UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE VILLARRICA DEL ESPIRITU SANTO

FACULTAD DE FILOSFIA Y CIENCIAS HUMANAS

TEORIA Y PRÁCTICA DE LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLES I
ENCARGADA: Abg. Coral Fernández

UNIT VI Info. As. 8

►TOTAL PHYSICAL RESPONSE

Total physical response (TPR) is a language teaching method developed by James Asher, a
professor emeritus of psychology at San José State University. It is based on the coordination of
language and physical movement. In TPR, instructors give commands to students in the target
language, and students respond with whole-body actions.
The method is an example of the comprehension approach to language teaching. The listening and
responding (with actions) serves two purposes: It is a means of quickly recognizing meaning in the
language being learned, and a means of passively learning the structure of the language itself.
Grammar is not taught explicitly, but can be learned from the language input. TPR is a valuable
way to learn vocabulary, especially idiomatic terms, e.g., phrasal verbs.
Asher developed TPR as a result of his experiences observing young children learning their first
language. He noticed that interactions between parents and children often took the form of
speech from the parent followed by a physical response from the child. Asher made three
hypotheses based on his observations: first, that language is learned primarily by listening; second,
that language learning must engage the right hemisphere of the brain; and third, that learning
language should not involve any stress.
Total physical response is often used alongside other methods and techniques. It is popular with
beginners and with young learners, although it can be used with students of all levels and all age
groups.
Background
James Asher developed the total physical response method as a result of his observation of the
language development of young children. Asher saw that most of the interactions that young
children experience with parents or other adults combine both verbal and physical aspects. The
child responds physically to the speech of the parent, and the parent reinforces the child’s
responses through further speech. This creates a positive feedback loop between the parent’s
speech and the child’s actions. Asher also observed that young children typically spend a long time
listening to language before ever attempting to speak, and that they can understand and react to
utterances that are much more complex than those they can produce themselves.
From his experiences, Asher outlined three main hypotheses about learning second languages that
are embodied in the total physical response method. The first is that the brain is naturally
predisposed to learn language through listening. Specifically, Asher says that learners best
internalize language when they respond with physical movement to language input. Asher
hypothesizes that speech develops naturally and spontaneously after learners internalize the
target language through input, and that it should not be forced. In Asher’s own words:
A reasonable hypothesis is that the brain and the nervous system are biologically programmed to
acquire language, either the first or the second in a particular sequence and in a particular mode.
The sequence is listening before speaking and the mode is to synchronise language with the
individual’s body.
The second of Asher’s hypotheses is that effective language learning must engage the right
hemisphere of the brain. Physical movement is controlled primarily by the right hemisphere, and
Asher sees the coupling of movement with language comprehension as the key to language
acquisition. He says that left-hemisphere learning should be avoided, and that the left hemisphere
needs a great deal of experience of right-hemisphere-based input before natural speech can
occur.
Asher’s third hypothesis is that language learning should not involve any stress, as stress and
negative emotions inhibit the natural language-learning process. He regards the stressful nature of
most language-teaching methods as one of their major weaknesses. Asher recommends that
teachers focus on meaning and physical movement to avoid stress.
The main text on total physical response is James Asher’s Learning Another Language through
Actions, first published in 1977.
Principles
Total physical response is an example of the comprehension approach to language teaching.
Methods in the comprehension approach emphasize the importance of listening on language
development, and do not require spoken output in the early stages of learning. In total physical
response, students are not forced to speak. Instead, teachers wait until students acquire enough
language through listening that they start to speak spontaneously. . At the beginning stages of
instruction students can respond to the instructor in their native language.
While the majority of class time in total physical response is spent on listening comprehension, the
ultimate goal of the method is to develop oral fluency. Asher sees developing listening
comprehension skills as the most efficient way of developing spoken language skills.
Lessons in TPR are organized around grammar, and in particular around the verb. Instructors issue
commands based on the verbs and vocabulary to be learned in that lesson. However, the primary
focus in lessons is on meaning, which distinguishes TPR from other grammar-based methods such
as grammar-translation.
Grammar is not explicitly taught, but is learned by induction. Students are expected to
