25

Chapter-1

Modern Approaches to English Language Teaching and

Learning:

Increasing global economies, a heightened need for matching the

international standards and changing demographics in the world have

increased attention to our country‟s lack of language capability in terms

of transacting in foreign languages, especially the English language.

Every call to action to prepare our students for the 21st Century includes

offering them the opportunity to learn English so as to increase their

knowledge of other cultures. The hall mark of success in the 21st century

world certainly amounts to two key factors: one is digital literacy and the

other knowledge of English language. It is a crucial call on our part to

offer our students ample of opportunities to develop these two

fundamental skills. English education not only guarantees success

academic and professional fronts, it also provides international exposure

to the students. Knowledge of English language facilitates students with

an invigorating perspective of the whole world. Despite having

conflicting perspectives built on use of various languages, there are

similarities, too, to be found across language platforms of the 21st

century. Knowledge of English, in this way, guarantees understanding of

many a nations, their cultures and people. It is in this sense that students

of English language stand better chances of becoming skilled learners of

the 21st century.

English language learning provides opportunities to connect and

understand developed, developing and underdeveloped communities

across the globe and is thus vital to success in global environment of

academics and professions, science and research in the 21st century. With

26

regard to teaching and learning of English language and literature, it is

necessary to observe that communicative competence and language

proficiency are interdependent and mutually contributing to the grasp of

language. Teaching and learning of English language in the context of

India is based upon achieving the following objectives keeping in mind

the educational and professional needs of Indian students:

1. Communicative competence:

In a traditionally teacher centric country like India, students usually

remain at the receiving end as far as direct classroom teaching is

concerned. However English language learning through newer

methodologies ensures greater communicative competence on the

part of students as they are more engaged within proactive learning

ambience that incites greater participation from their side.

Communicative competence through English language is crucial to

their academic and professional success.

2. Cultural Exchanges:

Teaching and learning of English language and literature exposes

students to intra and inter cultural exchanges. On one hand, it

allows Indian students of diverse linguistic backgrounds to interact

through the link language under one roof; on the other hand

knowledge of English language ensures their exposure to cross

cultural interaction with learning communities outside India.

3. Interdisciplinary connections:

Knowledge of English enables Indian students to access a wide

range of learning resources of other disciplines across the world. It

is the lack of proper grounding in English language results into

27

limited access to the rest of the world; whereas proficiency in

English ensures interdisciplinary academic connectivity widening

promising horizons for Indian students to avail of distinct branches

of knowledge all over the world.

4. Comparative study:

For Indian students, knowledge of English language means

exposure and access to a promising domain comparative study of

the best of the East and the best of the West and even the best of

the Rest. Since knowledge resources pertaining to distinct branches

of studies are available mostly in English language, Indian students

who have proficiency in English stand brighter chances of getting

benefitted by way of comparative study of what best they can offer

to the rest of the world and what best can come to them through

their knowledge of English.

5. Cyber Communities:

Knowledge of English also ensures participatory benefit to Indian

students to the digital world of cyber communities. Extensive

continuous learning, sharing of resources and human bonding with

people across the world is possible through entry into cyber

communities. This is the linguistic dividend which could be

capitalized by Indian students through their knowledge of English

language.

In the 21st century world which demands productivity and

performance, communicative competence through proficiency in

English language is crucial to the successful academic and

professional lives of Indian students. For this purpose, right from early

28

schooling, adequate grounding in English language is utmost

necessary. Teaching and learning of English language needs to be

reinforced on the basis of communicative competence and proficiency

during schooling is almost mandatory. Any efforts towards teaching

and learning of English language at under graduate level will yield

desired results only if due care is taken at the school level education.

Advanced level proficiency in English at the under graduate level

depends, by and large on how students are taught English at schools.

In order to facilitate students with adequate levels of proficiency in

English language as well as communicative competence, the pedagogy

and methodology for the same has witnessed and undergone

tremendous changes that began early in the last quarter of the 20th

century along with technological advancement in education. Ever

since the advent of technology in the tenets of education, like other

branches of knowledge, teaching and learning of English language and

literature has witnessed a series of innovative experimentations in

pedagogy as well as methodology.

There have been various attempts to define the process of teaching

andlearning. However theoreticians mostly agree on one point- that

the process of teaching English as a foreign language is a complex

phenomenon. Teaching and learning of English as a foreign language

consists of the following aspects:

(a) Teaching through presentations and explanations

(b) Inviting participation of students through practice plans

(c) Testing, assessment and evaluation leading to language profiling of

learners

29

In the modern age, successful teaching and learning of English

happens only when teachers and students actively participate sharing

responsibilities mutually working out on the ratio of needs and

responsibilities. An English teacher in India is also supposed to keep

in mind learning needs of students that vary not only in numbers but

also in heterogeneous individual profiles. At this point of discussion, it

is imperative to take note of Abraham Maslow‟s extensive analysis of

human needs. In a scholarly paper „A Theory of Human Motivation‟

published in 1954, he chartered hierarchy of human needs depicted in

a pyramid structure that consists of five levels of human needs (See

figure1).

Figure 1 :Maslow’s Hierarchy of Human Needs

(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs)

The basic physiological needs of breathing, food, water, or sleep hold the

base of the pyramid and lie at level one in the bottom. The higher needs

30

remain at the top levels and comprise safety, love and esteem. This level

involves human body, family, health, property and employment. At the

third level, human needs of friendship, love and marriage are categorized.

However for the purpose of education in general and language learning in

particular, the fourth and the fifth levels are more significant than the first

three. The fourth level has two levels: the lower one is associated with

fame, respect and glory; whereas the higher one relates to confidence,

competence and achievement. The line of demarcation rests on the fact

that all other needs are based on dependence on other sources of people,

whereas confidence, competence and achievement are independent of any

dependency since the same can be achieved through efforts on one‟s own.

The topmost level of Maslow‟s Hierarchy focuses self actualization that

covers acceptance of facts, lack of prejudice, problem solving, creativity

and morality. It is the qualities inherent in the zenith of Maslow‟s

Pyramid that attract our attention as far as teaching and learning of

English language and literature with special reference to use of Multiple

Intelligences is concerned.

The study of Maslow‟s Pyramid reveals that it is important to consider

needs of students in the process of teaching and learning; since the higher

needs can be employed only when the lower needs are adequately met

with. It is the extent to which needs of students are satisfied that

determines their motivation to study a foreign language.

Motivation, as a key factor in the process of learning and

teaching, is defined as some kind of internal drive which pushes

someone to do things in order to achieve something.(Harmer, 51).

Penny Ur (A Course in English Language Teaching, 2012) presents the

following kinds of motivation: „extrinsic, intrinsic, integrative,

instrumental, global, situational and task motivation‟ (276). Extrinsic

31

motivation involves factors like passing an examination or travel plans.

Intrinsic motivation comes from individual‟s preference for the process of

learning as a matter of personal choice leading to enjoyment. Integrative

Motivation focuses one‟s desire to mingle up with and even internalize

some cultural traits of the language being studied. Instrumental

Motivation involves a desire to learn language for academic or

professional goals. Global Motivationindicates holistic orientation of the

learner in acquiring a foreign language. Situational motivation occurs on

account of learning ambience and environment building. Task motivation

pertains to the lesson plans and methods that the students undertake under

the supervision of the teachers.

