DEVELOPING LANGUAGE SKILLS

DEVELOPING LANGUAGE SKILLS IN THE CLASSROOM

DEVELOPING LANGUAGE

SKILLSFinal Assignment

Name and surname(s):

Carolina Susana Sepúlveda Godoy

José Faiver Sanjuán Gómez

Login:

CHFPMTFL643693

COFPMTFL1304571

Group:

Fp_tefl_2013-02.

Date:

22/09/2013

0


:

INDEX

INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………………………………..……2

The learning theories implicit in the way the units are presented and

developed………….…….…….2

The extent to which the skills are integrated …………………………………………...…………………3

The product-process aspects of the two units

…………………………………………………………......3

The ‘authentic/genuine’ aspects ….…………………………………………………………………………4

The issue of simplification of text …..…………………………………………………………….…………5

The relationship between the skills work and the learning/practice of

grammar……………………….6

1


The opportunities for production (oral and

written) the units provide…………………………………...6

The types of production required ………………………………………………………………...…………8

The variety (or otherwise) of the activity types .………………………………………………..…….

……..9

Which unit do you prefer?

Why? ....................................................................

.............................................9

Other aspects considered relevant or important ……………………………………………………………9

Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………………………….10

BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………………………….….………..12

WEBOGRAPHY ……………………………………………………………………………..…….…..........12

INTRODUCTION

This piece of writing is focus on the comparison and contrast between two

pieces of English learning-teaching materials. Important aspects are

2


analyzed and confronted with each other as

the use and integration of the macro skills in the process.

During the developed process of materials several aspect of reading,

writing, listening and speaking skills will be compared, contrasted and

commented, helped by various theorist and linguistic perspectives of

TEFL.

It is important because it allows an excellent training and a deep

reflexion about how can skills be developed in the classroom.

Finally, it is a great help for teachers who are willing to improve their

performance in the class as excellent TEFL teachers based on the latest

research and the analysis of real English materials which are offered by

editorials but also to help teachers at the time of choosing any course

text to work with.

- The learning theories implicit in the way the units are presented and

developed. There is a marked learning theory in each unit, the M1 (first

material) called Bachillerato Made Easy, has an implicit tendency on the

traditional approach, as it is the introduction of a number of lexis and

grammar and topic. However, a communicative approach is evident in the

process; it is important to emphasise what Funiber stating David Nunan

writes “…it has been realised that there never was and there probably

never will be a method for all…” Funiber, (2013, pg. 5). Based on these

words and analyzing the texts, a clear influence of multi-syllabus

approach is evident. Widdowson distinguishes between usage and use, being

the former recognized as the ability of the user to manage the linguistic

rules, Funiber, (2013, pg. 6-7), this is evidenced since the beginning of

the unit when it presents the goals of it, there is a tendency to cover

some grammatical chunks, i.e. revise reported speech (statements,

questions and commands) and irregular comparatives and superlatives, all

thinking on a final task. On the other hand, M2 (second material),

Botellón, in its objectives shows a clear tendency or at least is more

3


evident what Widdowson calls use, this

defined as “…extent to which these rules are used”, and it can be seen

since the objectives where the learner is required to infer the

author/speaker´s opinion and the point of view of a text, to defend it,

to express opinion, to justify, to use arguments and the appropriate use

of linguistic expressions. These features are the same covered by M1 but

with a different focus, what is seen by Widdowson as “structurally graded

syllabuses” which corresponds to abnormal resolutions of language use and

could be not demonstrative of the forms of language discourse. Funiber

(2013, pg. 6)

Widdowson also mentions two terms: ´genuineness and authenticity´ to

distinguish quality and appropriateness of materials. M1 has a tendency

on genuineness where the quality of the material in itself has a clear

influence, making and keeping friends, is a reading point in which what

is stated there, shows a valuable amount of information to which the

student is exposed in order to achieve the goals above mentioned.

