Understanding learning ways and teaching ways in efl classrooms at ho chi minh city college of transportation m a 60 14 10

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY – HO CHI MINH CITY
UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES

NGUYEN THANH LONG

UNDERSTANDING LEARNING WAYS AND
TEACHING WAYS IN EFL CLASSROOMS
AT HO CHI MINH CITY COLLEGE OF
TRANSPORTATION

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Master of Arts (TESOL)

Supervisor
LUU TRONG TUAN, PhD

Ho Chi Minh City, March 2011


i
STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY

I certify my authorship of the thesis submitted today entitled
UNDERSTANDING LEARNING WAYS AND TEACHING WAYS
IN EFL CLASSROOMS AT HO CHI MINH CITY
COLLEGE OF TRANSPORTATION
in term of the statement of Requirements for Theses and Field study reports in
Master’s Program issued by the Higher Degree Committee. The thesis has not
previously been submitted for a degree.

Ho Chi Minh City, December 2010

NGUYEN THANH LONG


ii
RETENTION AND USE OF THE THESIS

I hereby state that I, NGUYEN THANH LONG, being the candidate for the degree
of Master of Arts (TESOL), accept the requirements of the University of Social
Sciences and Humanities relating to the retention and use of the thesis of Master’s
Thesis deposited in the University Library.

In term of these conditions, I agree that the original version of my thesis deposited
in the University Library should be accessible for the purpose of study and research,
in accordance with the normal conditions established by the Library for care, loan,
or reproduction of the theses.

Ho Chi Minh City, December 2010

NGUYEN THANH LONG


iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my deepest and sincerest appreciation and thanks to my
supervisor, Dr. Luu Trong Tuan. His profound knowledge and his logical way of
thinking have been of great value for me. His personal guidance, encouragement
and patience have provided a good basis for this thesis.

I wish to express my warm and sincere thanks to the teaching staff of the master
program for their instructions and dedication.

I am deeply grateful to the teachers and the students of Ho Chi Minh City College
of Transportation for their participation in this research. Without their cooperation,
this research would not have been possible.

I also wish to thank the assistance of the staff of the Office of Graduate Studies, the
Department of English Linguistics and Literature, and the ERC of the USSH.

I would like to extend my gratitude to my colleagues for their support and
encouragement when I faced difficulties during the implementation of the thesis.

Let me also say ‘thank you’ to my friends who have supported me by ways of
expressions of trust, interest, and encouragement.

I am greatly indebted to my parents, and my brothers and sisters. Although they live
in my remote home country, their unconditional support, encouragement and trust
have enabled me to pursue my interests and overcome times of discouragement.

Last but not least, I own my loving thanks to my lovely wife. She had lost a lot due
to my study. She had to shoulder my family duties so that I could pursue this work.
Without her sympathy, encouragement, and love, it would have been impossible for
me to complete this work.


iv
ABSTRACT

Individuals learn in various ways. Some ways make them feel comfortable while

some others do not seem help them reach their intended goals. The learning process
may take place best when ways in which teachers present information and learning
experiences that match students’ learning ways. Mismatch between learning and
teaching ways can make the process of teaching and learning not gain good results
as expected.

This research aimed at exploring how teachers teach and learners learn English in
EFL classrooms. It also explored if there are any mismatches between learning
ways and teaching ways in the process of teaching and learning English.

This is a descriptive research using an adaptation of the Felder-Solomon Index of
Learning Styles questionnaire to survey the learning styles of 241 undergraduate
students and the teaching styles of 38 teachers in Ho Chi Minh City College of
Transportation.

The research compared learning ways and teaching ways then examined possible
matches/mismatches between learning and teaching ways. Although little mismatch
was found, overall, there was a match between learning and teaching ways in Ho
Chi Minh City College of Transportation. The results were discussed and
recommendations were made by the author of the thesis to English teachers in
relation to understanding and meeting students’ learning needs with the hope that
these recommendations will be selectively applied to enhance students’ learning
performance and achievement in this school.


v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Statement of authority ............................................................................................... i
Retention and use of the thesis ................................................................................. ii
Acknowledgement ..................................................................................................iii

