Language Teaching Models in Teacher Training Programs

Year 2016, Volume: 1 Issue: 3, 0 - 0, 17.09.2016

Alper Aslan

Abstract

Any language teacher who has gone through some kind of training program for the teaching of English should be familiar with various specific language teaching models that constitute the core of the training process. A language teaching model is a guide that helps the trainee to sequence the activities designed for the expectations and needs of learners in a lesson. This paper reviews the common language teaching models in teacher training programs (PPP, OHE, III, TTT, TBLT, ESA, ARC) and discusses them with deficiencies over each other.

References

• Anderson, J. R. (1983). The Architecture of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Anderson, J. R. (1987). Skill Acquisition: Compilation of Weak-Method Problem Solutions. Psychological
• Review, 94 (2), 192-210.
• Anderson, J. R. (2005). Cognitive Psychology and its Implications. 6th Ed. New York:Worth Publishers.
• Bowen, T. (2002). Task-Based Learning, One Stop English Website (http://www.onestopenglish.com/)
• Byrne, D. (1976). Teaching Oral English. London: Longman.
• Ellis, R (2004). Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
• Evans, D. (1999). A Review of PPP. Birmingham: University of Birmingham.
• Harmer, J. (1991). The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman.
• Harmer, J., (1996). Is PPP dead? Modern English Teacher, 5 (2), 7-14.
• Harmer J. (1998). How to Teach English. London: Longman.
• Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching. 3rd Ed. Harlow: Longman.
• Harmer, J (2007). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Harlow: Longman.
• Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Howatt, A. P. R. with Widdowson, H. G. (2004). A History of English Language Teaching. Oxford:
• Oxford University Press.
• Kuhn, Thomas S. (1996). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 3rd Ed. Chicago and London:
• Univ. of Chicago Press. - Google Books
• Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach: The state of ELT and the way forward. Hove, England:
• Language Teaching Publications.
• Lewis, M. (1996). Implications of a lexical view of language. In Willis, D. & J. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and
• Change in Language Teaching. Oxford: Heinemann.
• Lewis, M. (1997a). Implementing the lexical approach: Putting theory into practice. Hove, England:
• Language Teaching Publications.
• Lindsay, C. and Knight P. (2006). Learning and Teaching English. Oxford: Oxford UP.
• McCarthy, M. & R. Carter (1995). Spoken grammar: what is it and how can we teach it? ELT Journal 49/3
• Nunan, D. (1988). Syllabus Design. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Nunan, D. (1989). Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University
• Press.
• Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge.
• Pica, T., Kanagy, R., & Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for second
• language instruction and research. In G. Crookes & S.M. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning (pp. 9-33). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
• Prabhu, N.S. (1987). Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (Second.
• Edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Scrivener, J. (1994). Learning Teaching. A guidebook for English language teachers. Oxford: Heinemann.
• Scrivener, J. (1996). ARC: A descriptive model for classroom work on language. In J. Willis, & D. Willis
• (Eds.), Challenge and Change in Language Teaching. Oxford: Heinemann.
• Skehan, P. (1998). A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible
• output in its development. In Gass, S. and Madden, C. (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition, pp. 235-256. New York: Newbury House.
• Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In Cook, G. and Seidelhofer, B.
• (Eds.) Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics: Studies in Honor of H.G. Widdowson, pp. 125-144. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Swain, M. (2005). The Output Hypothesis: Theory and Research. In E. Hinkel (ed), The Handbook of
• Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning (pp: 471-483). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Swan, M. (1985b). A critical look at the communicative approach (2). English Language Teaching
• Journal, 39/2, 76-87.
• Willis, D. (1996a). Introduction. In D. Willis & J. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and Change in Language
• Teaching. pp.iv-vi. Oxford: Heinemann.
• Willis, D. (1996b). Accuracy, fluency and conformity. In D. Willis & J. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and Change
• in Language Teaching. pp. 44-51. Oxford: Heinemann.
• Willis, J. (1993). Preaching what we practice-Training what we teach: Task-based language teaching as
• an alternative to PPP. The teacher Trainer, 8(1), 17-20.
• Willis, J. (1996a). “A flexible framework for task-based learning”. In D. Willis & J. Willis (Eds.), Challenge
• and Change in Language Teaching. pp. 52-61. Oxford: Heinemann.
• Willis, J. (1996b). A Framework for Task-based Learning. Essex: Addison Wesley Longman.
• Woodward, T. (1993). Changing the basis of pre-service TEFL training in the UK. IATEFL TT SIG
• Newsletter, 13, 3-5.
• Woodward, T. (2001). Planning Lessons and Courses: Designing Sequences of Work for the Language
• Classroom. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
• Internet Sources
• http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/knowledge-database/test-teach-test.
• http://www.columbusisd.org/cms/lib/TX01001718/Centricity/Domain/363/What_5E_model_000.pdf