Teacher Training and Competence: Many teachers in Pakistan are trained in
outdated methods or lack sufficient training in multiple teaching approaches.
Without strong pedagogical grounding, they may misuse or poorly integrate
eclectic strategies.
2. Lack of Resources: Public schools often face shortages in teaching materials,
technology, and libraries. The effectiveness of the eclectic method, which depends
on diverse materials and activities, may be limited in such environments.
3. Assessment Constraints: Standardized exams in Pakistan still emphasize rote
memorization and grammar rules. This mismatch between assessment practices
and eclectic teaching objectives can discourage innovation in classrooms.
CONCLUSION: In the Pakistani context, the eclectic approach holds great
potential to modernize English language teaching and better engage learners.
However, its success depends on investment in teacher training, curriculum reform,
and systemic support to overcome structural and attitudinal barriers.
The eclectic approach to teaching is a methodology that blends elements from
various instructional methods to create a flexible and responsive teaching style.
Rather than relying on a single method such as Grammar-Translation or
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), teachers who use the eclectic approach
draw from multiple strategies to meet the needs of diverse learners, objectives, and
contexts.
One of the primary advantages of the eclectic approach is its flexibility. It allows
teachers to adapt their instruction based on students' learning styles, proficiency
levels, and classroom dynamics. This method supports a learner-centered
environment, where lessons can be tailored to individual and group needs,
enhancing student engagement and motivation. Additionally, by integrating
techniques from various methodologies, teachers can balance fluency and
accuracy, promoting comprehensive language competence.
Moreover, the eclectic approach encourages professional growth, requiring
teachers to be reflective, creative, and continuously evolving in their practice. It
also aligns with modern educational goals that emphasize differentiated instruction
and inclusive pedagogy.
However, the eclectic approach is not without its challenges. It demands a high
level of teacher expertise to select and combine methods effectively. Inexperienced
educators may struggle to implement it coherently, risking disjointed or ineffective
lessons. Furthermore, lesson planning can be time-consuming, as teachers must
carefully consider which methods to use and how to integrate them meaningfully.
There is also a risk of superficiality, where methods are used without a clear
rationale, reducing their impact. Assessment can become more complex due to the
diversity of techniques and objectives involved.
In conclusion, while the eclectic approach offers rich potential for adaptive and
inclusive teaching, it requires careful planning, pedagogical knowledge, and
reflective practice. When applied thoughtfully, it can significantly enhance both
teaching effectiveness and student learning outcomes.
EFFECTIVENESS OF TBLT: Task-Based Language Teaching positions
real-world tasks at the centre of instruction, requiring learners to negotiate meaning
and collaborate to achieve concrete outcomes. This experiential focus cultivates
communicative competence, problem-solving, and transferable skills. Research
indicates task complexity can push learners’ interlanguage development, eliciting
output and attention to form in post-task reflection. Authentic input, learner
autonomy, and intrinsic motivation are therefore enhanced, making TBLT
particularly effective for vocational, ESP, and content-integrated contexts.
CHALLENGES OF TBLT: Despite its strengths, TBLT presents several
implementation challenges. Designing coherent task sequences demands
pedagogical expertise and substantial preparation time, something overstretched
teachers may lack. Large, exam-oriented classes often limit opportunities for group
work and spontaneous interaction, while institutional syllabi may still privilege
discrete grammatical objectives over holistic tasks. Assessment is another obstacle;
performance-based evaluation can be subjective and time-consuming, complicating
standardisation. Additionally, learners accustomed to traditional teacher-fronted
instruction may feel anxious when success criteria are implicit rather than explicit.
ADAPTATIONS OF TBLT: To mitigate these issues, practitioners have
developed hybrid models that blend task cycles with focused language instruction.
Pre-task phases can incorporate micro-teaching of key lexis or structures, ensuring
learners possess the linguistic tools to perform effectively. Technology-mediated
tasks—such as synchronous online projects or mobile-based data
collection—extend interaction beyond the classroom and facilitate multimodal
feedback. For high-stakes testing environments, task-based assessment rubrics
anchored in the CEFR provide clearer benchmarks and improve reliability.
CONCLUSION: TBLT offers a compelling, learner-centred pathway to
communicative accuracy and fluency, yet it flourishes when contextual realities are
acknowledged. Adequate teacher training, flexible curricula, and assessment
frameworks are essential. By strategically integrating form-focused support and
leveraging digital tools, educators can adapt TBLT to diverse educational settings
without compromising its core emphasis on meaningful language use.
EFFECTIVENESS OF CALT: Computer-Assisted Language Teaching (CALT)
has significantly transformed language learning by integrating technology into
instruction. Its effectiveness lies in offering interactive, individualized, and
multimodal learning experiences. Through language learning apps, online
exercises, and virtual environments, learners gain access to immediate feedback,
extensive practice, and authentic input. CALT promotes learner autonomy and
motivation, allowing students to learn at their own pace and revisit materials as
needed. Moreover, it supports diverse learning styles through multimedia, making
language acquisition more engaging and accessible.
CHALLENGES OF CALT: Despite its advantages, CALT faces several
challenges. One primary concern is the digital divide—unequal access to
technology and the internet, particularly in low-income or rural areas. This limits
equitable implementation. Another issue is the lack of teacher training in using
digital tools effectively. Many educators are unfamiliar with the pedagogical
integration of technology, leading to superficial use or over-reliance on automated
tools. Additionally, some CALT programs lack communicative depth, focusing
more on drills and decontextualized grammar rather than meaningful interaction.
Overuse of screen-based learning can also reduce opportunities for face-to-face
communication and spontaneous language use.
ADAPTATIONS OF CALT: To address these challenges, CALT is increasingly
integrated with blended learning approaches, combining face-to-face instruction
with online resources. Professional development for teachers has become essential
to ensure they can select and use appropriate tools that align with communicative
and learner-centered goals. Advances in AI, virtual reality, and speech recognition
are being leveraged to create more interactive, authentic, and immersive learning
environments. Moreover, open educational resources (OER) and mobile-based
platforms help bridge access gaps in under-resourced contexts.
CONCLUSION: CALT holds great potential to enhance language learning when
thoughtfully integrated into pedagogical frameworks. By addressing technological
access, teacher training, and content quality, CALT can be a powerful tool to
complement traditional methods and support diverse learners globally.