Abstract .................................................................................................................. iv
Table of contents ..................................................................................................... v
List of tables .......................................................................................................... vii
List of figures .......................................................................................................... ix
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 1
1.1 Background and statement of the problem ............................................... 1
1.2 Aims of the research ............................................................................... 4
1.3 Significance of the research .................................................................... 5
1.4 Definitions of terms ................................................................................ 6
1.5 Organization of the thesis ........................................................................ 7
Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................... 8
2.1 English Language Teaching Approaches ................................................. 8
2.1.1 Traditional English Language Teaching Approaches ................. 8
2.1.1.1 The Grammar Translation Method ............................... 8
2.1.1.2 The Direct Method ....................................................... 9
2.1.1.3 The Audio-Lingual Method ....................................... 10
2.1.1.4 Suggestopedia ............................................................ 11
2.1.1.5 The Silent Way ........................................................... 11
2.2.2.6 Total Physical Response Method ............................... 12
2.1.1.7 The Natural Approach ............................................... 13
2.1.2 A new language teaching approach: The Communicative
Language Teaching Approach . ......................................................... 13
2.2 Learning Styles and Teaching Styles ...................................................... 15
2.2.1 Learning styles ......................................................................... 15
2.2.1.1 The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ............................... 17
2.2.1.2 Kolb’s Experiential Learning Model ........................... 19
2.2.1.3 The Felder-Silverman Learning Styles Model ............. 21


vi

2.2.2 Learning styles and Cognitive Traits ........................................ 26
2.2.3 Teaching styles ......................................................................... 28
2.2.4 Learning and teaching styles ..................................................... 29
Chapter 3: METHODOLOGY ................................................................................ 33
3.1 Research questions ................................................................................. 33
3.2 Research design ..................................................................................... 33
3.2.1 The participants ........................................................................ 34
3.2.1.1 The characteristics of student sample .......................... 34
3.2.1.2 The characteristics of teacher sample ......................... 35
3.2.2 The instruments ....................................................................... 35
3.2.2.1 Questionnaires for students ......................................... 36
3.2.2.2 Questionnaires for teachers ......................................... 39
3.2.3 Procedures of data collection .................................................... 41
Chapter 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ......................................................... 42
4.1 Learning styles and teaching styles ........................................................ 42
4.1.1 Learning styles ......................................................................... 42
4.1.2 Teaching styles ......................................................................... 49
4.1.3 Matching between learning styles and teaching styles ............. 53
4.2 Learning methods and teaching methods ................................................ 54
4.2.1 Learning methods ..................................................................... 54
4.2.2 Teaching methods .................................................................... 60
4.2.3 Extend of match between learning methods and teaching methods ......68
Chapter 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................. 74
5.1 Limitations of the research ..................................................................... 74
5.2 Recommendations for classroom practices ............................................. 74
5.3 Recommendations for further research ................................................... 79
References .............................................................................................................. 81
Appendix 1: Vietnamese questionnaire version for students ................................... 87
Appendix 2: English questionnaire version for students .......................................... 91
Appendix 3: Vietnamese questionnaire version for teachers ................................... 95

Appendix 4: English questionnaire version for teachers .......................................... 99


vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Overview of learning styles

16

Table 2: Preferences of Myers-Briggs Personality Types

18

Table 3: Felder’s model of learning styles

23

Table 4: Comparison of learning styles models

24

Table 5: Felder & Solomon summary of the different learning styles

25

Table 6: Models of learning & teaching styles

31

Table 7: Gender ratio of students

34

Table 8: Length of English learning

34

Table 9: Profile of teacher sample

35

Table 10: Semantic groups associated with learning style questions

36

Table 11: Semantic groups associated with learning method questions

39

Table 12: Semantic groups associated with teaching method questions

40

Table 13: Students’ responses on learning styles

42

Table 14: Results on student learning styles

45

Table 15: Percentage of each learning style

46

Table 16: Teachers’ responses on teaching styles

49

Table 17: Results on teaching styles

51

Table 18: Percentage of each teaching style

52

Table 19: Comparison of preferred teaching styles and preferred learning styles

53

Table 20: Students’ perceptions toward their methods of learning English

54

Table 21: Teachers’ perceptions toward their methods of teaching English

60

Table 22: A comparison between students’ responses and teachers’

68

responses on “Need and feedback analysis”
Table 23: A comparison between students’ responses and teachers’

69

responses on “skill orientations”
Table 24: A comparison between students’ responses and teachers’