Apart from the above motivational factors described by Harmer and Ur,

family background of students, their friends and teachers and the

methodology used by the institutions are also governing factors. Scholars

agree that the teacher is also a major factor allowing motivational

learning on the part of students. Besides the teacher, methodologies

adopted also make a decisive difference. This brings up the point of

discussion surrounding the importance of teacher in theprocess of

learning. The students, on the other hand, need to face challenges, take up

language tasks, overcome their limitations and excel in learning. This can

be achieved by way of correct identification of strengths and weaknesses

pitted against their ambitions and opportunities. Learning a foreign

language also involves a higher degree of commitment, sense of

positivism and concrete output in terms of efforts. The teacher s of

English, therefore need to motivate their students by way of arousing

their basic interest in learning a foreign language. If the teacher sets the

32

goals on one hand, the students on the other hand must not lose their

focus on objectives. It is equally important to devise a methodology

involving interplay of active learning lesson plans incorporating language

tasks based on multiple intelligencesso as to enable students for self

learning beyond the direct teaching. In order to generate motivation

among students, the teacher has to evolve methods conducive to the

learning styles of students. The learning styles / types refer to students‟

orientation in one or more of the multiple intelligences. Indian English

teachers need to devise methodology based on multiple intelligences

incorporating psychological, cognitive and socio cultural aspects of

heterogeneous groups of students. Based on the learning styles of

students, the teacher can devise his lesson plans in such a manner that

students work in groups of peers sharing similar learning types for

example verbal smart learners are preoccupied with use of books and

reading material, whereas visual smart learners fancy learning through

drawing , sketches and images. Bodily smart learners like to involve

physical actions in the process of learning. The music smart learners love

to study while engaged in rhythmic patterns of sounds. People smart

learners prefer learning in groups through interaction, whereas self smart

learners like to be left alone in solitude for reading or writing exercises.

The nature smart students love to work outdoors in the midst of scenic

beauties whereas the philosophy smart learners enjoy learning through

contemplation and meditation.

In order to devise lesson plans based on multiple intelligences that the

students belong to, the teacher is supposed to orient and engage the

learners on the following intelligences envisaged, propounded and

33

distinguished by Prof. Howard Gardner in his book Multiple Intelligences

: New Horizons ( 2006, 8-20)

No. Intelligence Indication

1 Linguistic/verbal Word

2 Logical/mathematical Number Smart

3 Spatial/Visual Picture Smart

4 Musical Sound Smart

5 Kinesthetic Body Smart

6 Interpersonal People Smart

7 Intrapersonal Self Smart

8 Naturalist Nature Smart

9 Existential Philosophy

Smart

Keeping in mind the above domains of intelligences , English teachers

are supposed to plan out their direct teaching sessions in such a

manner students enjoy learning on the basis of their prevailing type of

intelligence/s. for word smart learners, the teacher can offer reading

and writing exercises choosing appropriate poems or stories and offer

them vocabulary exercises as well. For Number Smart learners,

exercises on grammar, word puzzles and strategic language games are

offered. The picture smart students love to learn through visuals and

can be engaged in exercises based on drawings, caricatures and

collages. For music smart learners, poetry recitation, reading of a play

or exercises based on instrumental music can be offered. Lesson plans

involving role play and stage performances should be offered to body

smart learners. People smart learners are at their best when assigned

group activities like event management, group discussions and

34

debates. Self smart learners like to write diaries, travelogues and

memoirs. For nature smart learners, the teacher can offer extra mural

projects wherein they learn from field visits in the midst of nature. The

philosophy smart students love to learn through meditation and

contemplation and exercises on reflective thinking.

It is necessary for a good language teacher to have adequate

competencies for tackling two important tasks: to achieve goals

through teaching and to be able to address learning needs of students.

Melissa Kelly (2004) mentions that there are four main kinds of

competences that each language teacher should display: general

competences, existential competences, ability to learn and strategic

competence. General Competence involves existential, psychological,

social, socio cultural and intercultural considerations. This

competence enables the teacher to tackle issues pertaining to

personality traits, attitudes, systems of values and beliefs and

cognitive style of the students. For Indian English teachers, it is the

communicative competence and linguistic competence that matters the

most as the teacher should be able to find out linguistic background of

students in order to tackle issues of pronunciation, vocabulary and

grammar among students belonging to diverse socio linguistic

backgrounds. Along with this knowledge of socio cultural background

of students helps teacher understand their interpersonal relations,

value systems, body language and cultural practices. Communicative

competence also involves honing of four skills – listening, speaking,

reading and writing to determine use of language for personal, public,

academic and occupational purposes. Ability ot learn would mean

students understanding and evaluation of their professional

development integrated with the knowledge they receive. At the same

35

time, exercising strategic competence, the teacher can devise planning

of delivery of content, ability to execute lesson plans as well as

judging measures for assessment of students. Besides these

competences, the teacher is also required to possess an ability to learn,

to evaluate his academic and professional development and to

integrate his learning with his actual classroom methodology.

Teachers with such competences as mentioned above turn their

classroom into a happening place wherein students enjoy learning

freely according to their learning styles.

The process of teaching involves above mentioned competences that

the teachers must possess in order to implement effective ways of

learning among students. Considering the above competences, Harmer

(2012) distinguishes eight distinct roles of the modern teacher:

(a) Controller

(b) Organizer

(c) Assessor

(d) Prompter

(e) Participant

(f) Resource person

(g) Tutor

(h) Observer

It is for a good teacher to decide which role to assume and perform

considering the actual classroom situation at a given point of time

including students learning needs on the basis of Multiple

Intelligences that they belong to. On the basis of the above

observations, teaching and learning of English language and literature

in India can be discussed and deliberated upon. It is in this sense that

36

an overview and brief analysis of modern approaches towards English

language teaching and learning are discussed herein after:

(f) Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)

(g) Task-Based Learning (TBL)

(h) Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)

(i) Presentation, Practice and Production (PPP)

(j) Computer Aided Language Learning (CALL)

Communicative Language Teaching (CLT):

Identification of the communicative aspects in general and increasing

need for better communicative skills in English has created widespread

demand of learning and teaching of English across the world. The 21st

century also has witnessed significant surge and spurt in number of

people who want to achieve command over English for various purposes

ranging from education to professional goals. People of the modern world

receive English voluntarily through human activities like studying

abroad, travelling, cross country exchange programmes, formal, informal

and instructional literatures, multimedia and the cyber world of the ICT.

The worldwide demand for proficiency in English had necessitated

qualitative output from teachers and students of English. It also demands

quality in terms of methodology, resources and assessment and

evaluation. The students aspire to master English to a required level of

accuracy and fluency. There is also a distinct professional demand for

good communicative skills in English to ensure success. Accuracy and

fluency are prerequisites for success and advancement within the

academic world. Such a situation calls for a methodology that caters to

the communicative goals of students of English.

It is observed that the teachers of English, especially dealing with the

ESL/EFL students are found to have fancy for the term „communicative

37

approach‟ and proudly claim that they teach English through

communicative methodology. However, when probed to give their

explanation on communicative methodology, after initial enthusiasm,

they fumble for concrete answers. Such a slack approach of the English

teachers raises following doubts in our minds regarding the CLT:

(a) Does CLT amount only to the teaching of conversations?

