Reflections on ELT Methodologies

1. Does it make any sense to you that forming questions / answers through a chain drill may be a worthwhile activity but it is not generating purposeful communication? Can you state the reasons that justify your answer?

Considering that the brain develops as we learn a new language, and it not being known exactly what changes take place during that development, I think that rote responses and generation of phrases, words or even sounds, may have a positive impact on language learning even when they lack meaning. Even in learning our first language there are instances when we practice sounds or phrases that are not meaningful--tongue twisters are an example of this practice. So yes, I think that a chain drill or other types of drills may be helpful as part of language learning.


2. Should teachers overlook certain student errors in the beginning? If so. What type of errors should be disregarded?

I think that teachers should overlook some errors at every stage of language learning. What changes is which errors are overlooked at the different stages. At the very beginning of language production, I think all errors should be overlooked. As with the acquisition of L1, the joy on the part of the beginning language speaker is repeated in the listener and no correction takes place. (The baby speaking “mama” for the first time, is not corrected, just celebrated.) In order to help the ELL gain confidence, all errors can be ignored at first. As the ELL begins to speak some things correctly, what has been taught and can expected to be known, could be corrected, using appropriate correction techniques. As the ELL has more and more knowledge, more of what he/she speaks can be corrected.

3. Non-verbal behavior is an important aspect of any culture. Why is its use relevant in CLT?

4. Since CBT has been designed around the notion of competency not around the notion of subject knowledge, do you think that competency-based approach is suitable for every subject? If yes. What subjects?