Diane Larsen-Freeman

XII To th e Teac her Educator To the Teac her Edu cat or Xlll
lan guage ca n best be learned when ir is taught th rou gh communication,
rat her than for it (Chapte r to, on con tent- based, task-based, and participarory
approaches), a nd seco nd, that language acquisition ca n be
enha nced hy wo rking nor only on language, bur also on the process of
learn ing (Chapter It, on learning strategies, cooperative learning, a nd
mult iple intelligences).
A further substantial mod ificati on is that the ep ilogue of the first edition
has grown inro a full cha pte r of its own (Chapter 12) in (his second
edition. Readers of th e first ed ition have rold me that they wished that J
had concluded with a more explicit evaluation and comparison of the
met hods. I chose not to do so in the first edition oft his book. as I am not
of the opi nion that (he purpose of learni ng about methods is so one can
adopt the right one, or that I could choose for oth ers which one that
would be. However, in this second edition, I have responded to readers'
requests by providing a summary chan of the method s discussed in this
book, and by so doing, high lighting their ma jor differences. I have also
used th e opportunity tha t a full final chapter presents to indulge myself in
sharing with readers my views on making informed met hodo logica l
cho ices.
A word a bout nomenclature is also in order. I am using (he term
'm eth od' here nor to mean a formulaic prescription, hut rather a coherent
set of links between principles and certa in techniques an d procedu res.
Anthony (1963) has made the case for a tripartite hierarchy. As he put it:
, ... techniques ca rry out a meth od which is consistent with an a pproach'
(p. 64 ). Following Amhony, in certain of the chapters, Jwill introduce a
particular method by showing how it is an exa mple of a more genera l
approach ro language teach ing. However, not all methods discussed in
this book conveniently follow from a general approach. They all do ,
though, have both a conceptual and an operational component, finin g
the definition in Richards et al. (1992): Dictionary of Language Teaching
& Applied Linguistics (a method is 'a way of teaching a language wh ich
is based on systema tic principles and procedures'), and justifying my use
of the term . Admittedly, I sometimes have foun d it difficult to use the term
'method' with more recent innovations, such as conrenr-based insrruction
and coo perative learnin g. At times, I hav e resorted to the term
'methodological innovations.'
Even so, some langua ge educato rs might obj ect to the inclu sion of conrent-ba
sed, task-ba sed, and part icipatory approaches in a methods book,
for they might be more comforta ble ca lling these sylla bus types. Neverrhclcss,
others feci that a method designation is very appropriate. Snow
(199 1), for instan ce, cha racterizes con ten t-based instr uction as a 'method
wit h many faces' both to mak e (he case for co rircnr-bascd instruction as a
method of language teac hing, and (0 ca pture the great varie ty of for ms
an d settings in whic h it rakes place. Kuma ravadivelu (1993) observes that
the rerm '(ask' is often used with reference (Q bot h co ntent an d mcrhodology
of language (cachin g. Indeed, within the strong version of a communicative
appro ach (Howatt 1984 ), (he traditional separation of syllabus
design a nd methodology is blurred. If stu dents learn (Q communicate by
communicating (Breen 1984). (hen (he desti na tion and the route becom e
one and the same (Nu na n 1989). f inally. if we apply the definition of a
met hod we are using in this boo k, 'A met hod is a coherent set ofthoughtin-action
links,' then the th ree rightfu lly belong.
Some migh t also ques tion whet her the three arc distinctive enough to
be treated separately. For example. Skeha n (1998) makes the point that
one could regard much content-based instruction (as well as project
work, which we will also briefly consider in Chapter 10) as particular
examples of a task-based approach. And others have suggested that taskbased
and participatory ap proaches are a form of content-based instruction.ln
any case, although it should be acknowledged that these methods
arc unified by (he assumption rhat students learn (Q communicate by
co mmunicating, (heir scope an d their particular foci seem distinctive
enough ( 0 warrant independent treatment.
Finally, alt hough I have made every effo rt toward a faith ful rendering
of each meth od and methodological innova tion, (here will undoubtedly
be those who would not totally accep t my rendition . Th is is understan d­
ab le and probably inevitable. My descr iption is, as it must be, a product
of my own experience.
It is my sincere hope (hat this book will bot h inform and stimulate its
readers and that it will encourage them to reflect, inquire, and experiment.
If it meets these goa ls, then ir may help to restore faith in the appropriate
use of reachi ng met hod s in lan guage reacher educat ion.
Brattleboro, Vermollt
REFERENCES
Dian e Lar sen-Freeman
Allwright, Dick. 1988. Observation ill th e Classroom . London: Longnun.
Anthony, Edward. 1963. 'A pproach, met hod, and technique.' Ellglish
Language Teaching Jailmal 17: 6]-7 reprinted in Allen, H . and R.
Campbell (cds.) : Teaching ~llglish as ,1 Second Language. (2nd edn.)
1972. New York: ~1cGraw· Hi ll.