Widdowson, defines authenticity as the reader´s response to the text, and

this is what is important even if the text is original or adapted. The

main idea is to get a connection between the reader and the text which

could provide a real and practical relationship between practice/theory

and real life. Funiber, (2013, pg. 7). At this point, M2 offers a more

interesting engagement for the student because the variety of information

and the different points of view presented there, this is what Widdowson

calls authenticity and the unit offers a good variety of information and

has been adapted to a real world. The presentation of M2 has an influence

of the context of CLIL since the aim is to promote knowledge of a subject

and knowledge of a foreign language at the same time. Goethe-Institute.

n.d. (2013). It is evidently in here, particular forms of work involving

a partner, group work and project labor. These cooperative forms of work

are linked with the educational principle of learners’ autonomy, the

conceptual basis of all recent educational approaches. As the material is

4


presented students are facing a real social

situation so this is the best engagement in order to promote enthusiasm

and independent, student centred activities, and collaborative work.

- The extent to which the skills are integrated. There are lots of

items included when teaching English as a foreign language such as the

teacher, the learner, the setting and the native language the learner and

the teacher speak. It has to be considered the way the teacher delivers

the teaching and the learning style of each learner in the class. Also

the learner must be interested and motivated to learn; the setting has to

have the support required to teach (resources, values, learning

environment, etc.) in order to make all these items interwoven to success

in an effective learning. In the case of M2, Botellón offers a wide

variety of information to catch the learner’s attention. However, in an

integrated-skill approach, there is considered to mix the four macro

skills as reading, listening, writing and speaking which have to be

associated to sub-skills like the knowledge of the vocabulary, meaning

and usage, syntax, pronunciation and spelling which are integrated in M1.

But that is not enough to make everything work out, it is also required

all those factors lead the learning to communication as a success in

order to produce the integrated-skill approach. This type of approach

makes the learner learn in an integrated way which combined If factors

are not combined in a good way it may produce a Segregated-Skill

approach.

Segregated-Skill approach is shown in traditional ESL/EFL programs that

focus only on segregated language skills which makes the focus learning

in one of the language skills as a success when the learner manages it in

a discrete mastery and it is separate. Mohan (1986)

- The product-process aspects of the two units. Regarding product and

process the units placed as example present two different ways of

5


approaching skills; Funiber quoting

McDonough and Shaw, lists some aspects which refers to a first approach

which emphasizes a traditional trend as it makes stress on accuracy, it

centers on the finished product, the role of the teacher is the one of

judging, and some joining functions this is often stressed specially in

writing. Funiber, (2013, pg. 86). The second one, the process, focuses on

the “route one takes to a goal” rather than the accuracy, this procedure

aims to a process of planning, organizing, processing, drawing, editing,

among others. This is considered as very important by several authors in

the process of writing. Funiber, (2013, pg.87), in this part M1 has a

tendency to the first target because it strikes specially on linguistic

and rhetorical rules while M2 generates a way of solving a problem

through a process of generating learner ideas by examining other ways of

thinking, and looking for possible solutions and an accurate way of

expressing ideas.

Materials deal with various aspects of production in the four skills, M1

begins with types of questions such as: true and false, wh., and

multiple choice questions. M2 deals with wh. questions, where learners

are asked to answer some requirements related with the topic, a social

problem; M1 makes emphasis on usage rather than use and M2 deals with use

rather than usage aspects mentioned by Widdowson, (1978) which evidently

allow seeing the line in which the material engages the learner with its

objectives. The first evident aspect of production is done as a personal

reflexion, M1 allows students to answer question with their own words and

lead students to see references as a help for a kind of an accurate or

expected response. M2 focus on a real or a situational problem, so a pre-

concept is needed, consequently, what is emphasised here in the

engagement both materials are doing through types of questions that lead

to a particular objective(s), displayed at the beginning of the unit.

According to Hedge, quoted by Funiber, study and institutional writing

6


types are evident in these materials

Funiber, (2013. pg. 78). While M1 leads the learner to produce writing in

the workbook, and writing a report on what other people say or think; M2

pushes to produce solutions for a particular problem, in this case

Botellón, using concepts of agree or disagree which allows the production

of individual written work with the particularity of engaging a personal

point of view. In this case it can be said that M2 consents writing to

become a successful process because learner is encouraged to think about

a social real problem solution this idea is stated by John Cleff.