70

responses on “error correction”
Table 25: A comparison between students’ responses and teachers’
responses on “classroom interaction”

70


viii
Table 26: A comparison between students’ responses and teachers’

71

responses on “lesson preparation”
Table 27: A comparison between students’ responses and teachers’
responses on “use of mother tongue”

72

ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Sample activities and roles of faculty for each Kolb learning style

20

Figure 2: Learning Styles and Learning Circle based on Kolb’s Model

21

Figure 3: The relationship between the Felder-Silverman learning style

27

model and working memory capacity
Figure 4: Equal opportunity learning

78


1
Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background and statement of the problem

There is a statement: “English is the language of the global village” and this may
not surprise anyone. In fact, more than ever in the history of human beings,

competence in English is a precondition for participating in any kind of
international cooperation.

Across the world, the English language is associated with educational and economic
issues that go far beyond the role of English as a tool for communication. People
with fluent English proficiency tend to receive leadership positions in the school
and the community, and English proficiency allows employees a greater advantage
in occupational promotions (Kung, 2000).

With the globalization, teaching English as a Foreign Language (EFL) has been
changed for years. Many workshops have been held to pursue a new purpose of
teaching EFL. Teachers have been reconsidering the purpose of teaching EFL. They
have tried to use activities that they think effective for facilitating the four skills –
listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Most teachers have tried to shift their
teaching methods from traditional method to a communicative one.

The necessity of acquiring English as a tool of communication has been recognized
by both the administration and the public. English has been viewed as a subject as
important as literature and mathematics. Some colleges and universities have
adopted English proficiency tests like TOEIC as a condition for graduation. Along
with education administrators, the public seems to be more aware of the need to
study English. The importance of being able to communicate in English when
traveling overseas for business or pleasure is becoming increasingly apparent to


2
Vietnamese. Even understanding the lyrics of popular English songs today requires
some knowledge of English vocabulary.

Contrary to the trends of the society, there are still many students who do not study

English effectively. The majority of students have difficulties in learning English
and if students have fallen behind in English in high school, this situation is
compounded as they face English in colleges or universities. Difficulties in learning
English may in part originate from differences in learning styles.

In the language classroom, different learning styles are inevitable (Gill, 2005).
Individuals learn in different ways, some ways make them feel comfortable while
others do not seem help them reach their intended goals. There are certain learning
ways that learners feel comfortable because the learning process may take place
best when they employ such ways. Understanding these preferences is one of
paramount importance in the teaching and learning process. This is because,
according to Soo (1999), “differences in learners’ learning ways affect the learning
environment be either supporting or inhibiting their intentional cognition and active
engagement”. This stems from the fact that learners are expected to be highly
motivated in doing things that they prefer. Therefore, the need for teachers’
knowledge about their students’ preferences and styles is indisputable. In this
regard, Alfonseca et al. (2006) point out that an awareness of students’ learning
ways will enable teachers to adapt appropriate techniques and methods that suit the
students’ preferences. They go on to extend the benefits gained from understanding
the students’ learning ways to include the students themselves so as to help them
improve their effectiveness in learning language. In addition, according to Reid
(1987), “identifying the learning styles preferences of non-native speakers may have
wide-ranging implications in the areas of curriculum design, materials development,
student orientation, and teacher training.”

Teaching ways vary as learning ways do. Teachers have different strengths and
preferences to develop a student’s learning outcomes. Some teachers lecture, others


3

demonstrate or lead learners to self-discovery; some focus on principles and others
on applications; some emphasize memory and others understanding. How much a
given student learns in a class is governed in part by that student’s native ability and
prior preparation but also by the compatibility of his or her characteristic approach
to learning and the instructor’s characteristic approach to teaching (Felder &
Henriques, 1995). Felder & Henriques (1995) showed that matching teaching ways
to learning ways can significantly enhance student’s attitudes, and behaviors, and
academic achievements in foreign language instruction. Ford and Chen (2001)
explored the relationship between the matching of instructional presentation styles,
students’ cognitive styles and the student performance and found that the matchedconditions group had better performance than the mismatched-conditions group. To
some extent, this study provides support for the effect of matching condition on
learning outcomes.

Therefore, it is crucial for teachers to prepare the teaching process in a manner that
they can address the students’ learning way preferences, which would bring about
the learning effectiveness. This means teachers need to adopt teaching approaches
and create a suitable mix of different learning opportunities that help students with
different learning ways learn effectively.