(b) Does the CLT omit grammar as an integral part of the curricula?

(c) Does CLT only mean teaching of English through classroom

activities based on discussion or conversation?

In order to dispel misconceptions surrounding the practices of CLT,

following points are worth observing:

(i) Language learning is a matter of practice; mere theoretical

information does not lead to proficiency

(ii) Learning grammar in isolation ceases to be the most important

practice towards teaching and learning of English

(iii) It is through communication that one learns English in a more

natural environment

(iv) Notion of correctness is replaced by an error –tolerant approach

(v) CLT emphasizes the skill of speaking over other three basic

skills of listening, reading and writing.

(vi) The classroom witnesses lot of activities and participation from

students who are engaged in meaningful communication.

(vii) The CLT targets accuracy as well as fluency, not at the cost of

reasonable comprehension on the part of students.

On the basis of the above characteristics of the CLT, it is understood

that this methodology considers learning needs of students to be of

significant value. Not only that, it also covers pro-active classroom

activities that facilitate learning among ESL/EFL students.

38

Communicative competence is the prime goal of the CLT approach.

Unlike the concept of grammatical competence that insists only on

technical knowledge of English language, the CLT emphasizes

communicative aspects of English. Insistence on rules, structures and

mere reproduction of correct phrases and sentences are implied

limitations impended by the structural/grammatical approach; whereas

the CLT enables students to produce and present their ideas, thoughts

and views through meaningful communication as it goes beyond the

rules of grammar and turns ordinary language learners into acceptable

performers of English. However the CLT does not totally obliterate or

underestimate the place for grammar or technicalities of language

involved therein as it covers following aspects of language taking into

consideration that beyond learning, English is also to be used by the

students beyond their classrooms:

Focus on language learning for distinct purposes like

educational and /or professional.

Insistence on use of language according to the situation/s.

Knowledge of language being operated at different levels to suit

ad hoc purposes.

Encouragement on communication and performance

irrespective of level of proficiency in language

Our understanding of and attitude towards the Second Language

Learning(SLL) has undergone significant changes on account of

challenges encountered by teachers and students of English in the

globalised world of the 21st century. The cult that grew under the aegis of

the CLT was a reasonable response to such challenges in teaching and

learning of English. The mastery of grammatical competence once

regarded as the final outcome of English language learning was pushed to

39

the margins with the advent of the CLT that discouraged the process of

mechanical habit formation and encouraged students of English to use

language while allowing them to make mistakes without feeling guilty

over it. The absolute control of the teacher ceased to see the daylight as

the CLT invited students with a package that promised participation along

with errors. Thus learning became a process easier for students of English

who were allowed to learn beyond fixed sets of grammatical rules. The

advent of CLT and the practices that followed changed the course of

action as far as teaching and learning of English is concerned. In recent

years, teaching and learning of English language has been viewed with

fresh perspectives that include the following features:

Scope for fruitful interaction between the students of English and

comparatively competent users of English.

Collaborative approach towards teaching and learning.

Insistence on meaningful and purposeful interaction in English.

Building blocks of understanding through negotiations between the

learners and the teachers.

Learning through feedback mechanism evolved by teachers and

students to ensure that students improvise upon each of their

interactions.

Communicative competence through the input of English used by

competent speakers and learners responses to the same.

Experimentation by students on how to use English differently for

distinct purposes.

It is in this sense that the CLT heralded an ambitious movement drifting

apart from the traditional approaches towards teaching and learning of

English. Unlike the structural approach on grammar and controlled

activities, the CLT opened doors for refreshing activities for students of

40

English like role plays, group activities and project work. The discussion

on CLT brings us also to the point of syllabus design. It necessitated

rethinking of approaches to curriculum design and subsequent/

consequent execution/implementation of the same. The traditional

approaches towards teaching and learning of English language began to

be replaced somewhere in the latter half of the previous century. However

the CLT gathered significant momentum during the last quarter of the

20th century. The monopoly of the traditional approaches was grounded

as it was mistakenly believed that grammatical competence lead to

proficiency in English. Direct instructional method for learning grammar

was boringly repetitive and never went beyond rigorous drilling practices.

The traditional approach also imposed a restricted understanding on the

part of teachers and student of English that language learning was all

about knowing and reproducing a fixed set of sentences and grammatical

patterns wherein what mattered the most was accuracy and notion of

correctness however controlled exercises and drilling practices fail to

allow students to perform on their own under unknown situations. Even

training on four basic skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing

was given in an extremely restricted manner focusing on memorization of

sentence structures, practice of question and answer pattern, drilling

exercises on verb conjugations and guided practices on speaking and

writing. Stern insistence on the British Received Pronunciations (BRP)

and accuracy in terms of correct grammatical structures further marred

the interest of students in learning English on the basis of their abilities

and preferences almost zero tolerance was practiced on students who

made mistakes while using English. However the traditional approaches

had to face the music as strong reactions began to be hurled at the

structuralists who fell out of fashion at the advent of the spirit of

41

democracy and individuality in the field of education. The last two

decades of the previous century witnessed questions on the over emphasis

on grammatical competence and believed that language learning was

certainly more than a mere knowledge of grammar. The attention was

shifted to communicative goals, the priorities changed from being

absolutely correct to being appropriately suitable to the occasions

wherein English is to be practiced. Unlike the traditional approaches, the

CLT took into account students‟ perspectives on language learning that

include learners‟ needs, goals, objectives and desires to learn English.

It is in this sense that the Communicative Language Teaching touched

upon the cross sections of linguistics and socio linguistics in order to

appeal to the teachers and students of English who were badly in need of

a sensible way out of unimaginative and unproductive implications of the

traditional approaches. As for the operational part, the notion of

communicative competence implies changes in terms of content,

methodology and criteria for assessment. During the last two decades of

the previous century, the CLT garnered a great deal of enthusiasm and

excitement among teachers and students of English who loved to rethink

their methods of teaching and learning ,curricula, resources and their own

responses to the process of teaching and learning. The advocates of CLT

acknowledge and recognize heterogeneity of purposes for learning

English among students of diverse backgrounds. The CLT considers

varieties in terms of specific educational and /or occupational conditions

of students as opportunities to operate its methodology exercising greater

amount of flexibility. It facilitates teaching and learning of English based

on communicative skills that are conducive to the specific purposes for

which English is taught and learned. Consequently concentration on and

42

concretization of „General English‟ was done away with by newer trends

often labeled as ESP- English for Special Purpose or EOP- English for

Occupational Purpose. Thus the CLT comprises analysis of observations,

surveys, situations, language samples collected from various pockets of

human activities and interactions in order to arrive at nearly exact

estimate of learners‟ needsobjectives and goals for learning English. On

the basis of such considerations, the CLT offers customized

programmes/courses on ELL to suit the requirements of learners with

diverse backgrounds and priorities. At the same time, this approach also

examines the following points of diversions among various groups of

learners:

Vocabulary levels and choice of terminology.

Ratio of grammatical and communicative content.

Selection of texts and ancillary materials.

Moderation of functionality and practices.

Focus on skill orientation.