subconsciously acquire the grammatical structure of the language through exposure to spoken
language input, in addition to decoding the messages in the input to find their meaning. This
approach to listening is called codebreaking.
Total physical response is both a teaching technique and a philosophy of language teaching.
Teachers do not have to limit themselves to TPR techniques to teach according to the principles of
the total physical response method.
Because the students are only expected to listen and not to speak, the teacher has the sole
responsibility for deciding what input students hear.
Procedure
The majority of class time in TPR lessons is spent doing drills in which the instructor gives
commands using the imperative mood. Students respond to these commands with physical
actions. Initially, students learn the meaning of the commands they hear by direct observation.
After they learn the meaning of the words in these commands, the teacher issues commands that
use novel combinations of the words the students have learned.
Instructors limit the number of new vocabulary items given to students at any one time. This is to
help students differentiate the new words from those previously learned, and to facilitate
integration with their existing language knowledge. Asher suggests that students can learn
between 12 and 36 words for every hour of instruction, depending on their language level and
class size.
While drills using the imperative are the mainstay of total physical response classes, teachers can
use other activities as well. Some typical other activities are role plays and slide presentations.
However, beginners are not made to learn conversational dialogs until 120 hours into their course.
There is little error correction in TPR. Asher advises teachers to treat learners’ mistakes the same
way a parent would treat their children’s. Errors made by beginning-level students are usually
overlooked, but as students become more advanced teachers may correct more of their errors.
This is similar to parents raising their children; as children get older parents tend to correct their
grammatical mistakes more often.
According to Asher, TPR lesson plans should contain the detailed commands that the teacher
intends to use. He says, “It is wise to write out the exact utterances you will be using and
especially the novel commands because the action is so fast-moving there is usually not time for
you to create spontaneously.”
Teaching materials
Total physical response lessons typically use a wide variety of realia, posters, and props. Teaching
materials are not compulsory, and for the very first lessons they may not be used. As students
progress in ability the teacher may begin to use objects found in the classroom such as furniture or
books, and later may use word charts, pictures, and realia.
There are a number of specialized TPR teaching products available, including student kits
developed by Asher and an interactive CD-ROM for students to practice with privately.
Research
Asher conducted a large number of scientific studies to test and refine his hypotheses and the
teaching practices in total physical response. When testing children and adults learning Russian,
Asher and Price found that the adults outperformed the children.
Reception
According to the Routledge Encyclopedia of Language Teaching and Learning, TPR is often
criticized as being only suitable for beginning students. However, the encyclopedia goes on to note
that there are several publications available about how to use TPR with intermediate and
advanced students.[
According to its proponents, total physical response has a number of advantages: Students enjoy
getting out of their chairs and moving around. Simple TPR activities do not require a great deal of
preparation on the part of the teacher. TPR is aptitude-free, working well with a mixed ability
class, and with students having various disabilities. It is good for kinesthetic learners who need to
be active in the class. Class size need not be a problem, and it works effectively for children and
adults.
However, it is recognized that TPR is most useful for beginners, though it can be used at higher
levels where preparation becomes an issue for the teacher. It does not give students the
opportunity to express their own thoughts in a creative way. Further, it is easy to overuse TPR--
"Any novelty, if carried on too long, will trigger adaptation." It can be a challenge for shy students.
Additionally, the nature of TPR places an unnaturally heavy emphasis on the use of the imperative
mood, that is to say commands such as sit down and stand up. These features are of limited utility
to the learner, and can lead to a learner appearing rude when attempting to use their new
language. As a TPR class progresses, group activities and descriptions can extend basic TPR
concepts into full communication situations.
Because of its participatory approach, TPR may also be a useful alternative teaching strategy for
students with dyslexia or related learning disabilities, who typically experience difficulty learning
foreign languages with traditional classroom instruction.
Influence
Teachers who use TPR typically use it together with a variety of other activities and techniques. It
is most often used for introducing new vocabulary. This is in line with Asher’s recommendations
for using the method.
Blaine Ray, a Spanish language teacher, added stories to TPR to help students acquire non-physical
language creating the foundation of the method known as Teaching Proficiency through Reading
and Storytelling (TPRS) built on Stephen Krashen's theories of language acquisition.

