The Great Motivators

I recently updated my book, Teach and Leorn: Reflections on Communicative Language Teaching, from which this is a chapter, and made it available on Kindle and as an inexpensive book. To enjoy a read, please click here.

By Peter McKenzie-Brown

For teachers, four key factors affect the rate at which a student learns a second language. (I am referring to external factors. Although they clearly have roles to play, such considerations as attitude, aptitude and previous experience in language learning don't count in the context of this discussion.)

The most important factor relates to the student's primary motivation. Language theorists often describe a language student's primary form of motivation as either instrumental or integrative motivation.

Instrumental motivation is the weaker form. Common among those learning English, for example, with no intention of ever living in a country like Britain or Canada, instrumental motivation is the prime mover of those who want to learn a language as a tool for some secondary purpose – talking to tourists, for example. Integrative motivation is a greater force. It is the motivation of those who are learning a second language in a new country, and they are learning the language so they can integrate into a new society.

The second fundamental factor affecting language learning is the amount of time the student spends in class and practicing the language. Generally speaking, more motivated students spend more time; less motivated students, less.

The third factor is the teacher’s approach (for example, communicative language teaching or audiolingualism) to language teaching. The fourth is the instructor's teaching effectiveness and style.

You can probably see a big problem here. The myth of the great teacher whose motivational abilities inspire her students to world-shattering achievements is essentially flawed. I think of this as the paradox of motivation. The student's main motivator - integrative or instrumental motivation - is the one factor the teacher essentially has no control over. And that motivation drives the second most important factor behind student success, time spent on task.

What's a teacher to do? Accept this reality, and develop your ability to motivate students in secondary ways. Primary motivation notwithstanding, the teacher's motivational skills are still critical for both learning and teaching.

Good teachers use many teaching qualities to motivate students. These include a combination of variation and structure in teaching activities. They find ways to show the practical value of learning English. They encourage and nurture their students, and many excellent teachers also bring sympathy and empathy into the classroom. They make the physical teaching space as compatible with learning as they can. They offer tools for learning (for example, mnemonics) and they conduct the class in a fair and balanced way. They also provide the students with consistency and fairness, and they do everything they can to help the students feel safe.

What TEFL teachers think: In a recent class, I discussed this problem with my TEFL (teaching English as a foreign language) students, and asked them to brainstorm ways to motivate their students. They concluded that there are five areas where the teacher can really make a difference: in their lesson plans, in classroom management, in teaching style, in testing and assessment and in professional development. By no means were their ideas exhaustive, but they were good. Here is a summary.

1. Create great lesson plans: Choose great topics. Provide interesting and varied activities. Develop medium-term class themes. Have attainable goals and objectives, which provide real challenges but seek progress, not perfection. KISS (Keep it short and simple). And use authentic materials and situations for classroom teaching.

2. Classroom management: Attend to your students’ comfort and convenience. Find ways to visually represent class progress. Set up the classroom effectively and use equipment as effectively as you can.

3. Teaching style: Your teaching style consists of attitude, presence and rapport. Here are some comments on each.
• Attitude: Know your students’ names. Activate their prior knowledge and nurture their abilities. Be knowledgeable and authoritative, but modest. Be passionate about teaching. Be punctual. Dress and groom professionally.
• Presence: Empathize with your students. Enable your students to have fun. Show your personality, and vary the ways you teach
• Rapport: Appeal to different learning styles, especially kinaesthetic. Be conscious and respectful of your students’ culture or cultures. Give genuine praise and recognition. Involve the students in their learning; for example, use KWL (“what you know, what you want to know, what you have learned”) charts to develop and measure class content. Offer appropriate counsel and advice.

4. Assessment: Give your students good and regular assessment and testing. Get them to help each other. Monitor the class through feedback, and use prizes as rewards from time to time.

5. Professional development: Keep a log of your classroom performance, on occasion get someone to video your performance, and periodically ask a colleague or friend to assess your teaching. And take advantage of whatever professional development training you can get your hands on. We can always improve, and we must.

Using the Mother Tongue to Teach another Tongue

I recently updated my book Teach and Learn: Reflections on Communicative Language Teaching, and made it available on Kindle and as an inexpensive paperback. To enjoy a read, please click here.