Funiber, (2013, pg. 79).

Regarding speaking process, it is evidently that there is tendency of

group and pair work, as it is well known, writing and speaking are linked

each other since the first leads to the second, Funiber, (2013, pg.79);

the units permit group discussion M1 uses more conventional parameters

such as the use of given expressions listed, while M2 allows the use of

Realia through a development of a debate where the learner uses

differences and strategies to make a proposal to solve a problem.

- The ‘authentic/genuine’ aspects. Funiber, (Pg7 Authenticity 1.2.2.).

As it has been mentioned above, when developing Language Skills, as

Widdowson points out, there are two types of texts which he calls ‘usage’

and ‘use’… the first one is related to linguistic rules and the second

one is related to the rules used for effective communication. Most of the

texts are more focused on the ‘usage’ of the language, use of linguistic

rules.

On the other hand, there is also a need to show to the learner different

types of texts and Widdowson (1978, pg. 80) makes a difference between

‘genuineness’ and ‘authenticity’. The first one shows the ‘characteristic

of the text itself and is an absolute quality’, on the other hand the

second shows ‘the relationship between the passage and the reader and the

appropriate response’ but his definition of ‘authenticity’ is the way the

7


reader answers to the text, in this case it is

difficult the learner get an effective reading in terms of accuracy and

efficiency and to be able to comprehend as much as the text as the

learner needs to achieve his/her purpose Greenall and Swan (1986, pg. 2).

In the case of these texts, there is a point to be considered in relation

to the ones the students are exposed to, texts can be authentic in terms

of the response, this can be evident specially in M2. thus, is considered

as authentic by Widdowson. When learner responds as he/she would in real

life, by, expressing feelings, then, there is what the scholar calls an

‘authentic’ response, which is important. In the response it can be seen

if the learner has comprehended in a ‘genuine’ text which means that this

could be or not better than the other one, the response of the learner is

what matters here.

In the listening happens something similar. One sample is the BBC World

Service Bulleting, but other scholars like David Graddol, (1997) point

out that the inauthenticity that, due to the audience, is predominantly

made up of non-native listeners. On the other hand, Tony Lynch, (1996,

pg. 124) says it is authentic because texts are samples of native

speakers. Therefore, scholars seem to disagree in many of the points.

To sum up, it seems there are many experts and scholars that pay

attention and put emphasis in the ‘authenticity’ but there is also

considered the distinction between ‘genuineness’ and ‘authenticity’ that

Widdowson’s, (1978) pointed out; then, also it should be considered the

appropriate response as an important matter.

- The issue of simplification of text. Materials deal with two types of

text, M1 uses authentic reading material regarding the main aspects of

authenticity such as linguistic and non-linguistic features, the former

regards with the authenticity of the text in itself and the later with

the presentation and layout, pictures, space, typeface, and colour. M2

contains a less quality of non-linguistic features, the texts are varied,

8


and they deal more with personal perspectives

about a concrete topic in this case Botellón, although they are very

varied, they are personal points of view rather than scientific research

or other authors´ points of view, even though it does not make the text

less authentic. A notorious simplification problem in M2, it is the

deficiency of non-linguistic aspects such as layout, colour and pictures

features which are not the best quality. According to Funiber, the

layout has a lot to do with authenticity because what is displayed there

is an integral part of the general massage. Funiber (2013, pg. 9)

A good balance is required between usage and use to reach the objectives

proposed, the first is related to the knowledge rules and the use of them

Funiber (2013 pg. 6) both texts deal in a proper manner with this

balance.

- The relationship between the skills work and the learning/practice of

grammar. Materials differ in the quantity of possibilities given to

produce oral and written language. There is no agreement among the

scholars and researchers in terms of the amount/percent of time when the

learner is exposed to see specifically the grammar part that is seen at

the moment of developing skills and its practice. Introducing grammar

aspects in M1, is done in a systematic way, using grammar boxes while in

M2 the grammar is implicit and material focuses on meaning rather than on

form. M1 proposes an example or an organization in order to build a

sentence in this case a reported speech while M2 engages students into a

real situation in which social points of view are relevant, the pursued

issue is focused on a problem resolution, nevertheless, concepts as find

arguments, support opinions are giving grammar structure without being

explicit.

