Introduction
Currently, there are many different methods of teaching a foreign language. Each of them undoubtedly has its advantages and disadvantages. In the communicative language teaching (CLT) method, the training takes place within the framework of conversation between students and a teacher, and the emphasis is placed on achieving communicative goals; audiolingual and grammar-translation methods focus on the correctness of pronunciation and grammar structures.
Comparing the CLT method with audiolingualism and grammar translation, it can be said that the communicative method allows one to master the language more quickly, while the other two focus on forming specific skills. Finally, the choice of method primarily depends on the skills they are used to train, so that the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches are counterbalanced to provide effective language teaching.
Communicative Language Teaching
Description
Communicative language teaching (CLT) is a method in which the study of theory and rules is minimized or absent altogether, and the main attention is paid to live communication. Topics for discussion correspond to the student’s range of personal or professional interests and age (Pinter, 2017). In the learning process, a sufficient amount of time is paid to both vocabulary and grammar, but these aspects are not seen as the primary goal of learning.
Benefits
Advocates of communicative language teaching consider educational materials to influence the quality of communication and language use; that is why many textbooks and tasks are used. The tasks include, but are not limited to, game situations, working with a partner, and tasks for finding mistakes, which increase students’ vocabulary and teach them to think analytically (Richards& Rodgers, 2001). Discussing real-life situations attracts students and arouses keen interest and a desire to share their ideas. Many advocates of the communicative approach support the use of authentic materials. These can be various magazines, advertisements, newspapers, or visual sources around which communication is built, such as maps, pictures, symbols, graphs, and others (Richards & Rodgers, 2001).
Critique
Proponents of other methods often criticize communicative language teaching for focusing too much on conversation and not placing proper emphasis on the structure of the language. Critics say that CLT is mainly suitable for learning a language for a short time, for example, for a tourist trip, and to use it for work, one must first learn the grammatical structure. However, CLT incorporates elements of grammar and pronunciation and works towards automatization by making students use them in educational situations (Pinter, 2017). The most crucial problem of Communicative Language Teaching is how not to lose intensively acquired practical skills without being able to apply them in real life regularly.
Grammar Translation Method
Description
The grammar-translation method began at the end of the 18th century, but officially, it appeared in the middle of the 20th century. Its main difference from CLT is the presence of a language barrier, which is understood as difficulties that arise in speaking a foreign language. A person tries to combine words according to grammar rules and cannot communicate their ideas effectively.
Advantages
However, despite this weighty limitation, the grammar-translation method has some advantages. First, it allows students to learn grammar at a decent level. Secondly, this method is helpful for people inclined to logical thinking, who tend to perceive language as a set of grammatical formulas. Thirdly, this method lays down the structural and logical foundations of the language studied.
While students spend much time speaking, the grammar translation method presupposes translations from a native language to a foreign one, analysis of texts, and writing compositions and essays. Unlike the communicative method, where attention is focused on acquiring communication skills, in the grammar-translation approach, the emphasis is placed on writing skills and translation. Students are engaged in analyzing texts and writing expositions and essays.
Much of the work is devoted to oral and written translation from a native language to a foreign one and vice versa. This system also conveys the structural and logical foundations of the language being studied. Compared to the communicative method, grammar translation is more helpful in developing reading and writing skills.
Critique
However, the method fails to achieve communication goals since students experience difficulties in real-life conversations with foreigners (Richards & Rodgers, 2001). Thus, it can be concluded that the grammar translation method helps improve the material’s assimilation quality. Still, it is useless for developing basic speech skills.
Audiolingualism
History
The basics of audiolingualism originated in the 40s in America. The method was a great success based on an intensive course of classes. It was used for the training of immigrants. The training aimed to master the rules, grammatical forms, and pronunciation of a native speaker.
Description
This method is divided into two stages. In the first one, the student repeatedly echoes the teacher or the phonogram. When learners acquire specific phonetic skills, they can say a few phrases independently; everything else consists of repetitions.
Limitations
This method has a significant drawback. The learning process occurs within the programming framework; the learner is not allowed to study the language more extensively and is driven into template repetitions. On the other hand, the student gradually replenishes his vocabulary every lesson and constantly listens to correct speech. However, this method is tedious, which has a detrimental effect on the learner’s learning ability. The psychological idea of over-memorization is unsuccessful, leading to severe student fatigue.
While the necessity of bringing speech skills to automatism is proved by memorizing samples, the student does not learn to take risks or form derivative words or sentences according to the principles of the language. When the CLT method teaches students to act independently in communicative situations and overcome difficulties they experience, in audiolingualism, students depend on the limited number of structures they learn. The language barrier is formed (Richards & Rodgers, 2001). This method does not develop communicative competence.
Comparison with Other Methods
Compared to CLT, audiolingualism has less diversity in teaching methods, and the lessons are less interesting and challenging. While in CLT, the content of what is said is essential, and the emphasis is placed on students’ ability to communicate their needs in a foreign language, audiolingualism focuses primarily on the form of speech. In the communicative method, students are guided by the context; in audiolingualism, they are oriented by the form, and the samples are often disconnected from life.
In audiolingualism, learning occurs through memorization; in CLT, it happens through meaningful communication. With CLT, communication begins immediately; in the audiolinguistic method, the transition to natural communication is postponed. However, audiolingualism allows one to achieve the pronunciation level of a native speaker, which is undoubtedly an advantage in comparison to CLT, where the utterance should just sound understandable.
Another difference between the two methods is the place of the learner. Indeed, while in CLT, the teacher is guided by students’ interests and communicative needs, in the audiolinguistic method, the teacher plays a central role. Pair or group work is not encouraged, and the attitude towards possible mistakes of the student on the part of a teacher is intolerant. Motivation in the audiolinguistic method is external; students, as a rule, are not interested in lessons but try to study because they need the language. In CLT, the motivation is internal; students are interested in what they do, which is undoubtedly a significant incentive.
Conclusion
Having compared CLT to grammar translation and audio linguistic methods, the results of their application, and the skills they are primarily used to train, it can be said that the communicative approach has pronounced advantages over the other two methods. First, CLT allows students to be involved in studying by considering their interests and needs. This significantly boosts motivation and enhances the efficiency of language learning.
Secondly, unlike the other two methods, CLT presupposes using various interesting and challenging materials for language learners. Finally, CLT allows using language from the very first stages to solve communicative tasks, while grammar translation and audiolingualism delay communication.
Reference List
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge university press.
Pinter, A. (2017). Teaching young language learners. Oxford University Press.