By Peter McKenzie-Brown

“Language teaching must start afresh!” was the battle cry of a German language teacher, Wilhelm Viëtor, who published a manifesto of that name in 1886. His text lays out the weaknesses of the then-current grammar translation approach to language teaching, and proposes a surprisingly modern method to replace it.

This was one of the seminal moments for the Reform Movement in language teaching, and communicative language teaching is clearly part of the tradition that Fricke described so many years ago.

His thoughts on using the foreign language and the students’ native language in the classroom are worth noting. “It goes without saying that that the foreign language should always be spoken in class,” he says. However, “in certain circumstances, (questions about the content of a text) may have to be put in German first, then in the foreign language….” In his thoughtful commentary, he thus comes down on what I take to be the right side of an issue that has bedeviled reformers from his day to the present.

Sometimes called the principle of monolingualism, the idea is that you should essentially banish your students’ mother tongue from the foreign language classroom. This notion, which is very convenient for teachers who do not know the native language of the students they are teaching, has many advocates. This practice is essentially a product of the twentieth century. In no other age have language teachers been forbidden as a matter of principle to communicate with their students in their native language.

The widely respected methodology writer Jeremy Harmer, for example, makes a concession to the mother tongue in these words: “Where students all share the same mother tongue (which the teacher also understands), a member of the class can be asked to translate the instructions as a check that they have understood them.” The very wording of this proposal implies that the teacher should ban the mother tongue from the classroom. It certainly sounds as though Harmer wouldn’t stoop to use it himself!

Does this make sense? For some, using the students’ native language is not an option. These teachers may work in western countries where attendance sheets read like UN committee lists. Or they may have monolingual classes in developing countries whose language they have not mastered or even attempted. Much conventional wisdom about language teaching suggests that these situations are irrelevant, since the ideal language classroom should involve communication in the foreign language only. Conventional wisdom notwithstanding, there are strong arguments that the monolingual principle is an impediment to effective language teaching.

The balance of this commentary will reflect the ideas of a worthy successor to Viëtor, the 19th century German pamphleteer. Now a retired professor of language instruction in Aachen, Germany, Dr. Wolfgang Butzkamm argues that having the ability to speak the first language of your learners is a gift to be valued. All else being equal, a teacher fluent in her students’ mother tongue will be a better teacher than one who blunders in that language or doesn't know it at all. He assumes that the students are at least seven years old, by which time their native language is well established.

Here is his essential argument.

Using the mother tongue, we have learned to think, learned to communicate and acquired an intuitive understanding of grammar. The mother tongue opens the door not only to its own grammar, but to all grammars, inasmuch as it awakens the potential for universal grammar that lies within all of us….For this reason, the mother tongue is the master key to foreign languages, the tool which gives us the fastest, surest, most precise, and most complete means of accessing a foreign language.

This is a radical notion, but in many ways it makes great sense. The trick is to use the mother tongue sparingly in class. Offer brief explanations and instructions where necessary, but do not do so randomly; Butzkamm suggests particular techniques to use in the classroom. He adds,

In principle, conveying meaning is not a matter of vocabulary, but concerns the text, i.e. it takes place simultaneously on a lexical, grammatical and pragmatic level. The pupil first wants to understand not what an individual word is saying, but what the text is saying, as accurately and completely as possible. An oral utterance equivalent in the mother tongue is the best and fastest way to fulfill this basic need.

He adds that “interferences, those unwelcome imports from the mother tongue, are avoided by the sandwich technique.” The sandwich technique? This is when the teacher “inserts a translation between repetitions of an unknown phrase, almost as an aside, or with a slight break in the flow of speech to mark it as an ‘intruder’.” In this way the teacher briefly uses the mother tongue, but quickly re-establishes syntax for his students.

Butzkamm’s arguments are often complex, but they fall well within the structure of communicative language teaching. For example, he suggests that using teaching aids in the mother tongue can “promote more authentic, message-oriented communications than might be found in lessons where they are avoided…. (Also,) mother tongue techniques allow teachers to use richer, more authentic texts sooner. This means more comprehensible input and faster acquisition.”

In a comment on this post, Butzkamm pointed out that "my argument stands even if there is no such thing as a universal grammar common to all languages...in the Chomskyan sense." He continues,

Mother tongue grammars have paved the way to foreign grammars in as much as they have prepared the learner to expect and understand underlying basic concepts such as possession, number, agent, instrument, cause, condition etc, no matter by what linguistic means they are expressed in a given language. Naturally, if both the target language and the FL have adjectives, relative clauses or the pluperfect tense in common, they need not be taught from scratch, but are directly available for incorporation into the L2 system. However, the path breaking power of L1 grammar is not dependent on the fact that both languages share such grammatical features. One natural language is enough to open the door for the grammars of other languages because all languages are cut from the same conceptual cloth.

