English Within Reach: teaching exams

No student is like another, and the way each person learns is different. Our brains are unique and all of our experiences contribute to our different learning methods. Psychologists have spent countless hours running tests to better understand how students learn. Teachers need to be trained to be ready to teach students every day, and an important part of teacher training is understanding the different ways of learning. There are many strong learning theories that teachers can learn from as they prepare to help students in the classroom. Those who understand learning theories can use different techniques in their classes to address different types of learning. This can help all students learn successfully. There are five main theories of educational learning that educators can use to improve their classrooms and improve the learning environment for all students.

Cognitive theory

Cognitive learning theory analyzes the way people think. Mental processes are an important part of understanding how we learn. Cognitive theory understands that students can be influenced by internal and external elements in how we think as humans. Many other researchers have delved into the idea of our thinking and initiated further research. Jean Piaget is a very important figure in the field of cognitive psychology and his work is focused on internal environments and processes. Structures and how they influence learning. Cognitive theory has evolved over time and broken down into sub-theories that focus on unique elements of learning and understanding. At its most basic level, cognitive theory suggests that internal thoughts and external forces are an important part of the cognitive process, and when students understand how their thinking affects their learning and behavior, we can have more control over them.Cognitive learning theory affects students because their understanding of their thought process can help them learn. Teachers can give students opportunities to ask questions, fail, and think out loud. These strategies can help students understand how your thinking process works and use that knowledge to build better learning opportunities.

THE COMMUNICATIVE APPROACH

- 0 Comments

THE COMMUNICATIVE APPROACH

This approach has preserved quite a lot of characteristic features from both the cognitive and the natural approaches. The representatives of the Communicative Approach (CA) acknowledge that structures and vocabulary are important but they emphasize the acquisition of linguistic structures or vocabulary as well. When we communicate we use the language to accomplish some function such as arguing, persuading and promising. We carry out these functions with a social context.

1.1. Characteristics of communicative classes:

Communicative language teaching is

• content based

language is a tool for getting information about the world. In this approach message is more important than the form. Interdisciplinary or in another word: cross-curricular approach, by which content can be integrated into English teaching, is based on a lot of authentic materials taken from various text types such as newspapers, journals, pamphlets, guidebooks etc. These texts cover a wide range of topics, so in addition to broadening your students’ minds, they will build up their vocabulary as well. • intercultural

Foreign language learning is often foreign culture learning. In order to understand just what foreign culture learning is, one needs to understand the nature of acculturation and culture shock. A person's world view, selfidentity, and systems of thinking, acting, feeling, and communicating can be disrupted by a change from one culture to another

• holistic

It means that the whole personality of the learner must be developed during language teaching. This term related to communicative language teaching, will focus teachers attention on the fact that students’ ways of thinking should also be developed. • experiential

The students are supposed to experience that the target language acquired is very useful in life. Authentic texts such as brochures, instructions, cookery books etc. make students feel how practicable their knowledge in English is.

• learner-centred

Learners’ needs are very important in communicative language. Activities are chosen according to the various learning styles and they also must be age relevant.

The goal of communicative language teaching is to make students communicatively competent. Let us examine what the term communicative competence means.

1.1. Defining Communicative Competence

The term "communicative competence" was coined by Dell Hymes (1967, 1972) -a sociolinguist who was convinced that Chomsky's (1965) notion of competence (see Chapter Two) was too limited. Communicative competence, then, is that aspect of our competence that enables us to convey and interpret messages and to negotiate meanings interpersonally within specific contexts.

In the 1970s, research on communicative competence distinguished between linguistic and communicative competence (Hymes 1967, Paulston 1974) to highlight the difference between knowledge "about" language forms and knowledge that enables a person to communicate functionally and interactively.

Seminal work on defining communicative competence was carried out by Michael Canale and Merrill Swain (1980), now the reference point for virtual discussions of communicative competence vis-á-vis second language teach in Canale and Swain's (1980), and later in Canale's (1983) definition, four :different components, or subcategories, make up the construct of communicative competence. The first two subcategories reflect the use of the linguistic stem itself.

(Brown 1994: 226-250)

(1) Grammatical competence is that aspect of communicative competence that encompasses "knowledge of lexical items and of rules of morphology, syntax, sentence-grammar semantics, and phonology" (Canale and Swain 1980:29). It is the competence that we associate with mastering the linguistic code of a language, the

"linguistic" competence of Hymes and Paulston, referred to above.

(2) The second subcategory is discourse competence, the complement of grammatical competence in many ways. It is the ability we have to connect sentences in stretches of discourse and to form a meaningful whole out of a series of utterances. Discourse means everything from simple spoken conversation to lengthy written texts (articles, books, and the like). While grammatical competence focuses on sentence-level grammar, discourse competence is concerned with intersentential relationships.

The last two subcategories define the more functional aspects of communication.

(3) Sociolinguistic competence is the knowledge of the socio-cultural rules of language and of discourse. This type of competence "requires an understanding of the social context in which language is used: the roles of the participants, the information they share, and the function of the interaction. Only in a full context of this kind can judgments be made on the appropriateness of a particular utterance (Savignon 1983: 37).

(4) The fourth subcategory is strategic competence, a construct that is exceedingly complex. Canale and Swain (1980: 30) described strategic competence as "the verbal and nonverbal communication strategies that may be called into action to compensate for breakdowns in communication due to performance variables or due to insufficient competence." Savignon (1983:40) paraphrases this as "the strategies that one uses to compensate for imperfect knowledge of rules-or limiting factors in their application such as fatigue, distraction, and inattention." In short, it is the competence underlying our ability to make repairs, to cope with imperfect knowledge, and to sustain communication through "paraphrase, circumlocution, repetition, hesitation, avoidance, and guessing, as well as shifts in register and style" (Savignon 1983: 40-41).

Strategic competence occupies a special place in an understanding of communication. Actually, definitions of strategic competence that are limited to the notion of "'compensatory strategies" fall short of encompassing the full spectrum of the construct. In a follow-up to the previous (Canale and Swain, 1980) article, Swain (1984:189) amended the earlier notion of strategic competence to include "communication strategies that may be called into action either to enhance the effectiveness of communication or to compensate for breakdowns." (my italics) Similarly, Yule and Tarone (1990: 181) refer to strategic competence as "an ability to select an effective means of performing a communicative act that enables the listener/reader to identify the intended referent." So, all communication strategiessuch as those discussed in Chapter Five-may be thought of as arising out of a person's strategic competence. In fact, strategic competence is the way we manipulate language in order to meet communicative goals.