According to a research made by Simon Borg and Anne Burns, in relation to

the beliefs and practices about the integration of the skills as well as

the grammar with 176 teachers of 18 countries, they have found that

9


teachers believe strongly in the necessity of

avoiding the teaching of grammar in an isolated way, they have also

reported a very high level of integration of grammar in their practices.

There is no doubt that integrated skills and grammar have been the

subject of several studies with no definite results nor the amount of

time grammar should be exposed to learner but it has been set it is

beneficial for the learner. Mitchell (2000, pg. 27) highlights that

‘grammar teaching needs to be supported and embedded in meaning-oriented

activities and tasks, which give immediate opportunities for practice and

use’.

The general frameworks for integration mentioned earlier, combined with

these more speci c pedagogical options make it clear that, in terms offi

the relation between grammar teaching and communicative work, there are

many options available to teachers. Additionally, as Ellis (2006)

concludes, there is an agreement about the need for learners to learn

connections of form and meaning but there is no consensus among SLA

scholars regarding the degree of integration between grammar and

communicative work which promotes language learning most effectively.

- The opportunities for production (oral and written) the units

provide. Materials differ in the quantity of possibilities given to

produce oral and written language. M2 offers a wide and interesting form

of oral and written language production since the beginning of the unit.

An important aspect to bring in mind is the way in which the topic

introduces the learner through a real social situation where a pre-

concept is needed in order to develop a personal engagement through

activities such as the proposal of possible solutions, personal point of

view, community thought about the problem, identifying different opinions

concepts and main words, familiarization with short phrases, finding

arguments to support opinions, group work, comparing agreements and

10


ranking each solution, personal reflection and

reading in order to agree or disagree with possible solutions,

socialization in a forum meeting, correction of ideas (sentences), a

debate where social and cultural discussion takes place, comparing

answers, creating a strategic list, correcting errors, proposal for a

general solution, complementing ideas from a writer´s point of view and a

final task which picks up different elements in order to make a last

proposal modified by a work group and posted for the whole class in order

to offer a proper solution to the problem faced. Finally, a writing

correction polishes the last product.

As it can be seen, there are several possibilities to produce oral and

written language into a real situation which easily engage students into

a discussion which develops L2. According to Spada (1990), quoted by

Funiber 2013, pg. 73) speaking for many learners is considered the most

important of the four skills; he shows that in many cases this is not

emphasised as it should be specially when speaking is not well prepared

for a specific reason and taking in mind personal or personalized points

of view using turn taking. M2 makes a strong emphasis on these aspects

and facilitates opportunities to produce oral and written production.

On the other hand, M1 facilitates language production using various

strategies evidently through a different tactic from M2. It is observed a

traditional approach where different aspects such as true false, personal

and multiple choice questions, choose and self-correction using reference

material such as the workbook. A traditional grammar box is presented, as

well as an example of how to make a reported speech, explanation of

grammar rules, in this case superlative and comparative rules. Individual

work aims to vocabulary and rules and offers optional grammar practice

with the use of coincidence and non-coincidence expressions. It can be

stated that a more traditional line is evident in M1 regarding oral and

written production.

11


According to some authors such as Ian Tudor

(1997) and Penny Ur (1996) group activities are very important in order

to offer opportunities for learners to work at their own pace and to be

successful, in this case the production of language. M2 gives a wider

option to produce L2 held by a group work, the discussion performed and

the variety of opinions and the task in itself, offer a good possibility

to develop language through group work.