On the basis of the above considerations, ESP and EOP courses were

designed and offered to suit the requirements of students enrolled under

programmes like Engineering, Management Studies, Hospitality, Airline

Services, Medical and Paramedical Services, Liberal Studies and so on.

Consequently methodology for classroom teaching also underwent

remarkable changes since it was communication that came to be regarded

the main factor leading to the learning of a language. It is the

communicative aspect that was thought to be providing better learning

opportunities to the students who had not been aptly rewarded by the

traditional approaches.Following are some of the core principles that

constitute the nature and functions of the CLT methodology:

Real communication is the focus of language learning.

43

Encourage students to experiment on the basis of what they already

know.

Maximize students‟ participation in the classroom activities.

Greater tolerance is to be observed towards errors made by

students.

Inculcate sense of accuracy and fluency among learners to make

them competent communicators in the target language.

Exercise linkage among four skills: Listening, Speaking, Reading

and Writing in order to encourage students for collaborative

learning.

Allow students to find out rules of grammar through their practice

of and exposure to the actual use of language.

The application of principles of CLT mentioned herein above called

for newer classroom techniques and activities which, in turn,

demanded new perspectives on the roles of students and teachers. The

focus was shifted from rigorous and acute repetitions as well as

forceful memorization of grammatical structures to activities

encouraging sense of initiatives, negotiations and interactions among

students. The CLT methodology owes its acceptance and popularity to

its notion that language is a matter of practice and that communicative

competence is achievable with or without absolute knowledge of and

control over the grammar of a language. On the basis of this merit

itself, the CLT methodology won accolades especially in the field of

ESL and EFL. Along with the growing awareness on importance of

second language learning, the CLT methodology has also evolved to

the level of one of the most standard and proven methodologies for

teaching and learning of English. At the same time, it has also

influenced educational paradigms and traditions by way of not

44

adhering to a single practice, tradition or ideology for language

teaching. On the contrary, it operates on the basis of principles agreed

upon generally while taking into consideration the context and

purpose of teaching and learning along with the technicalities involved

therein.

In the light of this observation, it is interesting to reflect upon Jacob

and Farrell‟s article “Paradigm Shift: Understanding and

Implementing Change in Social Language Education”(2001) wherein

they have articulated the importance of a communicative view of

language leading to a paradigm shift making us rethink of

stakeholders involved in the process of teaching and learning. They

further suggest that the paradigm shift triggered by CLT has affected

the following changes in approaches towards teaching and learning of

English:

(a) Learner Autonomy:

It suggests shift from teacher-centric approach to learner

friendly environment wherein students can exercise choices in

terms of selection of content, method/mode of learning and

sometimes even modalities pertaining to time and space.

(b) Pro -Social Learning:

Under the CLT methodology, it is implied that learning is an

activity that is neither individual nor private, but a social pursuit

which is dependent on human interactions. It would also mean

learning through co operation and collaboration. It espouses the

idea of inter-personality and connectivity among learners of

different backgrounds and different goals.

45

(c) Curricular Integration:

It calls for design of curriculum on English in connection with

other curricula so that the subject of language is not isolated

from the main stream teaching and learning happening at

educational institutes. It includes selection of texts carefully

prescribed for the predefined purpose of learning English.

(d) Focus on Meaning:

What lies at the basis of learning is satisfactory comprehension

of the content being taught. It is the meaningful understanding

of the content that is responsible for wholistic learning. The

exploration of meaning is achieved through content-based

teaching, which is one of the most important aspects of the CLT

methodology.

(e) Diversity:

Any group of students is marked with heterogeneity of some

kind in terms of the learning needs of students and their

approaches towards language learning. Any teaching strategy

has to take into account such differences prevailing among

learners and never attempt to restrict learners within one fixed

methodology. It is, therefore, necessary to invite responses from

students in building learning strategies for them.

(f) Thinking Skills:

Further to the discussion on Abraham Maslow‟s Pyramid of

Learning Needs(Figure 1), it is to be noted that it is Language

which has to serve as a means for developing HigherOrder

46

Thinking Skills (HOTS), especially critical and creative

thinking. As for teaching and learning of language, it means

that students need to move on from the basic outcome of

language learning to their development and application of

thinking skills in real life situations, academic or professional.

(g) Alternative Assessment:

The traditional patterns of assessment aim at testing only the

lower order skills. Hence, multiple forms of assessment are

required to test the higher order thinking skills of learners. This

includes task-based learning offering students a variety of

learning resources, beyond books and fixed set of problems, like

multimedia, interdisciplinary writings and excerpts from

journalism. Assessment based on such varied sources facilitates

students for comprehensive acquisition of the Second

Language.

(h) Teacher as co-learner:

The CLT methodology triggered paradigm shift that includes

the changing role of teachers who are now viewed as facilitators

in the process of learning. The archaic role of teachers has been

replaced with more pro-active responsibilities as far as the

process of teaching is concerned.Besides being a facilitator, the

21st century teacher also has to engage him/herself in research at

the levels of content development, teaching methodologies, use

of ICT and creating assessment patterns for appropriate

evaluation of students.

47

The Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), therefore, accentuates

the functionalities of language rather than a restricted focus on grammar

and structural practices. The key contribution of the CLT in the field of

language teaching is to be found in its emphasis on applicability and

usage of forms of language learned by students who are able to use,

present and produce language competence under real life situations. The

principles and practices of the CLT methodology reveal the following

features as far as teaching and learning of English is concerned:

(a) Communicative Interaction in the Classrooms

(b) Focus on Meaning throughout the Process of Learning

(c) Active Participation from Learners

(d) Positive Reinforcement of Strengths, Abilities and Inclinations

(e) Freedom of Choice in Selection of Study Materials

(f) Flexibility in Modesand Means of Learning

(g) Learning with a Sense of Enjoyment and Reward

(h) Learning through Target Language

(i) Error-tolerant Approach

The above mentioned features manifest the fact that the CLT

methodology comprises communication based on real and/ or realistic

situations wherein teachers and students of English engage themselves on

the process of teaching and learning of English. However, there is less

emphasis on the issues of accuracy and correctness as far as language

learning is concerned. It is the communicative purpose attained

satisfactorily that holds greater importance. That‟s why activity is on role

playing and simulations have been found quite useful under the practices

of this methodology. One of the most important practices of the CLT is

its aim at devising activities in such a manner that students are prompted

to communicate within the boundaries of such activities. Thus, purpose

48

for communication and urge for the same on their part of the students

makes their language learning and interactive process wherein their

participation is not only crucial but also mandatory. Similarly, focus of

the content is also targeted towards inciting communicative responses

from the learners who fail involve in all level in the process of teaching.

The students are found to be learning with ease and confidence especially

when they are engaged into meaningful communication of the content

through their knowledge of grammatical structures and they learn during

the course of their exposure to the course contents. Since their learning

needs, sense of initiatives towards self-learning and reward mechanism

based on actual participation are taken care of, the students improvised

their communicative skills in a better manner than what could be

achieved by using traditional methodologies. In order to sustain students‟

interest in the process of learning, the teachers can exercise need based

changes in terms of interactive modes, classroom activities, pace of

teaching, intensity of delivery of content, learning environment and

overall academic ambience wherein teachers and students make

collaborative efforts towards teaching and learning of English. Besides

this, the teachers have to ensure familiarity of the approach, moderation

of instructions, minimization of corrective measures and maximization of

positive reinforcement to achieve desired levels of communicative

competence among learners.

The Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) methodology owes his

success to selection of appropriate content of teaching, ensuring learners‟

participation in classroom activities, calibration of differing levels of

proficiency, assessment of socio cultural background of learners,

estimations of learners‟ objectives and students profiling based on their

abilities rather than weaknesses. It is in this sense that the CLT

49

methodology aims at developing and enhancing the learners‟ ability to

communicate in the target language under real life situations ranging

from educational to professional purposes. However there has also been a

critique leveled up against the CLT, maintaining that it attaches less

importance to the teaching of grammar and grammatical structures,

resulting into learners‟ accuracy in using the target language. Despite

such criticism, the CLT methodology has yielded heartening results on

the grounds of confidence, productivity and fluency achieved by students

in their communicative skills using English as a second language or as a

foreign language.

Task Based Learning (TBL)

The methodology of Task Based Learning (TBL) was first propounded

and popularised by N. Prabhu (2012), who initiated practices of Task

Based Learning (TBL), Task Based Language Teaching (TBLT) and

Task Based Instructions (TBI) with major focus on the learning needs of

Indian students with diverse socio-linguistic-cultural backgrounds. This

methodology insists that students learn more of a language not when they

are engaged in structural and/or grammatical forms of the target

language; which means that, according to the principles of the TBL,

students should be engaged in task based activities that enable them to

acquire ESL/EFL in a better and friendly manner. Like the CLT, the

focus of the TBL shifts from fixed grammatical structures of a language

to planned lessons and Task Based Activities wherein learners are

required to perform. The key principle of the TBL is, therefore, learning

through performance. This approach involves students‟ engagement in a

series of activities culminating in successful completion of tasks. This

method also emphasizes use of authentic, real world language actually

practiced by competent users, native or non-native. It is worth noting that

50

this method takes into consideration students‟ exposure to the real world

and their knowledge of the same. Students‟ acquaintances with the real

world are exploited to form lesson plans and task based activities to

provide situational practice to them so that they can learn to reuse the

language they have seen being used in the world around them. In this

sense, the TBL also includes learners‟ skills deduction and individual

analysis in terms of their own exposure to and knowledge of the target

language actually practiced by competent users. Like the CLT, the TBL,

two, provides motivation for adopting communicative skills while

learning ESL/EFL. The point of similarity between the CLT and the TBL

is an overt emphasis on communicative fluency rather than

linguistic/structural/ grammatical accuracy. It is for this reason that the

TBL advocates language learning through natural contextualization of the

content used for language teaching. Such an emphasis calls for selection

and adoption of teaching and learning material from authentic sources.

Though there are similarities between the CLT and the TBL, there is a

clear distinction that separates one from the other. The CLT is more of a

method based on orientation of learners on the principles and the

philosophy that it propagates; whereas the TBL is all about

implementation of principles and execution of practices among the

learners as an integral part of the process of teaching and learning of

English. Following are fundamental notions upon which the TBL

operates:

(a) Primary concern over meaning and comprehension

(b) Grammar and structural forms are guarded, if not over emphasized

(c) Units of learning are offered in terms of tasks

(d) Linkage between pedagogy and methodology

51

Scholars offer various interpretations and definitions of tasks selected for

the Task Based Teaching. According to Rod Ellis (2003), Deputy Head of

Department of Applied Language Studies and Linguistics at the

University of Auckland, New Zealand, a task is a lesson plan that

demands learners to study structures of language so as to arrive at an

outcome which is to be estimated in terms of the delivery of content

conveyed as per pre decided action plans. It, then, requires the learners to

focus on the meaning of the content prescribed and the linguistic sense

that they could make out of it. David Nunan (2004), an Australian

linguists and author of the largest selling ELT textbook series „Go For It‟,

defines a task as an action plan for the classroom which demands multiple

activities on the part of the students who are supposed to derive

comprehension, to manipulate as per the needs or to produce and/or

interact with the same in the target language. He believes that the students

of ESL/EFL have to translate their notional knowledge of grammatical

structures into concrete interactive and communicative practices in the

same language. For an ESL/EFL, classroom activities can be offered at

pedagogical and linguistics levels. While linguistics tasks aim at handling

structural forms, the pedagogical tasks deal with the meanings of the

contents. Jane Willis (1996), teacher of TEFL/TESOL at Aston

University, U.K., suggests three fundamental stages of the TBL

framework:

(a) The pre task

(b) Task cycle

(c) Language focus

In the first stage, the teacher introduces the topic, explores its details and

exposes students to important linguistic features of the same. In the

second stage, the learners act upon the tasks prescribed in either fares or

52

small groups. The teacher has to monitor task based activities being

carried out by the students without interfering with their process of

learning. In the third stage, the students are required to examine the

linguistic features of the prescribed task and are encourage to practice the

same for their independent use. Despite its acceptability as a method

suitable for ESL/EFL learners at primary levels, there has been some

criticism of the TBL concerning its limitations in terms of selection of

tasks that often offer restricted pattern of language. Besides this

limitation, the TBL also lacks inclusion of advanced level samples of

language used in academic/ profession group discussion, debates or

interactions. However, the TBL is desirably applicable methodology as

the resources that it incorporates and implements do provide concretized

experiences towards acquisitions of Second/ Foreign language on the part

of the learners.

Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)

Project UNICON, University of Jyvaskyla, in joint venture with the

European Platform for Dutch Education, first defined the term Content

and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in 1994 and launched it as a

systematic project in 1996. Through this project, a team of experts was

trying to establish a possibility of teaching various subjects through a

foreign language with two objectives: one of learning the content of the

subjects taught and the other of learning the target language in which

subjects are offered. The linguistic experts consider CLIL as a

methodology that includes learning of subject contents, may or may not

be language and literature, through the medium of a foreign language as

well as learning of that foreign language by way of studying subject

contents delivered in the same language. For example, if subjects like

Physics and Economics are taught through English medium to students of

53

a non-English speaking country, such students will be at dual advantage:

study of subject content of Physics and History and learning of English

language through which the subjects are taught. It is to be noted that,

under this methodology, subjects are not taught through the mother

tongue of the students, but through a foreign language. In this way it is

primarily the knowledge of language that proves to be the means of

learning subject contents; at the same time language learning also

happens simultaneously with the content based teaching of subjects

offered in a foreign language. Thus, CLIL bolsters learners‟ motivation

through studying a foreign language which is contextualized by study of

contents taught in the same language. Following are some of the major

advantages that this method offers:

(a) One of the important advantages of CLIL can be seen in the fact

that it enables learners to have bilingual access to the world of

knowledge

(b) It broadens their horizons for inter and cross cultural understanding

of the world.

(c) It also helps learners develop their inter cultural communicative

skills

(d) It increases language competence in the target language

(e) It makes learners more aware of niceties nuances of their mother

tongue and the target language

(f) It provides ample opportunities to learners for subject specific

study that helps them at educational and professional fronts

(g) It allows learners to borrow strategies of the target language and

used the same for learning the subject content. Thus, giving them

diverts and flexible learning experience.

