Diane Larsen-Freeman

154 Content-based, Task-based, and Participatory Approac hes Content-based, Task-based, and Participatory Approaches 155
Observations
3 Th e reacher leads the class in
discussing the prob lem, ending
with students responding with
solu tions to the problem.
4 The teacher asks the students if
they want to write a gro up
letter. She uses a collabor at ive
process to do so.
5 Afterwards, the studen ts work
togeth er to edit the lerrer for
meaning and form. T hey
continue editing the letter for
homework.
6 T he st udents arc to bring t heir
revised versions of the lcrtcrs to
class next time for ot hers to
read.
7 T he stu dents discuss what they
have learn ed in the clas s.
Principles
Education is most effective wh en it
is experie nce-centered, when it
relates to studen ts' real need s.
Students arc motivated by their
person al involvement. Teachers
are co-learne rs, asking que stions
of the students, wh o arc the
exper ts on their own lives.
When knowledge is jointly
constructed, it becomes a roo! to
help students find voice and by
find ing their voices, students can
ace in the world. Srudenrs learn to
sec t hemselves as social and
po litica l beings.
Focus on lingu istic form occurs
wit hin a focus on content.
La nguage skills a rc taught in
service of action for change, rather
tha n in isola tion.
Students can cre ate their own
ma te rials, wh ich, in turn , can
become texts for ot her students.
A go al of the participatory
approach is for students to be
evalua ting their own lea rnin g
and to increasin gly direct it
rbcmselvcs.
Thus, as we have seen with the other a pproaches we have examined in
this clmprer, the lang uage focus in the participato ry approach is not
esta blished in adva nce. Rather, it follows fro m content, which itself
emerges from on goin g, collaborative investigations of critical themes in
students' lives. As Auer bach (1992: 14 ) put s it, ' Real communication,
accompanied by appropriate feedbac k that subor dinates for m to the
elaboration of meaning, is key for language learning.'
CONCLUSION
l.caming to co mmunicate by communicating, rather than by prep ar ing
to do so through practicing the vario us pieces of lang uage, is a different
way to approach the goal of deve loping stu dents' communicative compctcn
cc. Can you see yourself applying th is central notion in yo ur
teaching? Is there content you r students ar e interested in studying that
may prove to be a useful medium for their langua ge acquisition- per haps
some special interest like music or sports, if not an academic sub ject? Are
there tas ks that you could devise tha t would engage your students in
using the language, rather th an having t he lan guage itself be what is in
focu s at all times? Do you sec t he valu e of having issues, if not problems,
that a rc relevant to your stude nts ' lives be the vehicle for their pe rso na l
empowerment as well as their language learn ing? Which , if any, of
the techn iques presented here can you ada pt to your own teac hing
context ?
ACTIVITIES
A Check your understanding of content-based, task-based, and
participatory approaches:
1 In your ow n words descri be the difference between the approa ch
to teaching communication taken in the previous chapter and this
one.
2 Why do yo u think that conte nt-based instruction has been ca lled 'a
metho d with many faces'? (Snow 199 1).
3 Willis ( 1996) proposes the following sequence for ta sk-based act ivities:
Pre-task, Task, an d La nguage Focus. Skeha n (1998) C0111 111cnts
tha t this sequence is the reverse of the seq uence found in more tra dition
al inst ruction. Discuss.
4 It might be said rha r the participatory approach has a political philosophy
as well as an educational on e. What do you understand this statement
to Ill C ~lI1 ?