At first, some of his arguments sound like those of a CL teacher gone mad. Consider the beginning of this argument, for example: “Mother tongue aids make it easier to conduct whole lessons in the foreign language.” This sounds almost surreal until he explains that using such aids enables “pupils to gain in confidence and, paradoxically, become less dependent on their mother tongue.”

The mother tongue has a role in explaining vocabulary, Butzkamm says, but we have to me careful about it, as his explanation of the sandwich technique illustrates. In language teaching, other approaches do not work as well, he says, and can even be harmful. As importantly, “we need to associate the new with the old. To exclude mother tongue links would deprive us of our richest source” for building associations with words we already know. In general, he says, “the foreign language learner must build upon existing skills and knowledge acquired in and through the mother tongue.”

Butzkamm is not modest about his ideas. His theory, he says,

restores the mother tongue to its rightful place as the most important ally a foreign language can have, one which would, at the same time, redeem some 2000 years of documented foreign language teaching, which has always held the mother tongue in high esteem.

Hardly the first linguist to argue against the principle of monolingualism, Butzkamm’s arguments may be the most coherent and compelling. Language teachers – especially those whose students speak a common language – should remember a simple truth: knowing and judiciously using your students’ native language can make you better teachers.

Podcast in the Classroom

I recently updated my book, Teach and Learn: Reflections on Communicative Language Teaching, and made it available on Kindle and as an inexpensive paperback. To enjoy a read, please click here.

By Peter McKenzie-Brown

Thomas Edison didn’t exactly consider the phonograph a device for teaching language when he invented it in 1877. However, he did suggest that its ten possible future uses included “the teaching of elocution” and “the preservation of languages by exact reproduction of the manner of pronouncing.”

He could hardly have imagined that a remote descendent of that device, the podcast, would one day offer such convenient, powerful potential for language learning and teaching.

A podcast is a multimedia file distributed over the Internet for playback on mobile devices and personal computers. For the language learner in particular it is the answer to a maiden’s prayer. Motivated learners can now download excellent content through iTunes or Breaking News English, for example, and listen to it at their leisure. Teachers should encourage their students to take advantage of these opportunities, as well as such excellent commercial listening materials for beginners as those provided by Pimsleur.

Podcasts also provide great value for language teachers. Many excellent materials are available, and it is becoming progressively easier to use them in the classroom. It is hard to understate the importance of this media phenomenon for both learners and teachers. Why is this so?

Because listening is the single most important skill in language learning. The failure to promote listening activities in the classroom is a teaching flaw that even the best language instructors are often guilty of. In the past this was somewhat justifiable, because listening activities depended on clunky machines that were frequently unreliable. Moreover, finding appropriate listening materials was often difficult. Advancing technologies are changing that.

Pods and Bytes: Before we get into the nuts and bolts – or rather, perhaps, the pods and bytes – of using these new media in the classroom, let’s quickly review why listening is so important. Here are a few points about teaching this primary skill.

Listening is the language skill most used by the average person, and it is our major source of comprehensible input. Learners must hear and comprehend before they speak, so listening should be the first skill that you teach. This worries some teachers, but it shouldn’t; aural activities can be intrinsically motivating.

You should teach this skill gradually and systematically. In a pure listening exercise, your students develop the skill in isolation from the other skills. For the most part, you do this by presenting your learners with the opportunity to hear a specific selection of authentic speech. This includes giving them additional opportunities to listen to the exact same thing several times.

Students must be explicitly taught to recognize the reduced language forms of colloquial speech. Presented with identical repetitions of a speech segment, they will learn to recognize the reduced vowels of English, for example. They will also gradually learn to dissect the structures in use, and the unfamiliar vocabulary. Also, part of aural comprehension is learning to decipher nonverbal clues – many of which are carried, for example, in the intonation of a speaker’s voice. Listening activities can bring these intoned meanings to life.

We listen in different ways for different purposes, and this is an important consideration when we think about language teaching. For example, we should include among our listening activities a wide range of activities and materials. So says applied linguist David Nunan, who has provided an excellent set of rules for effective listening practice.