Materials differ in the quantity of possibilities given to produce oral

and written language. M2 offers a wide and interesting form of oral and

written language production since the beginning of the unit. An important

aspect to bring in mind is the way in which the topic introduces the

learner through a real social situation where a pre-concept is needed in

order to develop a personal engagement through activities such as the

proposal of possible solutions, personal point of view, community thought

about the problem, identifying different opinions concepts and main

words, familiarization with short phrases, finding arguments to support

opinions, group work, comparing agreements and ranking each solution,

personal reflection and reading in order to agree or disagree with

possible solutions, socialization in a forum meeting, correction of ideas

(sentences), a debate where social and cultural discussion takes place,

comparing answers, creating a strategic list, correcting errors, proposal

for a general solution, complementing ideas from a writer point of view

and a final task which picks up different elements in order to make a

last proposal modified by a work group and posted for the whole class in

order to offer a proper solution to the problem faced; finally, a writing

correction polishes the last product.

As it can be seen, there are several possibilities to produce oral and

written language into a real situation which easily engage students into

a discussion which develops L2. According to Spada (1990), quoted by

Funiber, (2013, pg.73) speaking for many learners is considered the most

12


important of the four skills; he shows that in

many cases this is not emphasised as it should be specially when speaking

is not well prepared for a specific reason and taking in mind personal or

personalized points of view using turn taking. M2 makes strong emphasis

on these aspects.

On the other hand, M1 facilitates language production using various

strategies evidently through a different tactic from M2. It is observed a

traditional approach where different aspects such as true false, personal

and multiple choice questions, choose and self-correction using reference

material such as the workbook. A more traditional grammar box is

presented, as well as an example of how to make a reported speech,

explanation of grammar rules, in this case superlative and comparative

rules. Individual work aims to vocabulary and rules and offers optional

grammar practice with the use of coincidence and non-coincidence

expressions. It can be stated that a more traditional line is evident in

M1 regarding oral and written production.

According to some authors such as Ian Tudor (1997) and Penny Ur (1996)

group activities are very important in order to offer opportunities for

learners to work at their own pace and to be successful, in this case the

production of language. Both materials, offer a good possibility to

develop language through coperative work.

- The types of production required. In M1 despite production is quite

limited, there is a set of questions that are open to get a limited

‘authentic’ response, and all the aspects have been covered in order

learner practice and learn increasing the difficulty and step by step how

to manage each part of the unit, in an integrated manner.

On the other hand, M2 offers a great command of reading to write and

speak afterwards to prepare a debate. Therefore, ‘authenticity’ is

evidently used in here. This kind of learners should be pre-intermediate

13


up, because they need a good level in order

to cope with the task proposed.

- The variety of the activity types. Materials offer a wide variety of

activities to develop different skills; both materials use request by

means of Ss’ own words, multiple choice and WH questions. Predicting is a

good activity which facilitates to avoid the overload of new information

(Funiber 2013. Pg. 18) and at the same time it helps to engage a group

into the topic used as an axis or a bridge which will connect linguistic

elements; in M1 there are pre-determined accomplishments for reading

interpretation, using before, while and after the reading. This is very

important because various activities are developed as extracting main

ideas, reading for specific information, predicting, dealing with

unfamiliar words etc.

M2 focus in a similar way engaging students but there is a clear

influence of schema theory that is the knowledge that the student brings

to the topic or text. The difference among M1 and M2 lays on the manner

that the author limits or opens the mind of the interpreter. (Funiber

2013 pg. 11)

While M1 asks if “it is a good idea to treat others just like you want

they to treat you”, M2 asks “what do you think about Botellón?”. The

latest gives the chance to express personal ideas while the first one is

a predictable, positive or negative answer the second one requires

knowledge about the situation, a personal perspective about the matter.

However, both units present a good variety of activity types in the four

skills.

- Which unit do you prefer? Why? No unit is the preferred one because

all of them have an important role in communication. When reviewing all

the units it is shown the skills are integrated. There is no one without

the other one. Therefore, when there is one the other is required in

14


order communication can be produced. If

there is written production there should be a reader, if there is oral

production there should be a listener, if these conditions do not take

place there is no communication. Then, all units are important, there has

to be one to make it work out with the other one. All skills are

important and also should be learned in an integrated way like in real

life, also grammar is an important factor but not the most important. In

any case grammar should be taught as a complement of the

learning/acquiring L2. All skills have their pros and cons in terms of

difficulty and all of them are necessary to produce communication. In

relation to the units it is the same. On the other hand, debating is a

complex task to develop inference, use the information to be persuasive,

it is quite difficult.