UNIT VII
►COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING

Communicative language teaching (CLT), or the communicative approach, is an approach to

language teaching that emphasizes interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of study.
Outline
CLT is usually characterized as a broad approach to teaching, rather than as a teaching method
with a clearly defined set of classroom practices. As such, it is most often defined as a list of
general principles or features. One of the most recognized of these lists is David Nunan’s (1991)
five features of CLT:
1. An emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target language.
2. The introduction of authentic texts into the learning situation.
3. The provision of opportunities for learners to focus, not only on language but also on the
learning process itself.
4. An enhancement of the learner’s own personal experiences as important contributing
elements to classroom learning.
5. An attempt to link classroom language learning with language activities outside the
classroom.
These five features are claimed by practitioners of CLT to show that they are very interested in the
needs and desires of their learners as well as the connection between the language as it is taught
in their class and as it used outside the classroom. Under this broad umbrella definition, any
teaching practice that helps students develop their communicative competence in an authentic
context is deemed an acceptable and beneficial form of instruction. Thus, in the classroom CLT
often takes the form of pair and group work requiring negotiation and cooperation between
learners, fluency-based activities that encourage learners to develop their confidence, role-plays in
which students practise and develop language functions, as well as judicious use of grammar and
pronunciation focused activities.
In the mid 1990s the Dogma 95 manifesto influenced language teaching through the Dogme
language teaching movement, who proposed that published materials can stifle the
communicative approach. As such the aim of the Dogme approach to language teaching is to focus
on real conversations about real subjects so that communication is the engine of learning. This
communication may lead to explanation, but that this in turn will lead to further communication.
Classroom activities used in communicative language teaching include the following:
1. Role-play: Students act out roles in specific situations to practice real-life language use. They
might pretend to be at a restaurant, a job interview, or a doctor’s office. This helps them practice
conversational skills, intonation, and functional language
2. Interviews: Students ask and answer questions to gather personal information from classmates
or others. Interviews can be structured (with prepared questions) or open-ended. This activity
promotes speaking fluency, question formation, and listening skills.
3. Gap: Each student has part of the information needed to complete a task, and they must
communicate to fill in the gaps. For example, Student A has a train schedule, and Student B has a
list of times they are available. They must talk to find a train that fits both schedules.
4. Language Exchanges: Students work in pairs or small groups to practice each other’s languages,
often in a tandem format (e.g., one student speaks English, the other speaks Spanish). They
alternate speaking in both languages, providing authentic practice and cultural exchange
5. Surveys: Students create and conduct surveys by asking classmates questions and then report
the results. This involves reading, speaking, listening, and writing—ideal for practicing question
formation, data collection, and summarizing.

6. Pair-work: Two students work together on a communicative task, such as solving a problem,
discussing a topic, or completing a worksheet. This encourages collaboration, negotiation of
meaning, and speaking in a low-pressure setting.
7. Learning by Teaching: Students prepare and teach part of a lesson to their peers. This method
deepens understanding and builds confidence as they must master the material well enough to
explain it to others, often in the target language.
8. Games: Language games involve fun, structured activities with rules that promote interaction
and learning. Examples include word bingo, vocabulary races, or sentence-building challenges.
Games increase motivation and provide meaningful language use in a relaxed context.
Reading and writing through CLT

WRITING

Why is writing difficult to teach?

By its nature, writing is often a solo activity, done silently, involving physical effort and taking a lot
of time. This may not make it attractive to learners or teachers as a classroom activity. In addition
to this, writing is difficult, even in L1. There are linguistic, psychological and cognitive problems
involved, making teaching it and learning it a considerable challenge. It is also important to
remember that many people never write anything of any length in their daily lives, or anything
using paper and a pen, or without using a spellchecker. But this is often what we ask them to do in
English.

