Postmethodology

The three readings discussed postmethod pedagogy. In Brown’s work, he focused on several different methods that were used during the postmethod era, which focused on advancing the language teaching methods that had been used previously. Some of the specific methods that the texts talked about were Communicative Language Teaching, Task-Based Language learning, Learner-Centered Instruction, Cooperative learning, Interactive learning, whole language education, and content-based instruction. These were some of the newer methods introduced during the postmethod era. One of the previously used methods that is contrasted with these new ideas is the Audiolingual Method, a very interesting method that was highly popular at one time. However, there are some downsides in comparison with newer ideas. For example, when compared with the Communicative Language approach, the audiolingual method has some downfalls. One of the huge differences is that in audiolingual, reading and writing in the TL are not permitted until speech is mastered, while in Communicative Language Teaching, reading and writing can be introduced at the beginning along with speech (Brown 49). This flexibility of methodology is more helpful. Another method that Brown discusses is Cooperative Learning. In cooperative learning, “students work together in pairs and groups, they share information and come to each other’s aid” (Brown 53). This method focuses on team work, instead of competition, a common thread in the postmethod era.

In Kumaravadivelu’s article and in his book, he talks about the switch from method-based to postmethodology, as well as the different perspectives that one can take on methods. For example, some of the different types of methods are language-centered, learner-centered, and learning-centered. First of all, language-centered are concerned with linguistic forms, or the grammatical makeup of the language (Kumaravadivelu 25). Although these focus very well on rules and structure, they don’t always lead to proficiency as well as other methods. Learner-centered methods “are those that are principally concerned with language use and learner needs” (Kumaravadivelu 26). This method has components of the academic and linguistic side of language learning, in addition to the communicative and realistic functional needs of the learner. Lastly, learning-centered methods are focused on the learning process, or the method being used to teach. An example of this would be the Natural Approach (Kumaravadivelu 26).

The task based language teaching method is one that I had not explicitly heard of before, although I’m sure that it has been loosely used in some of my classrooms over the years. When I first started reading through the description of this method, it didn’t sound very revolutionary or interesting to me. However, after delving deeper into what they’re really talking about, I started to understand it more.  The idea is that the students are doing small tasks throughout the class that relate to language learning, although it may not seem direct at first. Usually they have a string of small tasks that are relatable and then end in an all-encompassing task that brings the big picture together. I really like this method because it seems effective, and very simple for the students to follow. I believe that having students complete small tasks that have a larger goal is a really good idea, because it breaks down the goal into several small steps. Then at the end, the students have learned a lot without even realizing it. This quote from the reading caught my eye, “Be careful that you do not look at task-based teaching as a hodgepodge of useful little things that the learner should be able to do, all thrown together haphazardly into the classroom” (Brown 51). As Brown states, these tasks aren’t useless; they all play a part in the overall goals of the class. Is this a method that students would learn well from? Or do you think that because they aren’t aware of the goal of the tasks, they wouldn’t do well? Is task-based language teaching an effective way of exposing students to real-world situations, or is it superficial?