- Some other aspects considered relevant. Feedback is a really important

aspect which should be considered while teaching skills, "accuracy,

fluency, and overall communicative skills are probably best developed

through instruction that is primarily meaning-based but in which guidance

is provided through timely form-focus activities and correction in

context" Lightbown & Spada, (1990, pg. 443; see also Long, 1991). In this

case, both materials offer that possibility through self, peer and

teacher feedback. M1 uses exercises such as write sentences, pair

dictation and write an essay. M2 facilitates feedback offering students

the opportunity to quote solutions, giving a own point of view, work in

groups comparing arguments, making a debate, group discussion, check and

correct errors, polishing a last proposal. As it can be seen, a variety

of possibilities are displayed in both units in order to facilitate a

good “process-centred approach, where the how of writing assumes a

greater importance than the end of product” (Funiber, pg. 99)

Nowadays, it is important to facilitate access to internet resources and

materials should offer this tool as a way to learn. The lack of internet

15


links in both materials makes them less

attractive as well as the non-use of pronunciation rules or phonetic

clues.

Conclusion. During this task there has been considered the question of

‘authenticity’ and it was noted by ‘Botellón’ M2 text offers the

authenticity it is mentioned and ‘Made Easy’ text M1 offers the

authenticity of learner’s response. Widdowson’s (1978) points out a

distinction between ‘genuineness’ and ‘authenticity’. ‘Authenticity’

seems to be for many language experts the most important one where the

appropriate response is the important matter. Also the simplified texts

which cause positive effects like motivation and confidence to learners,

especially at lower levels, which likely is due to their use. This is

shown with great growth in simplified readers over the last decade. There

has been pointed out that grading could be the key to simplify ‘genuine’

written discourse. Grading is a viable option when using ‘genuine’

written discourse which means a gradual introduction to a text meaning a

careful guidance from the teacher and that seems to be a practical way

forward. Then, when understanding a text a ‘top-down’ approach is useful

and central what the reader brings to the text is central to the skill of

reading (i.e. Schema theory). In the case of M1 it is really an open

class considering the teacher guidance.

The act of reading is done when looking for information and also for

pleasure. The idea is to do this but not only due to pedagogical reasons.

This act can and should be fun; the idea is to find a way to promote it!

On the other hand, speaking discourse is ‘transient’ and often gives an

incoherent idea which makes all the process of listening very complex. As

McGregor’s ideas (1986) there is a model of ‘collaborative discourse’ and

this has to do with the role of the speaker and the listener that affects

the communication when he/she is participating in the exchange and the

response in the Schema theory it is said it has to do with the listening

16


and thus the way the listener would eventually

change the course of a conversation.

The research in relation of authenticity shows a similar perspective to

the one of reading and the focus, but the response should be in the

classroom. Penny Ur’s (1984) ‘real-life’ listening developing skill set

guidelines of ‘real-life’ conditions in the classroom. On the other hand,

grading texts is, as reading, a chance, also simplified texts have a

place on the curriculum but the frequency of use and the level of the

learner is a matter to consider.

There was said for many learners speaking is the most important of the

four skills. However, Spada’s (1990) study showed that sometimes learners

are asked to speak for no specific reason or learner does not find the

task interesting or appealing enough. Considering Byrne’s (1986)

assertion that in most of the situations, speaking is a two-way process

and that listening is an essential part of the process where the ‘turn-

taking’ is an important part of swapping listening and speaking skills

and we need to make our students familiar with.

Speaking is seen as a via which components develop general competences in

a competence-based view and they would help the learner in the real life

inside the society and sets the learner in different situations when

starting in the classroom and there is no difference in a foreign

language; therefore, teachers should see speaking as an elemental tool of

education.