However, according to Visser et al. (2006), in reality, teachers hardly ever present
information and learning experiences that match students’ learning ways. Mismatch
between learning and teaching ways can make students bored and inattentive, do
poorly on tests, get disappointed with the course, and in some case, students may
drop out of classes.

At many colleges in Ho Chi Minh City, to maximize the English learning results of
the students, educators tends to focus on issues such as syllabus design, teaching
materials, and teaching approaches. Little concern, to the researcher’s best
knowledge, has been directed to the topic of whether there are matches between the
ways teachers teach and the ways students learn in the EFL classrooms. This fact

4
may at least lead to the result that English learning problems remain unsolved for a
long period of time. It is the authors’ belief that a better understanding of these can
have a beneficial effect on the process of attempting to help students in learning
English as a foreign language.
Given the above, this research aims at investigating learning ways and teaching
ways in EFL classrooms at Ho Chi Minh City College of Transportation (HCT).
The research seeks to identify the students’ learning way preferences by
determining how they prefer to process information, and how they progress toward
understanding, and simultaneously seeks to explore how teachers preferentially
present information. It also attempts to explore whether teachers’ teaching way
preferences match students’ preferences in learning process. This is because,
according to Pallapu (2007), “knowing the learning ways of the learners helps the
designer or instructor to develop a curriculum to address various needs of the
learners in a group or class”. In addition, matching the learning ways of students in
a class and the teaching ways of the teacher would help improve students’
motivation, behavior, and learning (Felder, 1993; Felder and Henriques, 1995;
Felder and Silverman 1988; Kinsella, 1995; Lawrence, 1993; Oxford et al., 1991;
Reid, 1987; Schmeck, 1988; Willing, 1988).
1.2 Aims of the research
The main purpose of the research is to collect information from students and
teachers through an investigative survey with questionnaires in order to comprehend
the teaching-learning process of teachers and students in EFL classrooms at HCT.
The research looks at students’ learning styles and learning methods as well as
teachers’ teaching styles and teaching methods. It also examines possible matches
or mismatches between learning ways and teaching ways. Therefore, this study was
guided by the ensuing questions:
1. How do students learn English?

2. How do teachers teach English?
3. Are there any matches between the ways students learn and the ways
teachers teach in EFL classrooms?


5
1.3 Significance of the research

First of all, this research is significant since it explores students’ learning ways and
teachers’ teaching ways. Improvements can be made to effectiveness of teaching
and learning process when teachers do understand the different learning ways and
plan the learning environment to create an opportunity for the success of each
student.

It also seeks to consider the extent of match or mismatch between learning ways of
students and teaching ways of teachers within EFL classrooms. This area has not
been researched in HCT context. A number of studies have approved that a lack of
‘matching’ between preferred learning ways and teaching ways would result in
lower motivation, poorer performance and perhaps attrition. “A mismatch between
teaching and learning ways cause learning failure, frustration, and demotivation"
(Reid, 1995) and “in a language class where learning & teaching styles’ mismatch
occurs, the learners tend to be bored and inattentive, do poorly on tests, get
discouraged about the course, the curriculum, and themselves, and in some case
change to other curricula or drop out of school.” (Felder & Silverman, 1988)

Hence, this research needs to be carried out to investigate whether or not learning
ways match teaching ways as the findings from this study may offer valuable
insights into helping learners in learning English as foreign language.
Understanding students’ learning ways will help teachers develop appropriate
teaching ways and explore opportunities so that they will be able to make learningteaching process more interesting and productive.

6
1.4 Definitions of terms

Learning Ways: In the research, learning ways encompasses learning styles and
learning methods.

Learning Styles refer to the overall approach by which a learner “acquires, retains,
and retrieves information” (Felder, 1993). Learning styles can be generally
described as “individual’s preferred approach[es] to organizing and presenting
information” (Riding & Rayner, 1998); or “the way[s] in which learners perceive,
process, store and recall attempts of learning” (James & Gardner, 1995).

Learning methods are ways of learning a language which are based on systematic
principles and procedures.

Teaching Ways: In the research, teaching ways encompasses teaching styles and
teaching methods

Teaching Styles: A teaching style is defined as “ the collection of many attitudes
and behaviors he [a teacher] employs to create the best possible conditions under
which learning can take place … Teaching style is a complex amalgam of belief,
attitude, strategy, technique, motivation, personality and control” (Wright, 1987).