54

Adaptation of CLIL as a method for teaching and learning of English

involves the following significance aspects:

(a) Cognition of subjects specific topics on the basis of Higher Order

Thinking Skills (HOTS) and problem solving approaches in order

to grasp the grey areas of subjects taught through a foreign

language

(b) Community specific awareness of the students which is

contextualized upon the society and the institution that they belong

to and the culture of the same that they practice and reflect

(c) Communicative skills learnt, developed and practiced by students

for their academic and professional interactions with fellow

learners

(d) Students‟ exposure to cultural traits of the target language and

resultant discourse that they engage themselves in on the basis of

their own cultural practices.

On the basis of the above observations, it is clear that all the four aspects

are interlinked which makes learning an integrated process under the

CLIL method that combines all the four basic learning skills in the

following manner:

(a) Listening:

Students get adequate practice of this skill by attending direct

teaching sessions delivered by professors who would use standard

form of the target language. The Students can avail of audio library

and listen to the e-books for adequate practice on this fundamental

skill for learning.

55

(b) Speaking:

Like the CLT and the PBL, the CLIL also emphasizes the factor of

fluency without bothering about accuracy as it considers fluency to

be an empowering factor on the part of the ESL/EFL students

whose ability to speak English boosts up their morale which, in

turn, helps them learn the language at advance levels.

(c) Reading:

The CLIL offers dual advantage to students as far as reading of

learning resources is concerned. It allows bilingual access to

reading resources to the students who can avail benefits of printed

literatures on and about their subjects in their mother tongue as

well as the target language.

(d) Writing:

Through the CLIL methodology, students learn to write at an

advance level as far as the content of their subjects is concerned. In

so doing, they automatically happen to practice the skill of writing

in the target language. There may or may not be any conscious

separate practice on writing required to learn the foreign language

as formal education invariably covers large amount of writings on

the part of students; and in this case, students learn their subjects

through a foreign language.

LilijaVilkancienė (2011), Senior Lecturer in Business English, Academic

Writing and Effective Communication, ISM University of Management

and Economics, Vilnius, Lithuania, figures out five major tasks for

successful CLIL implementation:

56

Course and/or Curriculum Design

Methodology for Teaching and Learning

Innovative Practices: Tasks and Activities

Enhancement of Language/Communicative Competence

Pro-active and Pro-learning Academic Environment

Successful implementation and achievements in terms of meeting with

objectives in totality depend, by and large, on the educational policies

decided by authorities. There are non-English speaking countries where

universities offer major and minor programmes through the medium of

English and their students reap rich dividends of such positive pro-

learning educational policies. Even countries known for their staunch

adherence to their own linguistic roots and practices have now opened

their doors for English education to be able to meet the challenges

emerging out of the new order of globalized world. For successful

implementation of the CLIL methodology, the educational authorities

must adopt an attitude towards innovative and creative approaches and

practices to achieve excellence in higher education. The CLIL demands

collaborative efforts from all stakeholders of education including

governmental authorities, educational policy makers, teachers, students

and parents and further calls for their ability to develop strategies for

implementing this novel approach at institutions for learninginviting

support for initiatives and entrepreneurship in education.

Presentation, Practice and Production (PPP)

Compared to the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), Task Based

Learning (TBL) and Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL),

this methodology involves technicalities of lesser degree in the sense that

it aims at providing practical solutions towards teaching and learning of

57

English in a three-step process: Presentations of standard language

models, Practice on the same and Production at the desecration of the

learners once they have been through a series of presentations and have

practiced them enough to produce something on their own. The three-

phase process of the PPP model begins traditionally with the teacher who

controls the initial affairs in the classroom and makes presentations in

forms of:

(a) Textual readings

(b) Audio-visual presentations

(c) Demonstrations

(d) Recitations

(e) Reading Dialogues/Scripts

(f) Enactment of Situational Conversations

(g) Visual Presentations using Charts, Graphs and Images

The students are, then, invited by the teacher to respond to such

presentationswith a view to learning the following areas of language:

(i) Vocabulary: Lexical Meanings and Contextual

Understanding

(ii) Grammar: Sentence Patterns, Parts of Speech, Structural

Comprehension of Language

(iii) Forms of Language: Usages, Idioms, Phrasal Verbs,

Proverbs, Colloquial Expressions, standard and slang

expressions

The teacher, after having made presentations, can invite students to pay

attention to the above points which he would explain in details providing

additional information, examples and illustrations so that positive

reinforcement occurs among the learners.The students have to relate the

use of language with the presentations made for them in the classroom.

58

Their exposure to such presentations would result into their basic

comprehensions of the forms and functions of English language; which,

later on, they will be able to reproduce under standard conditions usually

governed by the teacher. Under the controlled phase, the students not

only learn grammatical structures but they can also reproduce them

correctly during the practice sessions. It is at the juncture of such practice

sessions during which students reproduce samples of language structures

learnt from the presentations made by the teacher that the teacher is able

to provide positive feedback on appropriate uses of language, correct the

inappropriate ones and again reinforce standard structures of language

among the learners. In the third phase, the production phase, the students

can use recently learnt forms of language, grammatical structures to make

presentations on their own. Unlike guided exercises on drilling, multiple

choices or transformation and analysis controlled by the teacher, in this

last phase of the PPP model, students come up with conversations,

dialogues, composition, essay writing or even simple formation of

sentences through which students prove their linguistic as well as

communicative competence. In the third phase, the teacher does not

interfere since it is assumed that students are not usually prone to errors

in this phase. Even if there are mistakes made by the students, the teacher

is supposed to address them in such a manner that the classroom

presentations made by students are not interrupted. Unlike the practice

phase that insists on accuracy, the production phase is all about fluency

and performance unmindful of occasional structural mistakes or

grammatical errors committed by the students. Activity based testing

carried out under the practice phase offers only one correct answer since

its aim is to teach formal structural part of a language often called

grammar; whereas the production phase offers multiple options and

59

answers to the learners. The success of the PPP method rests on its user

friendliness without involving more technicalities and higher level of

difficulty. At its best, it facilitates the teachers with better planning of

their classroom activities wherein they control the first two phases of

presentation and practice. However this method guarantees easier shifting

from teacher centric approach to the student centered end goals that are

achievable for most learners. However, critics opine that this model takes

a rather minimalistic and simplistic view of language learning through

some kind of mechanical practice. They also apprehend that despite

contributing and participating too well during the practice phase, when it

comes to translating verbal competence into action, students may or may

not perform in the third phase of production as per the goals standards

and objectives set up at the outset of implementation of PPP.