Authentic Texts: He adds that our materials should be based on a wide range of authentic texts, including both monologues and dialogues. Add answering-machine messages, public transportation announcements, mini-lectures and narrative recounts.

Also, the content should be personalized. For example, have your students “listen to one side of a conversation and react with written responses.” You can find many other ways to get your students to respond personally to the material. You might take into account local culture or recent news, for example. If your students are young adults, don’t forget to provide them with a brief love story. From the beginning, learners should know what they are listening for and why.

Schema-building tasks should precede the listening – in other words, the teacher should introduce the listening activity proper with questions or a warm-up activity, for example, that wakes up the learner’s dormant sense of what the listening activity will involve. By creating a sense of anticipation, you can add more life to the lesson.

You should incorporate strategies for effective listening into the materials. If the speakers use “woulda,” “shoulda” and “whaddaya” a lot, introduce those structures and have your students practise them before listening begins. Of course, key vocabulary should be part of pre-listening preparation.

Give your learners opportunities to progressively structure their listening by listening to a text several times. Also, have them work through increasingly challenging listening tasks as the number of repetitions of the text progresses. For example, after the first listening, they may need to write down the main idea of the text. The second time out, they may need to answer written questions about specific details from the text. These activities enable them to probe progressively deeper into the text.

Hardware and Content: With this review of the basics, let’s return to the matter of teaching technology. Recording devices like Edison’s phonograph have been around for 130 years, but were little used in the classroom until the development of the tape recorder.

For their part, record players were expensive and often cumbersome. The stylus was hard on the record, which quickly became scratched and often skipped. These devices were little used for language teaching.

Audiotapes have been available for half a century, of course, but for much of that time they were so clumsy they were used almost exclusively in language labs. It was difficult to rewind to the exact beginning of the text; also, the tapes can stretch, stick or break. And tape recorders seem much more likely to malfunction than later recording devices.

Audiotapes have been available for nearly fifty years, of course, but for much of that time they were so clumsy they were relegated to language labs. They have always had the drawback that it was difficult to rewind to the exact beginning of the text. Also, the tapes can stretch, stick or break. And tape recorders seem much more likely to malfunction than later recording devices.

The CD began to replace this technology twenty years ago. It has the advantages of instant response, much higher audio quality and greater durability. Its major drawback is in finding good and useful content for a language class. Good material has been available, but often prepared by big media firms to accompany textbooks that were not appropriate, for example, in emerging countries. Not only is this material often inappropriate, it is often quite expensive for teachers and schools in developing economies.

Then came the podcast, a whole new medium that is barely three years old. Although problems still exist, the podcast is progressively helping solve the language teacher’s content problem. More and more excellent material is available on the Internet, and it is downloadable for free. To extract the exact segment you want, you will need a free sound editor like Soundbooth.

How do you use this stuff? Whatever the level of technological sophistication of your teaching environment, you have options. For one, download onto an MP3 player your edited podcast; ideally it should be one with a transcript for lesson planning. Take it to class with a small pair of portable MP3 speakers. Now, you are off and running.

A less elegant solution is to download your chosen podcast onto a laptop computer, bring the laptop into class and let it rip. Unfortunately, laptop computer volume is often inadequate for medium-sized classes and larger, so external speakers may again be necessary.

Your third choice is to burn your podcast onto a CD or download it onto a flash storage device. Almost everyone has access to a CD player; fewer have access to a system that can read from flash memory. With luck and perhaps an investment in technology, however, you should be able to use this basic option.

Whichever playback system works for you, just do it. If you choose good materials and develop good, sophisticated activities, listening practice makes learning and teaching even more fun.

Language Teaching: Some Notes on Method

I recently updated my book, Teach and Learn: Reflections on Communicative Language Teaching, and made it available on Kindle and as an inexpensive paperback. To enjoy a read, please click here.

By Peter McKenzie-Brown


As a teacher, I use the communicative approach to language teaching, and this blog provides much information about its theory and practice. In some ways, the heart of CLT is the lesson planning cycle, which we stress from the beginning. (To download a PDF of my book on the topic, click here.)

To put CLT and lesson planning into context, it will be helpful to tell some of the story of teaching methods. We begin with the tale of teaching approaches and methods. Then we describe the two bêtes noire of language teaching – grammar translation and audiolingualism – before reviewing the direct method and CLT.