Teaching Methods are ways of teaching a language which are based on systematic
principles and procedures. Teaching methods can be defined as the types of
principles and methods used for instruction. There are many types of teaching
methods, depending on what information or skill the teacher is trying to convey.
Class participation, demonstration, recitation, and memorization are some of the

teaching methods being used. Teachers need to be flexible and willing to adjust
their method according to their students. Student success in the classroom is largely
based on effective teaching methods.


7
1.5 Organization of the thesis

This research is divided into five chapters.

Chapter 1: Introduction
This chapter gives an overview of the research which states the research’s
background, purposes, and significance.

Chapter 2: Literature Review
This chapter focuses on review of literature relevant to the research. It revisits
English language teaching approaches, both traditional and modern, as well as
learning styles and teaching styles with a deep exploration of learning style models
such as The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Kolb’s Experiential Learning Model, and
The Felder-Silverman Model.

Chapter 3: Methodology
This chapter deals with the methodology of the research. It describes the research
design with the description of the participants, the instruments and the data
collection procedure.

Chapter 4: Findings and discussions
The chapter shows the results of the questionnaires regarding learning and teaching
ways. Based on those results, discussions relating to the research are presented.

Chapter 5: Conclusions and recommendations
For benefits of matching learning ways with teaching ways, in addition to
limitations and recommendations for further research, recommendations for
classroom practices are put forwards in this chapter.


8
Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter reviews the theoretical background of the research topic comprising
English language teaching approaches and learning and teaching styles.

2.1 English language teaching approaches

In learning and teaching of languages, many theories have been proposed. These
theories, normally affected by developments in the fields of linguistics and
psychology, have inspired many approaches to the teaching of second and foreign
languages.

2.1.1 Traditional English language teaching approaches

2.1.1.1 The grammar-translation method
This method began in Germany at the end of the 18th century and became popular in
early years of the 19th century. It was historically used in teaching Greek and Latin
and focused on grammatical rules, syntactic structures, along with learning
vocabularies by heart and translation of literary texts. The key features of the
grammar-translation method, according to Prator and Celce-Murcia (1979, cited in
Brown, 1994) are as follows:
o

Classes are taught in the students' mother tongue, with little active use of
the target language.

o

Much vocabulary is taught in the form of lists of isolated words.

o

Long elaborate explanations of the intricacies of grammar are given.

o

Grammar provides the rules for putting words together, and instruction
often focuses on the form and inflection of words.

o

Reading of difficult classical texts is begun early.


9
o

Little attention is paid to the content of texts, which are treated as exercises
in grammatical analysis.

o

Often the only drills are exercises in translating disconnected sentences
from the target language into the mother tongue.

o

Little or no attention is given to pronunciation.

The aims of the method are to make learners understand the grammar of the
language, to provide them with a wide literary vocabulary, and to train them to
write the new language accurately by regular practice in translating from the native
language. This method’s contribution to foreign language learning has been very
limited; however, it is still one of the most popular and favorite model of language
teaching and learning since it requires few specialized skills on the part of the
teacher. Furthermore, tests of grammar rules and of translations are easy to
construct as well as objectively scored.

2.1.1.2 The Direct Method

This method was developed initially as a reaction to the grammar-translation
method in an attempt to integrate more use of the target language in instruction. In
this method, oral skills are prioritized and explicit grammar teaching is rejected.
The learners, it was supposed, picked up grammar in much the same way as
children picked up the grammar of their mother tongue. Richards and Rodgers
(1986) summarized the principles of this method as follows:
o

Classroom instruction was conducted exclusively in the target language.

o

Only everyday vocabulary and sentences were taught.

o

Grammar was taught inductively.

o

Oral communication skills were built up in a carefully graded progression
and organized around question-and-answer exchanges between teachers and
learners in small, intensive classes.


10
o

The mother tongue was not used: lessons began with a dialogue using a
modern conversational style in the target language which was easy for
learners to understand.

o

Correct pronunciation and grammar were emphasized.

o

Both speech and listening comprehension were taught.