Computer Aided/Assisted Language Learning (CALL)

Having witnessed and suffered the large scale genocides, massive

destruction, inhuman atrocities andonslaughts of two successive World

Wars within a short span of less than 50 years, the world, especially the

Western world made a remarkable comeback and took up formidable

challenges to change the course of history of humankind. One of the most

powerful tools to counter the adversities caused by the World Wars and to

make human life more comfortable, livable and progressive, the Western

world embarked upon the platform of technology and technological

advancement that revolutionized our life by turning many impossibilities

into promising possibilities. The second half of the 20th century witnessed

and endorsed confluence of changes owing to significant happenings in

the global economy, explosion of information, emerging trends in

cognitive sciences and growing demands from the field of education

60

world over. Computers and internet technology almost transformed

ordinary placid human life into surge of mobile, kinetic and hectic

activities across the world interlinked with the World Wide Web (WWW)

which, in turn, became a new destination where the rest of the world

wanted to belong to. Modern technologies began to be used for

betterment of humankind in the areas of engineering, medical science,

human resource management, business and education. The first instance

of systematic use of computer technology in the field of education could

be found in 1944 when Harvard University launched a computer assisted

programme called MARK 1. This was followed by a programme called

ENIAC initiated by University of Pennsylvania in 1946. Both the

computer assisted educational programmes focused on teaching and

learning of Mathematics, Science and Engineering on the basis of logical

problems and their solutions that the computer programmes rendered to

the students who would study on the computers with special software

programmes installed on them. The application of computer assisted

programmes in the field of sciences encouraged experts to use computers

for teaching and learning of languages. As far as teaching and learning of

English is concerned, the computer assisted modules work at the

following levels:

(a) Presentation of Learning Resources

(b) Reinforcement of Lessons through Computer supported

Sessions

(c) Computer assisted testing and assessment

Professor Mike Levy (2011), Chair of WorldCALL, observes that CALL

is a method that uses computer interface, programming and applications

for teaching and learning of English. The CALL experts and practitioners

across the world are of the opinion that computers can be used as tools for

61

language teaching and learning for synchronous as well as asynchronous

learning. The origin of CALL can be traced back to the 1960s to the early

1970s when such programmes were offered at universities where

language learning was assisted with computers used under the

supervision of experts from both categories: language teachers and

software developers. However, it was the PLATO (Programmed Logic

for Automatic Teaching Operations) project, initiated at the University of

Illinois in 1960, that heralded the beginning of CALL as an acceptable

method for language teaching and learning. The advent of Personal

Computers (PCs) in the 1970s changed the course of action in the field of

CALL as computers were now within the reach of masses and students

started getting access to personal computers; on account of which they

were able to learn language through computer programmes and

applications. The late 70s and 80s of the previous century witness a flurry

of activities associated with CALL as an approach toward teaching and

learning of English on the basis of programmed instructions to be

followed by rigorous practices with the help of computers. This

functionality of CALL resulted into a term called CALI which stands for

Computer Assisted Language Instructions that guide the learners to

undertake task-based sessions on computers. In the initial phase of

CALL, the computer programmers provided simple versions of language

programme which offered nothing beyond a set of instructions,

mechanical response interface and testing and assessment mechanism.

They lacked imagination and interactive skills to make CALL interesting

for the learners. However after 1980s, CALL was embedded with the

communicative approach and embraced a wide range of technologies that

resulted into its wider acceptance in the field of teaching and learning of

English. The growing popularity of the CALL method depended on the

62

interactive features inbuilt in the programmes that it offered. One of

successful examples of this approach is the CLEF (Computer assisted

LEcons for French) which was used for the learners of the French

language. It was developed in early 80s by a consortium of Canadian

University. One of the highlighting features of this method is the way in

which instructions are passed on and corrections of errors are executed.

Another striking feature is that the CALL method offers incentive based

learning wherein, for every correct operational step, the learners are

encouraged to move on to the next step. CALL also includes testing,

assessment and error analysis which are executed through a series of

interactive And /or multimedia commands. The practices of CALL offer

cross references to other disciplines of computational linguistics like

Natural Language Processing (NLP), Human Language Technologies

(HLT) and even Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Intelligent CALL

(ICALL). Though there is a perceivable hiatus among these disciplines, it

is the confluence of technological tools which is the common factor on all

of them. The modern versions of CALL include programme concordance

as well as web concordance that make it an explorative approach towards

teaching and learning of language. Unlike the era of personal computers

without any additional facility except textual inputs, the Multimedia

Personal Computers (MPCs) of the modern age allow students to access

interactive programmes on language learning using sums/ speech

recording, images, video recording and a host of presentation tools with

or without the internet facility enabling them to learn language through

multimedia, imaginations and creativity. The modern age technology

used for CALL has rendered a new version known as Web Enhanced

Language Learning (WELL) which includes online learning, testing,

assessment and evaluation of language learners. The web based version

63

of CALL encourages self-learning on the part of the language students.

At this juncture, it is imperative to note that the content development for

the CALL programme is designed by language experts who may or may

not be experts in the field of programming. However the content

developed is so designed as to fit in for being programme through

computer applications.

The CALL approach emerged as a method for language learning against

the traditional teachers‟ centric practices and systems in education.

Following are some of the key aspects which constituted grounds as to

why CALL was introduced, accepted and practiced:

(a) Experiential and Experimental Learning

(b) Motivational Approach

(c) Incentives and Rewards during the course of learning

(d) Authentic course content developed by experts

(e) Interactive modes of learning

(f) Individualisation, customisation and personalisation of modules for

learning

(g) Adherence to global standards of education

On the basis of the above aspects the related to the CALL approach,

language learners of the late 20th century were benefited to great extent

as they could learn in absence of teachers and also beyond the walls of

their institutes. However they are also a series of constraints and barriers

that inhibit practices associated with the CALL approach. Following is a

list some of the common barriers that restrict the scope and practice of the

Call approach:

(a) Financial issues as the CALL demands technological paraphernalia

that cost more than conventional tools for teaching and learning

64

(b) Infrastructural issues pertaining to availability of computers,

ancillary hardware and software goods

(c) Lack of theoretical and technical knowledge of handling hardware

and software on computers

(d) Philosophical dilemma over accepting the influence of technology:

struggle to rationalize subjective preferences over practical needs

Despite the above odds against the CALL, it is the market driven

economy of the world and the technology driven market that support

teaching and learning of language through for. From its early days in

1960s till present, the CALL has undergone phases of transformation.

The following table provides a brief account of phases of transformation

in the CALL:

Phase Type Description

I

(1960s and 1970s)

Behaviourist

CALL

Language drilling exercises,

drill and practice method,

computer tutoring,

grammatical structures,

structural instructions

II

(1970s and 1980s)

Communicative

CALL

Application of forms of

language, student generated

structures, cognitive and

creative learning, use of

personal computers, testing

through simulations

III

(Mostly 1990

onwards)

Integrative

CALL

Socio-cognitive teaching and

learning, emphasis on

meaningful and contextual

leaning, skill based learning,

use of multimedia, internet

enabled programmes,

informational, communicative

and publishing tool

65

From the above enumerations and elucidations it is obvious that the

CALL approach in its modern versions integrates technological tools to

great extent. The technology enabled CALL has changes the phase of

teaching and learning of language in the sense that it individualizes the

process of learning on the part of students who can now make personal

choices in deciding their course timings, mode of learning and even the

pace of learning; which means brilliant students/fast learners stand fair

chances of going ahead without restrictions of fixed time limits which

was earlier imposed by the traditional methods. The CALL also facilitates

students centered collaborative learning that lips restrictions of single

source of information. Students can access informational sources across

various platforms irrespective of their own global positioning. In this

sense, the CALL leads to inter disciplinary learning. Owing to the

internet connectivity, students acquire global understanding as they use

global resources for learning through CALL. The CALL enables students

to engage themselves in global classrooms where they participate and

communicate with fellow learners across the world. Internet supported

CALL establishes linkages with online learning resources, virtual

libraries and comprehensive digital database of knowledge shared and

contributed by experts of various disciplines. The technology- mediated

language learning has reshaped use of computers and internet facility for

language learning. This has also effected significant changes in the role of

the teacher who is now considered as facilitator in the process of learning

and a manager of resources in the process of teaching. The integrative

CALL has transformed passive students into active participants who now

are able to explore and create resources in their own. Thus, the CALL

approach is a collaboration of information processing, communication

skills, authenticity of learning resources and learners autonomy in the

66

process of teaching and learning; qualities that make it a promising option

for ESL/EFL students.