Responding appropriately to writing that learners give us is time-consuming and taxing, whether
we are addressing errors or the content. We often have to work as hard as our learners have done.
Our response is also often dictated by our concern with sub-skills and so correction is often at this
level rather than at that of communicative competence. This is aggravated by the fact that it is not
easy to evaluate this competence, especially formally - as can be seen in the complexity of the
speaking criteria for exams such as IELTS and Cambridge Main Suite. In addition, it is important to
recognize that learners are equally concerned about correctness in writing at a sub-level, in areas
such as spelling and punctuation. This is especially true when compared to speaking. This inhibits
communication.

The kinds of tasks we set learners may not be motivating, relevant or indeed very communicative.
Writing is rarely incorporated into a lesson, ending up relegated to homework - which reduces the
possibilities to be communicative. We need to give learners tasks that are intellectually satisfying,
especially when writing. Adult learners become aware of their limitations very quickly when they
try to express complex ideas on paper. As a final note coursebooks don't necessarily always help
us develop writing. We need materials that provide relevant, real and communicative practice.
This is rare.

Some solutions
We need to make a distinction between writing to learn (other things, like structures, spelling and
vocabulary) and learning to write. If we understand this distinction and make sure our learners do
too then the communicative purpose of writing will be clearer.
We need to work hard on developing ways of responding to the content of what our learners write
- the message - and not just the level of language. If we can do this effectively, then our learners
will make more effort to communicate when they write for us. This can support an emphasis on
the importance of writing for a real audience, but we do also need to find real audiences for
learner writing. This could include ourselves if we can respond as readers, other learners and
groups, and public forums such as blogs, websites and letter pages.

We need to find ways to integrate writing with other skills and activities, giving it more relevance
and importance - and also making it more interesting. We need to use meaningful, realistic and
relevant writing tasks, based on our learners' needs and interests. We may need to design
individual tasks based on what individual learners need to write. In addition we should talk about
writing with our learners, how we write well, why we write and for who, and what makes it
difficult. Learner training like this can provide valuable support and motivation.

Finally, we need to evaluate the impact on our learners' written English when most of our focus on
writing is as homework. Are we supporting them as well as we could as they tackle the difficulties
we discussed above?

Ideas for communicative writing tasks

 Find ways to publish learners' writing, on websites like Storybird

 They can also publish in blogs, in newspapers, and on posters. Get learners to create
individual and group profiles on social utility sites such as Facebook. Publish a class
magazine of previous writing work.
 Encourage learners to write with a clear purpose and for a clear audience, for example in
letters to newspapers, pen friends, to teachers and other students.
 Find challenging and rewarding tasks which can support a variety of learning aims and
integrate other skills and language systems, such as summarising, project work,
translation, writing up notes from interviews, and preparing a briefing or talk.
 Use relevant and realistic tasks such as writing notes, recipes, e-mails, filling in forms and
preparing signs for the class.
 Respond to the content of the work that your learners give you as well as correcting the
errors they make, by adding your own comments to their homework or establishing a
dialogue through e-mail and learner diaries.
 Make writing easier and more fun by doing group writing activities and group correction
and editing of work. Process writing includes elements of this.
 Support writing with reading. This not only helps learners develop the sub-skills they need
but also helps them understand that good writing is a powerful and important
communication tool.
READING

Can reading be communicative?

Communication suggests interaction of some sort, perhaps in many students' minds between
speaker and listener. Is reading, therefore, since it is often a solitary activity, a non-communicative
activity? Surely not since the reader is interacting with the writer, albeit in a less direct way than
speaker and listener. Reading is, of course, just as communicative as any other form of language
use and as teachers our aim is to bring out that communicative element. For example by
establishing direct communication between reader and writer by exploiting students' written work
for reading practice (see below for ideas). Another feature of real reading is that while we may
read alone we communicate what we read to others constantly. Talking about what we have read
is a rich source of classroom possibilities.