The objective of the method is to teach learners how to think and communicate in
the target language and to use the language spontaneously and orally. Although The

Direct Method became very popular at the beginning of the twentieth century, it
started to decline since it was difficult to use. Its impractical usage makes it become
less and less popular in the language teaching–learning situation because, to use the
method in class, the teacher must be a native speaker or have native-like proficiency
in the target language. Moreover, the constraints of budget, classroom conditions,
and time also made such a method difficult to use.
2.1.1.3 The Audio-lingual Method
This method, which was first known as the Army Method, was very popular from
the 1940s through the 1960s when the World War II happened and there appeared
Americans’ need to become orally proficient in foreign languages as part of their
overall military operations. The Audiolingual Method is based on structural
linguistics (structuralism) and behavioristic psychology (Skinner's behaviorism),
and places heavy emphasis on spoken rather than written language. The
characteristics of the Audio-lingual Method can be summed up as follows (cited in
Brown, 1994):
o

New material is presented in dialog form.

o

There is dependence on mimicry, memorization of set phrases, and
overlearning.

o

Little grammatical explanations are provided. Grammar is taught
inductively.

o

Vocabulary is strictly limited and learned in context.

o

There is much use of tapes, language labs, and visual aids.


11
o

Skills are sequenced: listening, speaking, reading and writing are
developed in order.

o

Great importance is attached to pronunciation.

o

Successful responses are immediately reinforced.

o

There is a great effort to get learners to produce error-free utterances.

o

There is a tendency to manipulate language and disregard content.

o

Very little use of the mother tongue by teachers is permitted.

The overall goal of the Audio-lingual Method was to create communicative
competence in learners. The Audio-lingual Method had many years of popularity,
and even to this day, its adaptions are found in contemporary methodologies. The
popularity of the Audio-lingual Method decreased, however, because of its ultimate
failure to teach long-term communicative proficiency.

2.1.1.4 Suggestopedia

This method is founded by Lozanov, who believed that we are capable of learning
much more than we think. The prime objective of Suggestopedia is to tap into
learners' mental potential in order to help them use their brain power and inner
capacities to learn and use the target language for communication. The vital roles in
the method are comfortable learning environment and music. Learners became
suggestible when vocabulary, readings, role-plays, and drama were presented with
classical music in the background and with sitting in comfortable seats.
Suggestopedia suffered from a major setback. What will happen if the classrooms
lack such things as comfortable seats and CD players? Evidence shows that this is
indeed the case, and most classrooms lack such facilities.

2.1.1.5 The Silent Way

This method was founded in the early 70s by Caleb Gattegno, who believed that it
is in learners' best interest to develop independence and cooperate with each other in
solving language problems. It was based on cognitive approach and was

12
characterized by a problem-solving approach. The name of the method comes from
the fact that the teacher typically stayed "silent" most of the time as part of his/her
role as facilitator and stimulator. Language learning is usually seen as the learners’
problem solving, both independently and as a group, and the teacher needs to stay
out of the way in the process as much as possible.

The Silent Way is also well-known for its common use of small colored rods of
varying length and color-coded word charts describing pronunciation values,
vocabulary and grammatical paradigms. The objectives of the Silent Way are to
help learners become highly independent and experimental learners and to
encourage them to work as a group - to try and solve problems in the target
language together.

2.1.1.6 Total Physical Response Method

The method was developed by James Asher, a professor of psychology at San Jose
State University, California, and became well known in the 70s. The method looks
at principles of language acquisition in young learners, most notably that the
process involves a substantial amount of listening comprehension in combination
with various physical responses (smiling, reaching, grabbing, looking, etc) well
before learners begin to use the language orally. It also focused on the ideas that
learning should be as fun and stress-free as possible, and that it should be dynamic
through the use of accompanying physical activity. The primary objective
underlying Asher's Total Physical Response Method was that learning needed to
become more enjoyable and less stressful. He believed that a natural way to
accomplish this was to recreate the natural way children learn their native language,
most notably through facilitating an appropriate “listening comprehension” period,
and encourage learners to respond using right-brain motor skills rather than leftbrain language "processing".