Approach, Method, Design and Procedure: In 1963, applied linguist Edward Anthony defined the terms “approach,” “method” and “technique” as they apply to language teaching and his ideas had a great impact on teachers and those who guide them. In his ground-breaking work, Anthony suggested that an approach is the large system of ideas and thought behind a teacher’s lesson plans. Method refers to specific ways to teach English, and each method uses a variety of specific techniques.

Here is what Anthony actually said: “The arrangement is hierarchical. The organizational key is that techniques carry out a method which is consistent with an approach….
• “…An approach is a set of correlative assumptions dealing with the nature of language teaching and learning. An approach is axiomatic. It describes the nature of the subject matter to be taught….
• “…Method is an overall plan for the orderly presentation of language material, no part of which contradicts, and all of which is based upon, the selected approach. An approach is axiomatic, a method is procedural…..Within one approach, there can be many methods….
• “A technique is implementational – that which actually takes place in a classroom. It is a particular trick, stratagem, or contrivance used to accomplish an immediate objective. Techniques must be consistent with a method, and therefore in harmony with an approach as well.”

In a review of Anthony’s ideas, two later thinkers – Jack Richards and Ted Rodgers – suggest a rethinking of this hierarchy. Anthony’s package can be improved, they suggest, by eliminating the notion of technique from the pyramid, and adding design and procedure. The following two categories replaced technique at the bottom of their hierarchy.
• Design: The two thinkers propose that design is “that level in which objectives, syllabus, and content are determined, and in which objectives, the roles of teachers, learners and instructional materials are specified.”
• Procedure: The implementation phase of language classes is where the rubber hits the road – the activities that help language learning occur. Rather than use the term implementation, they prefer the “slightly more comprehensive term procedure.”

The two men sum up their revised model with the words: “…a method is theoretically related to an approach, is organizationally determined by a design, and is practically realized in a procedure.” The lesson planning cycle used extensively in this course mirrors Richards’ and Rodgers’ revisions to Anthony’s pioneering work.

In the following discussion, we will talk about methods only, because we are concerned with how language is taught in the classroom rather than the theory behind individual methods. We will not, in other words, discuss the approaches behind the following four methods.

The Grammar Translation Method: The grammar translation method emerged when people of the western world wanted to learn such foreign languages as Latin and Greek. The focus is on learning grammatical rules and memorizing vocabulary and language declensions and conjugations. Typical classroom activities and homework includes text translation and written exercises.

The teacher presents a grammar translation class in the student’s native tongue, and students are not actively encouraged to use the target language in class. The teacher provides elaborate explanations of the grammatical intricacies of the target language, and often focuses on the form and inflection of words. Accuracy receives a great deal of stress. Vocabulary study takes the form of learning lists of often isolated words, and the rules of grammar provide the blueprint for putting words together. Students begin early to read classical texts, which are treated as exercises in grammatical analysis. There is little stress on the content of those texts.

The Audio-lingual Method: Grammar Translation classes lingered in the West until well into the 1970s, and the method is still used in some schools, especially in less-developed countries. However, the system began to be replaced in Western schools in the mid-1950s by a new, “scientific,” method known as Audio-lingualism. Also called the “aural-oral” method, it gets its name from the Latin roots for hearing and speaking. Audiolingualism emphasises pattern drills and conversation practice.

In the audio-lingual classroom, the teacher generally presents new material in dialogue form, and students are expected to mimic her pronunciation and intonation, which receive a great deal of emphasis. There is a great deal of stress on memorizing set phrases and over learning; learners acquire language patterns through repetitive drills. There is little grammatical explanation; the student learns grammar through analogy rather than explanation.

Audio-lingual teachers place great importance on getting students to produce error-free speech. They immediately reinforce successful speech, and quickly correct errors. They teach vocabulary through pronunciation (not the written word), and they make regular use of tapes, language labs, and visual aids. In the classroom, the teacher strongly discourages the use of the student’s mother tongue.

The Direct Method: Although these methods dominated much of language teaching, there were better alternatives available. Notable among these is the direct method, which originated in the 19th century through the work of a number of important thinkers, notably Lambert Sauveur – a Frenchman who opened a language school in Boston in 1869. His system of teaching French became known as the natural method. The direct method is an offshoot.