Strategies used for communicative reading

One of the things to bear in mind when lesson planning is that classroom reading is not the same
as real reading. Classroom reading aims at helping students develop the skills they need to read
more effectively in a variety of ways (the same variety of ways as they can employ in their own
languages, of course). To enable this we plan 'pre-reading', 'while-reading', and 'post-reading'
stages. These stages can help us make reading more communicative.
Pre-reading tasks
Pre-reading tasks often aim to raise the readers' knowledge of what they are about to read (their
schematic knowledge) as this knowledge will help them to understand the text. In our L1 we use
this knowledge subconsciously and as a result need to raise it consciously in an L2. This raising of
awareness is most effectively done collaboratively. Approaches used include:

 Tell your partner what you know about the topic

 Do a quiz in pairs to find out what you know about the topic
 Look at some pictures related to the topic
 Skimming the first paragraph for gist and then predicting.
When reading in our L1 we are constantly using our schematic and linguistic knowledge to predict
content (both related to the topic and the language itself). In class, predictions can be
communicated to colleagues, of course. Some examples of what predictions can be based upon
include:

 A title
 Visuals
 Knowledge of the author
 A skim of the first paragraph
 A set of keywords from the text
 Reading the end, predicting the beginning.
 Reading the middle, predicting the beginning and the end.
While-reading tasks
Although reading is often a solitary activity and the idea of 'reading in pairs' seems odd, reading
can be collaborative. Approaches normally used include:

Running and reading: this approach especially lends itself to scanning as the idea is to encourage
the students to read as quickly as possible in a race.

1. Divide the class into student A and student B pairs. Student A sits at one end of the
classroom.
2. Stick the text to be read on the wall at the other end of the room.
3. Give student A a list of questions.
4. Student A reads the first question to student B who has to run down the classroom to find
the answer in the text, and then run back to dictate the answer to student A, who then
tells B question 2 and so on.
5. The first pair to answer all the questions wins. (Ask the students to swap roles halfway
through so everyone gets a chance to scan).
Slashed / Cut up texts: This is a genuinely collaborative reading approach.

1. Photocopy a suitable text and cut it diagonally into four.

2. Seat students in fours. Give a piece of the text to each student. They mustn't show their
piece to the others.
3. Give each group a set of questions.
4. The group have to work collaboratively to answer the questions since no one has the
whole of the text.
5. Groups can compare answers when they have finished.
Using websites: if you have a computer room available this is a very effective way of promoting
communication as students can work on a reading task in pairs reading from the same screen.

While-reading tasks leading into post-reading tasks

Jigsaw reading is an old favourite but perennially effective.

1. Divide a text into two parts or find two (or three) separate texts on the same topic.
2. Students A get one text and a related task, students B get the other text and task.
3. Students A complete their tasks in a group. Students B likewise. Compare answers in A & B
groups.
4. Students get into A & B pairs and tell each other about their tasks.
Creating a class text bank: Encourage students to bring in interesting texts that they have found
(perhaps as a homework task using the Internet) which can be submitted to the class text bank.
For weekend homework each student selects a text to take away which they then discuss with the
student who originally submitted it. This is, of course, what readers do in real life.
Exploiting graded readers: this is a good way to help with detailed reading since this implies
reading for pleasure. There are two approaches:

1. Using a class set of the same reader so that everyone reads the same book. This leads into
class discussions of what everyone has read.
2. Students read different books and then recommend their book (e.g. by writing reviews) to
their colleagues.
Exploiting students' written work: I often put students written work up on the walls for the others
to read. Tasks can include guessing who the author is, voting on which is the most interesting,
selecting some for a class magazine.

Post-reading tasks
As mentioned above, telling someone about what we have read is a very natural reaction to a text.
Here there are some ideas:

 Discussions about the text

 Summarising texts
 Reviewing texts
 Using a 'follow-up' speaking task related to the topic
 Looking at the language of the text (e.g. collocations).

Source: https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/professional-development/teachers/knowing-subject/c/communicative-approach