13
2.1.1.7 The Natural Approach

The Natural Approach was developed by Stephen Krashen and Tracy Terrell in
1983 and has had a wide influence on language teaching in the United States and in
the rest of the world. It is based on Krashen's theories about second language
acquisition. The approach focuses on comprehension input and the optimum
affective state of the learners, on communication of ideas and no attention to
grammar accuracy at the first stage since meaning is considered as the essence of
language and vocabulary (not grammar) is the heart of language, on a wide range of
activities including games, role plays, dialogs, group work, and discussions. There
are three generic stages identified in the approach: (1) Preproduction - developing
listening skills; (2) Early Production - learners struggle with the language and make
many errors which are corrected based on content and not structure; (3) Extending
Production - promoting fluency through a variety of more challenging activities.
The approach was analogous to Asher's Total Physical Response method in terms of
emphasizing the need to make learners reduce anxiety as much as possible during
the learning process. As part of the Natural Approach, learners listen to the teacher
using the target language communicatively from the very beginning. It has certain
similarities with the Direct Method: learners are allowed to use their native
language alongside the target language as part of the language learning process. In
early stages, learners are not corrected during oral production as the teacher is
focusing on meaning rather than form (unless the error is so drastic that it actually
hinders meaning). The Natural Approach led naturally into the new English
language teaching approach: Communicative Language Teaching.

2.1.2 A new English language teaching approach: The Communicative
Language Teaching Approach

By the mid-eighties or so, the industry was maturing in its growth and moving
towards the concept of a wide “approach” to the language teaching that contained
various methods, motivations for learning English, kinds of teachers and the needs


14
of individual classrooms as well as learners themselves. It would be the
Communicative Language Teaching Approach (CLT). It is the generally accepted
“norm” in the field of second and foreign language teaching.

The approach places great emphasis on the goal of creating “communicative
competence”. Teaching learners how to use the language is considered to be as
important as learning the language itself. The role of the teacher in CLT is quite
different from traditional teaching methods. In the traditional classroom, the teacher
is in charge of and "controls" the learning process. But, in CLT, the teacher serves
as more of a facilitator, allowing students to be in charge of their own learning and
that helps learners gain confidence in using the target language in general. Learners
are more responsible managers of their own learning (Larsen-Freeman, 1986).
Brown (1994) aptly describes the "march" towards CLT:

"Beyond grammatical discourse elements in communication, we are probing
the nature of social, cultural, and pragmatic features of language. We are
exploring pedagogical means for 'real-life' communication in the classroom.
We are trying to get our learners to develop linguistic fluency, not just the
accuracy that has so consumed our historical journey. We are equipping our
students with tools for generating unrehearsed language performance 'out
there' when they leave the womb of our classrooms. We are concerned with
how to facilitate lifelong language learning among our students, not just with
the immediate classroom task. We are looking at learners as partners in a
cooperative venture. And our classroom practices seek to draw on whatever

intrinsically sparks learners to reach their fullest potential”.

Nunan (1991) lists five basic characteristics of CLT:
(1) An emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target
language.
(2) The introduction of authentic texts into the learning situation.


15
(3) The provision of opportunities for learners to focus, not only on the language but
also on the learning process itself.
(4) An enhancement of the learner's own personal experiences as important
contributing elements to classroom learning.
(5) An attempt to link classroom language learning with language activation outside
the classroom.

In spite of its great attraction, CLT has shown disadvantages: it can not be applied
for learners at all levels; it has not overcome the psychological barriers which
cripple learners and hinder the learning process, teachers may face important issues
for teaching training, materials development as well as testing and evaluation.
Unfortunately, although it is currently in use, teachers quickly get bored and resort
to the old Grammar Translation Method.

2.2 Learning Styles and Teaching Styles
2.2.1 Learning styles
Although many researchers agree that learning styles play an important role in
education, there is no single way to describe learning styles. According to Richard
Felder, a professor at North Carolina State University, learners have different
learning styles because “they preferentially focus on different types of information,
tend to operate on perceived information in different ways, and achieve

understanding at different rates” (Felder, 1993).

Learning styles can be generally described as “individual’s preferred approach[es]
to organizing and presenting information” (Riding & Rayner, 1998); “the way[s] in
which learners perceive, process, store and recall attempts of learning” (James &
Gardner, 1995); “distinctive behaviors which serve as indicators of how a person
learns from, and adapts to his/her environment, and provide clues as to how a
person’s mind operates” (Gregorc, 1979), “a gestalt combining internal and external
operations

derived

from

the

individual’s

neurobiology,

personality and

development, and reflected in learner behavior” (Keefe & Ferrell, 1990). Reid