The basic premise of the direct method is that second language learning should be more like first language learning. The method includes lots of oral interaction and the spontaneous use of language. The teacher discourages translation between first and second languages, and puts little emphasis on the rules of grammar.

The direct method classroom was one of small, intensive classes which stressed both speech and listening comprehension. The teacher gives instruction exclusively in the target language, teaching everyday vocabulary and sentences. The teacher develops oral communication skills in a careful progression that she frequently organizes around questions-and-answer exchanges. The teacher explains new teaching points through modeling and practice.

A direct approach instructor emphasizes correct pronunciation and grammar, which she teaches inductively. She presents concrete vocabulary through demonstration, realia and pictures, for example, and teaches abstract vocabulary through association of ideas. This method was the first to catch “the attention of both language teachers and language teaching specialists, and it offered a methodology that appeared to move language teaching into a new era.”

Communicative Language Teaching: In Western countries, at least, communicative language teaching is the generally accepted norm in the field of second language teaching. It is state-of-the-art.

CLT is based on theories about language acquisition, especially those developed by Stephen Krashen. At the considerable risk of oversimplification, here is a nutshell perspective on the fit between theory and practice. Krashen suggests that learners acquire language through using it for communication. Since most learners study language to use it for communication, this discovery represents a tidy fit between what works and what learners want.

The teacher’s job is to help his students develop communicative skills by experimenting with the second language in class and beyond. In the classroom, the CL teacher creates activities which simulate communication in real-world situations. His activities emphasize learning to communicate through interaction in the target language, and generally use a mix of the four language skills – listening, speaking, reading and writing. These activities enable his learners to internalize and activate their second or foreign language.

The communicative language teacher uses authentic materials and exercises in the classroom, since this enables his students to more easily take their language learning into the real world. The teacher provides opportunities for learners not only to activate the second language, but also to better understand the learning process. He might do this, for example, by helping his learners develop strategies that will speed up the learning process.

In a well-designed lesson, his efforts work together to improve his students’ communicative competence. He has a clear sense of the thinking behind the communicative approach, and the planning cycle enables him to integrate design and procedure into a master class.

The Structure of Language

I recently updated my book, Teach and Learn: Reflections on Communicative Language Teaching, and made it available on Kindle and as an inexpensive paperback. To enjoy a read, please click here.


By Peter McKenzie-Brown

You are studying a foreign language, you want to learn ten new words every day, and the mental task of managing your growing word list seems formidable. To put the job into context, consider the following from linguist Stephen Pinker.

“Children begin to learn words before their first birthday,” he says, “and by their second they hoover them up at a rate of one every two hours. By the time they enter school children command 13,000 words, and then the pace picks up, because new words rain down on them from both speech and print. A typical high-school graduate knows about 60,000 words; a literate adult, perhaps twice that number.”

Smaller than a toddler’s daily intake, your ten-word vocabulary list suddenly seems like a pauper in a palace. And the problem of properly learning vocabulary involves much more than remembering words. In the classroom, only a few words and a small part of what the learner needs to know about a word can be dealt with at any one time. For the common words, which often have multiple meanings and complex nuances, you can only teach a bit at a time. The more information you present, the more likely your learners are to misunderstand.

For both teacher and learner, vocabulary is a huge challenge. But help is at hand from vocabulary researcher Paul Nation, whose magisterial 480-page tome, Learning Vocabulary in Another Language, offers endless insights into the science and practice of teaching and learning vocabulary. He calls his preferred method of vocabulary teaching the direct approach.

Nation describes vocabulary learning as a “meeting” between the learner and the word, and he stresses that it only makes sense to have close encounters with common, useful words. Most teachers emphasize the most common 2000 English words. The most widely accepted list is available on the Internet by googling Michael West’s General Service List.

“Useful vocabulary needs to be met again and again to ensure it is learned,” Nation says. “In the early stages of learning the meetings need to be reasonably close together, preferably within a few days, so that too much forgetting does not occur. Later meetings can be very widely spaced with several weeks between each meeting.”

There are essentially four ways to learn and teach high-frequency words.
• One is direct teaching, mentioned earlier. For the language teacher, explaining vocabulary is a critical part of classroom duties.
• Also, encourage your students to participate in direct learning, which involves study from word cards and dictionary use.
• A third method, incidental learning, can involve guessing from context in extensive reading or through word use in communicative activities.
• The fourth method Nation calls “planned encounters.” These encounters include vocabulary exercises and graded reading – that is, using reading materials like shortened novels with reduced vocabulary for language learners.(Graded readers are available in many language teaching bookstores.)