In the case of ‘Botellón’ it can be said that communication is developed…

learners are motivated and “Talking about something which one is learning

is important, because it is when we express a new concept linguistically

that we gradually develop it. The concept may be partly developed in our

minds, but until we start to communicate it linguistically, we don’t know

how clearly – or unclearly – it is formed.” (John Clegg: “Language across

the curriculum”. The British example: “The National Literacy Strategy”.

(2002, Jardunaldi Pedagogikoak).

17


On the positive side, speaking in groups is

very beneficial since it lowers inhibitions to talk, and also there is

placed a chanced venue for communication. Negotiation of meaning can take

place here and therefore, brings authenticity to this activity in mixed-

ability groups. On the negative side, there can appear some inconvenient

during the time of learner training, a good classroom management and the

appropriate selection of content. Reviewing the pros and cons of ‘topic’

and ‘task-based’, last one activities were likely more productive.

There seems to be a consensus amongst teachers and researchers in

relation of the skill of writing and this is a central part of ELT

programmes. Writing has changed from a product-centred approach to

writing to a process-centred approach; so, greater importance is the

process in writer than the end product.

Nowadays, due to the arrival of internet, the writer is able to choose

his/her own style and content that could be seen in ‘Botellón’ text which

showed different possibilities of data and response. Also, feedback of

self, peer and teacher together with the formative and summative concepts

should be present at all stages of writing and thus, should show the

“Realia” with interactive and dynamic qualities during the process.

But the most important thing in all these processes, as in the input and

output, teaching is a very important part in the process, in can consider

more or less special teaching-learning of grammar in an integrated

teaching-learning developing skill process, but the motivation and

interest of the learner in being involved in this whole process is

crucial and the teacher should be ready to the new challenges that this

implies that is to help learners to discover his/her own motivation to

succeed in this process and learn/acquire the language.

18


Bibliography

Byrne, D. (1986). Teaching Oral English. Longman. London.

Graddol, D. (1997). The Future of English, The British Council.

Greenall, S. & Swan, M. (1986). Effective Reading. Cambridge University

Press. Cambridge.

Harris, T. & Ball, P. (2013). Developing Language Skills in the Classroom. Funiber

Lynch, T. (1996). Communication in the Language Classroom. Oxford University

Press. Oxford.

19


Widdowson, H. G. (1978). Teaching Language asCommunication. Oxford University Press. Oxford.

(Doughty and Williams (1998) El Papel de la Gramática en la Enseñanza-AprendizajeInicial de la Lengua Extranjera.

Ur, P. (1996). A Course in Language Teaching: Practice and Theory. Cambridge

University Press. Cambridge.

Webography Borg, S. & Burn, A. (2008). Integrating Grammar in Adult TESOLClassrooms.

29, March, 2008

http://es.scribd.com/doc/27664065/Integrating-Grammar-in-Adult-TESOL-

Classrooms

Goethe-Institute. V., (2013). Some Educational and Methodological Principles of

Content and Language

Integrated Learning (CLIL) (read:16/08/2013)

http://www.goethe.de/ges/spa/dos/ifs/met/en2747826.htm]

Mohan, B. (1986). Language and content. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.

Mentioned in

R.Oxford, University of Maryland (2001). EDO-FL-01-05, Integrated Skills

in the ESL/EFL Classroom, (n.d.)

http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/0105oxford.html

R.Oxford, University of Maryland (2001). EDO-FL-01-05, Integrated Skills

in the ESL/EFL Classroom, (n.d.)

http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/0105oxford.html

Swan, M. (2008). The Influence of the Mother Tongue on Second Language Acquisition and

Use. Web link:

20

http://www.goethe.de/ges/spa/dos/ifs/met/en2747826.htm


http://www.mikeswan.co.uk/elt- applied-

linguistics/influence-second-language.htm [Read: April 18, 2013]

21

http://www.mikeswan.co.uk/elt-applied-linguistics/influence-second-language.htm

http://www.mikeswan.co.uk/elt-applied-linguistics/influence-second-language.htm

DEVELOPING LANGUAGE SKILLS

Documents

Transcript of DEVELOPING LANGUAGE SKILLS