Deliberations on modern approaches towards teaching and learning of

English and discussions on salient features and functions of various

approaches as stated above reveal that the process of teaching and

learning of English is subject to change with the growing needs and

emerging challenges of the globalised world. The complexities of the 21st

century have compelled and/ or prompted academicians, theoreticians,

and educators of the 21st century to evolve a methodology that benefits

learners irrespective of heterogeneities in terms of their social, cultural,

linguistic, ethnic, religious, economic or political backgrounds. Prof.

Howard Gardner‟s Theory of Multiple Intelligences (MI) is a potential

and promising answer to the complex challenges lying before the teachers

and students of the modern era. Prof. Gardner is of firm conviction that

educational methods should be flexible and creative for students with

different intellectual levels. He believes that pedagogy and methodology

should be devised and revised in such a manner that they incorporate

multiple intelligences effectively to benefit all the stakeholders of the

education. His theory implies that there is no single concrete measure of

intelligence hence there cannot be a singular method for teaching and

learning. Based on Prof. Gardner‟s Theory of Multiple Intelligences,

Chapman and Freeman (1996) draw the following implications:

(a) Intelligence can be taught or at least enhanced through teaching

(b) Intelligence Are changing throughout life

(c) The existence of different intelligences possessed by different

learners results in different learning style and different needs

In the light of the above implications a Theory of Multiple Intelligences,

it is imperative to understand various ways in which individuals are

67

intelligent and that how they process, learn and remember information.

According to Prof Gardner, individuals are capable of processing

information in at least nine different ways; wherein they vary in the

degree of skills possessed in each of the nine intelligences. The Theory of

Multiple Intelligences reveals that there are nine distinct domains of

human intellect and its development and that all human beings have them

in greater or lesser degrees. As per Prof. Gardner‟s Theory, following are

the nine domains of human intellectual development:

(1) Verbal/ Linguistic Intelligence

(2) Logical/ Mathematical Intelligence

(3) Visual/ Spatial Intelligence

(4) Kinaesthetic/ Bodily Intelligence

(5) Musical/ Rhythmic Intelligence

(6) Interpersonal Intelligence

(7) Intrapersonal Intelligence

(8) Naturalist Intelligence

(9) Spiritual/ Existential Intelligence

Prof. Gardner believes that the above nine domains and ability that they

command operate together in complex ways. He further says that the nine

domains provide more comprehensive view of the constituents of human

Intelligence. The Theory of MI addresses to the learning needs of the

students with diverse backgrounds by appealing to their intelligences and

by creating customised learning environment. This theory has its primary

focus on the content and products of learning. The Theory of MI is a

promising option for then ESL/EFL students since it acts towards

utilising learners‟ individual strength by way of inculcating among them

communication skills and critical understanding of information of content

as well as grammatical and structural aspects of the content delivered

68

through teaching. One of the highlighting aspects of this theory is that

different intelligences can be easily identified, not by complex technical

or scientific testing, but through common experiences of life. Globalised

trends in education have witnessed remarkable rise in the number of

ESL/EFL students who have extremely diverse backgrounds.

Methodologies discussed earlier in this chapter do not fully catered to the

diverse learning needs of students belonging to non- English speaking

nations. The researcher attempts to critically evaluate potential merits

involved in the use of the Theory of MI as a methodology that best serve

purpose of wholistic teaching and learning of English language and

literature, especially in the context of ESL/EFL students with special

reference to India. It is with this purpose that the Theory of MI in context

of teaching and learning of English literature is discussed hereafter. Prof.

Howard Gardner‟s, The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, first published

by the Harvard University Graduate School of Education has positively

incited and evoked keen academic and intellectual responses from the

educational pockets across the world. Its merits are based on the level of

effectiveness in attaining desired goals of learning among students from

moderate to extreme diverse backgrounds. The Theory of MI contents

that successful learning in the area of ESL/EFL occurs only when

individual cognitive Factors are taken into consideration and understood

properly. Prof. Gardner‟s Theory of Multiple Intelligences ascertains that

intelligence as an individual cognitive factor significantly influences the

process of Second Language Acquisition (SLA). It is this influence of the

MI theory that has attracted scholarly responses from academic and

linguistic researchers who, on the basis of this theory, have worked

extensively for reassessment of practices towards content and curricula

development, pedagogy and methodology for teaching and learning,

69

especially for ESL/EFL programmes. Though originally perceived as

theory related to the academic practices of education in general and

psychology in particular by Prof. Gardner, the Theory of MI can be

effectively used for teaching and learning of English language and

literature, especially for students who belong to non-English speaking

Countries. However, before establishing the fact that a methodology

based on the MI Theory is the most promising option for teaching and

learning of English language and literature, a comprehensive

understanding of the theory, its contours and applications is essential to

ascribe methodological implications of the same for ESL/EFL students.

The next chapter, therefore, offers an explorative study of the origin,

nature and functions of the Theory of Multiple Intelligences as envisaged

and developed by Prof. Howard Gardner.

70

Works Cited:

Chapman, C., Freeman, L. Multiple Intelligence Centres and Projects.

Arlington Heights, IL: Skylight Training and Publishing,

1996.Print.

Ellis, Rod. Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford,

U.K.: Oxford UP, 2003. Print.

Gardner, Howard. Multiple Intelligences: New Horizons. New York:

Basic Books, 2006. 8-20. Print.

Harmer, Jeremy. Essential Teacher Knowledge. Harlow: Pearson

Longman, 2012. Print.

Harmer, Jeremy. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Harlow,

England: Pearson Longman, 2007. 51. Print.

Jacobs, George M., and Thomas S.C. Farrell. "Paradigm Shift:

Understanding and Implementing Change in Social

Language Education."TESL-EJ-Teaching English as a

Second or Foreign Language 5.1 (2001): n. pag. Web.

Kelly, Melissa. The Everything New Teacher Book: Increase Your

Confidence, Connect With Your Students, and Deal with the

Unexpected. Avon, MA: Adams Media, 2004. Print.

Levy, Mike. World CALL: International Perspectives on Computer-

assisted Language Learning. New York: Routledge, 2011.

Print.

71

Maslow, Abraham‟s Figure-1

hhtp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs

Nunan, David, and David Nunan.Task-based Language Teaching.

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP, 2004. Print.

N.Prabhu -hhtps://eltnotes.wordpress.com/2012/08/15/22-prof-prabhu-

on-task-based teaching

Ur, Penny, and Penny Ur.A Course in English Language Teaching.

Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2012.276. Print.

Vilkanciene, Lilija. “CLIL in Tertiary Education: Does it Have

Anything to Offer?”.Ktu: Studies About Language. 2011.

Web 4th

April,2013.

Willis, Jane R. A Framework for Task-based Learning. Harlow, Essex:

Longman, 1996. Print.