Nation’s direct approach to vocabulary teaching is built upon three main ideas. First, vocabulary teaching should focus on high-frequency words that will be of continuing importance for the learners. As a teacher, you have a duty to pass over low-frequency words completely or with little comment. Also, you have to make sure the learners come back to the word frequently, to diminish the power of forgetfulness.

Also, when you teach a word you should focus on its “learning burden” – that is, the features of the word that actually need to be taught. These can differ quite dramatically from word to word. Take the word “think.” You need to explain that it is an irregular verb; that it includes the irregular spelling “thought”; and that “thought” can also be a noun.

Finally, direct teaching should be clear and simple. To learn a word in all its complexity, learners need to meet it many times. Don’t try to teach a complex word – for example, the many meanings of the word “right” – in one sitting. That kind of intensive vocabulary teaching takes place in boring classrooms, and it frequently leads to perplexed students.

Words, Words, Words

I recently updated my book, Teach and Learn: Reflections on Communicative Language Teaching, and made it available on Kindle and as an inexpensive paperback. To enjoy a read, please click here.


By Peter McKenzie-Brown

You are studying a foreign language, you want to learn ten new words every day, and the mental task of managing your growing word list seems formidable. To put the job into context, consider the following from linguist Stephen Pinker.

“Children begin to learn words before their first birthday,” he says, “and by their second they hoover them up at a rate of one every two hours. By the time they enter school children command 13,000 words, and then the pace picks up, because new words rain down on them from both speech and print. A typical high-school graduate knows about 60,000 words; a literate adult, perhaps twice that number.”

Smaller than a toddler’s daily intake, your ten-word vocabulary list suddenly seems like a pauper in a palace. And the problem of properly learning vocabulary involves much more than remembering words. In the classroom, only a few words and a small part of what the learner needs to know about a word can be dealt with at any one time. For the common words, which often have multiple meanings and complex nuances, you can only teach a bit at a time. The more information you present, the more likely your learners are to misunderstand.

For both teacher and learner, vocabulary is a huge challenge. But help is at hand from vocabulary researcher Paul Nation, whose magisterial 480-page tome, Learning Vocabulary in Another Language, offers endless insights into the science and practice of teaching and learning vocabulary. He calls his preferred method of vocabulary teaching the direct approach.

Nation describes vocabulary learning as a “meeting” between the learner and the word, and he stresses that it only makes sense to have close encounters with common, useful words. Most teachers emphasize the most common 2000 English words. The most widely accepted list is available on the Internet by googling Michael West’s General Service List.

“Useful vocabulary needs to be met again and again to ensure it is learned,” Nation says. “In the early stages of learning the meetings need to be reasonably close together, preferably within a few days, so that too much forgetting does not occur. Later meetings can be very widely spaced with several weeks between each meeting.”

There are essentially four ways to learn and teach high-frequency words.
• One is direct teaching, mentioned earlier. For the language teacher, explaining vocabulary is a critical part of classroom duties.
• Also, encourage your students to participate in direct learning, which involves study from word cards and dictionary use.
• A third method, incidental learning, can involve guessing from context in extensive reading or through word use in communicative activities.
• The fourth method Nation calls “planned encounters.” These encounters include vocabulary exercises and graded reading – that is, using reading materials like shortened novels with reduced vocabulary for language learners.(Graded readers are available in many language teaching bookstores.)

Nation’s direct approach to vocabulary teaching is built upon three main ideas. First, vocabulary teaching should focus on high-frequency words that will be of continuing importance for the learners. As a teacher, you have a duty to pass over low-frequency words completely or with little comment. Also, you have to make sure the learners come back to the word frequently, to diminish the power of forgetfulness.

Also, when you teach a word you should focus on its “learning burden” – that is, the features of the word that actually need to be taught. These can differ quite dramatically from word to word. Take the word “think.” You need to explain that it is an irregular verb; that it includes the irregular spelling “thought”; and that “thought” can also be a noun.

Finally, direct teaching should be clear and simple. To learn a word in all its complexity, learners need to meet it many times. Don’t try to teach a complex word – for example, the many meanings of the word “right” – in one sitting. That kind of intensive vocabulary teaching takes place in boring classrooms, and it frequently leads to perplexed students.