The Miscellaneous Approach to Language Teaching: A Critical Look at the Single-Method Approach Adopted in the Libyan Schools

Ibrahim Ali Ellabiedi

Abstract


This research investigates the learners' and teachers' perceptions of the integrated-skill approach and explores the possible impact of this approach on the learners' communicative competence. To gather the required data, a qualitative study was conducted in the faculty of education, English department, University of Misrata/ Libya. Focus group discussions were used with thirteen students, and semi-structured interviews were conducted with four teachers. The questions asked were primarily focusing on the approach followed in teaching language skills; integrated or segregated approach, the learners' and teachers' perceptions of these approaches, and their possible influences on learners' competence. The results of this study revealed that there was integration, to some extent, regarding the skills of listening and speaking, and this integration was beneficial in enhancing learners' ability to use English properly. Whereas; the segregated-skill approach adopted to teach reading and writing was not effective as it led students to focus on some language elements such as vocabulary, following memorization techniques without paying any attention to authentic practice. Therefore, it is recommended that educators and policy makers consider students' needs and the possible impact of this approach on students' communicative competence, by advocating to the integrated-skill approach.

Keywords


Integrated-Skill Approach, Perception, Impact, Communicative Competence

Full Text:

PDF

References


Prabhu, N.S. 1990. There is no best method. Why? TESOL Quarterly. 24/2

Richards, J.C. 1990. The Language Teaching Matrix. Cambridge: CUP.

Mwanza, D.S. 2019. The eclectic method to language teaching: clarifications and conceptual extensions. Journal of Lexicography and Terminology. 1/ 2

Hiep, P. H. 2007. Communicative language teaching: unity within diversity. ELT Journal. 61/3.

Sakui, K. 2004. Wearing two pairs of shoes: language teaching in Japan. ELT Journal. 58/2

Orafi , S. and Borg, S. 2009. Intentions and realities in implementing communicative curriculum reform. System. 37 (243-253)

Li, D. 1998. "It's always more difficult than you plan and imagine": Teachers' perceived difficulties in introducing the communicative approach in South Korea. TESOL Quarterly. 32/4.

Bax, S. 2003. The end of CLT: a context approach to language teaching. ELT Journal. 57/3.

http://countrystudies.us/libya/56.htm

Richards, J.C. and Rodgers, T.S. 2001. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: CUP.

Medgyes, P. 1986. Queries from a communicative teacher. ELT Journal. 40/2.

Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, the General People's Committee for Education, 2008, the development of education, the national report of Libya presented to the International Conference on Education 48th Session, Geneva 25-28 Nov. 2008.

http://www.ibe.unesco.org/National_Reports/ICE_2008/libya_NR08.pdf [accessed Nov. 2010]

Frino, L., Mhochain, R., O'Neill, H. and McGarry, F. 2008. English for Libya, Preparatory 3, Teacher's Book. Reading: Garnet.

Savignon, S.J. 1991. Communicative language teaching: state of the art. TESOL Quarterly. 25/2 (261-277)

Savignon, S.J. 2007. Communicative language teaching for the twenty-first century. In Celce-Murcia, M. (ed.). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Third edition. Boston, MA: Heinle.

Harmer, J. 2003. Popular culture, methods, and context. ELT Journal. 57/3.

Gupta, D. 2004. CLT in India: context and methodology come together. ELT Journal. 58/3.

Swan, M. 1985. A critical look at the Communicative Approach (2). ELT Journal. 39/2.

Hu, G. 2005. 'CLT is best for China' – an untenable absolutist claim. ELT Journal. 59/1.

Widdowson, H.G. 1978. Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: OUP.

Snyder, H. 2019. Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research (Elsevier). 104 (333-339)

Wali, N.H. 2009. Eclecticism and Language Learning. Al- Fatih Journal. 39.

Mwanza, D.S. 2017. The Eclectic Approach to Language Teaching: Its Conceptualisation and Misconceptions. International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education (IJHSSE). 4/2 (53-67).

Celce-Murcia, M. 2007. Language Teaching Approaches: An Overview. In Celce-Murcia, M. (ED). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Third edition. Boston, MA: Heinle.

Khatib, M., Sarem , S.N., Hamidi, H. 2013. Humanistic education: concerns, implications and applications. Journal of Language Teaching and Research. 41, 45-51

Koletnik, M. 2012. Expanding vocabulary through translation – an eclectic approach. Scripta Manent 7/1 (2-12)

Mart, C.T. 2012. The grammar-translation method and the use of translation to facilitate learning in ESL classes. Journal of Advances in English Language Teaching. 1/4 (103-105)

Zulprianto. 2012. Looking on the bright side of grammar-translation method. Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching. 8/1

Navidinia, H., Akar, M., Hendevalan, J.F. 2019. Using translation in language teaching: exploring advantages and disadvantages from linguistic, humanistic and practical perspectives. International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies. 7/2. (12-18)

Nassaji, H. and Fotos, S. 2004. Current developments in research on the teaching of grammar. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. 24, 126-145.

Nunan, D. 1998. Teaching grammar in context. ELT Journal. 52/2

Long, M.H. and Porter, P.A. 1985. Teachers of English to speakers of other languages. TESOL Quarterly. 19/2.

Brown, H.D. 2007. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. San Francisco: Pearson Education.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.52155/ijpsat.v28.2.3562

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2021 Ibrahim Ali Ellabiedi

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.