Matthew K.
Gichohi
04/27/2013
The Bonga
Method.
As interactions between people
from various parts of the world increase, so has the need to speak more than
one’s own mother tongue. The learning of
second or third or fourth languages, however, carries considerable financial
and psychological costs. The financial costs that one incurs in second language
acquisition can be prohibitive; the Rosetta Stone system, for instance, charges
approximately 400 euros for the five level Spanish language set – cost that may
be out of many people’s reach. If one were able to successfully meet these
financial obligations, then they would still have to face the psychological
demands that second language acquisition imposes: the time and energy
associated with learning new words, grammar structures, socio-cultural norms
and, in some cases, entirely new scripts.
Despite these costs many people still invest in second language
acquisition and attest to its benefits: the ability to communicate with family
and friends from abroad, the ability to advance professionally, and even
satisfy their own intellectual and personal love for languages. These
investments and desires individuals have make clear the need for proper
instruction and processes where second language instruction acquisition is
concerned. In this paper, I will propose a new pedagogical approach to those
interested in second language acquisition writ large. The approach focuses on
both the instructor and students so as to ensure maximum usage of the target
language (the second language) while promoting comprehension and competence in the
language’s socio-cultural usage. The paper will be structured in the following
manner: in the next section I will present the current state of various pedagogical
approaches to second language acquisition (SLA) and their drawbacks. This will
be followed by my proposed approach to SLA, called the Bonga Method and a conclusion.
The pedagogical approaches to second
language acquisition are varied and their results even more so. In this section
I will review the four approaches and their drawbacks. The first, suggestopedia (Lozanoy 1978) aims to
eliminate the negative barriers to language acquisition. The barriers to
learning, assumed to be psychological, are eliminated through the creation of a
calm and relaxed environment, either through music or art, while the target
language is introduced to the student. This dual approach to teaching, conscious
(target language introduction) and subconscious (relaxing stimuli) is believed
to allow for the students to think of learning as enjoyable. The approach also
allows for the use of the student’s first language. The approach, however, places
too much emphasis on the environment and the quality of the instructor rather
than on the students achieving a high level of linguistic competence in the
target language.[1]
The next approach, total body response
(Asher 1964) calls for the students to learn the target language through
repetition and the acting out of instructions provided by the instructor. The
drawback facing this approach is the constraints it puts on higher-level
learners and its irrelevance where language and structure are more nuanced. It
also fails to allow for students creativity; that is to say that any
negotiation of meaning and contextual application of language is lost. The audio-lingual approach (Fries 1939) to SLA focuses more on the
structure (grammar) of the language rather than the vocabulary. This is done
through drills in the sentence patterns that focus on grammar while eliminating
mistakes. The approach, much like the others mentioned suffers from a few
drawbacks, namely: its focus on structural linguistics is not informative about
language and its constant evolution.[2]
Additionally, the method’s focus on structure makes the use of native languages
necessary, which can stunt SLA. The Grammar
Translation Method, which focuses on students learning the target language
through translation so that they can read its literature and benefit from the
mental discipline and intellectual development that result from foreign
language study. The approach however, fails recognize that students ought to
learn languages actively rather than indirectly, fails to teach students how to
apply the knowledge gained in real life situations and due to its method leaves
students with poor listening and speaking ability du to the low levels of
listening and speaking practice.
The Bonga method unlike the
previously discussed second language acquisition methods is designed to encourage
communication in the target language from the very first lesson. Students are
treated as agents who wish to use the target language in socio-linguistically
appropriate ways and contexts. As a result, though the Bonga system are caters
to the specific needs of the students, the ultimate goal of the system is to
ensure that students are able to function independently in all possible social
contexts where they may encounter the language.[3]
In the Bonga system, all classes are taught in the target language, a strategy
that is advocated by the direct method, the communicative method and several
other systems, including Oxbridge. The focus on L2 instruction is to acquaint
the student well with the target language while also attempting to minimize the
occurrence of L1 interference.[4]
In addition, the introduction of the language’s structure and vocabulary is
explicit, especially with beginners and low intermediate students. Failure to
be explicit in teaching these aspects of language can be detrimental. Without a
proper base in the language that is direct, the likelihood of students making
errors that become into habits, which are more difficult to modify, increase
significantly. The method also places a
great emphasis on communication since this is the best way to ensure language
acquisition, not just mere learning. Through communication students are exposed
to the use of language in particular contexts and the dynamic nature of language,
since it is never static.
More than taking into account
the language of instruction and the nature of communication in the classroom,
the method also considers sequencing. In what order should material be
introduced? The general course of instruction will be progressive; that is to
say, functional formulaic sequences are introduced to beginners and as students
achieve higher levels of language comprehension and usage, then more complex
topics and themes will be introduced. The initial reliance on functional and
formulaic vocabulary (simple and limited) and structures will familiarize the
students with the language and build up their confidence in its use. For the
absolute beginners, for instance, the classes are a mix of total physical
response techniques and a communicative approach.[5]
The physical response aspect will help the beginners be engaged in the lessons
while also associating information with specific actions, such as introductions
and learning simple verb tenses (possession, future actions, past actions, etc).
Lessons will also take place outside the classroom on certain days. This is in
order for the students to become familiar with the contexts in which the
language being learned is used and how to actually use it themselves, such as
in supermarkets or cafes.
In a café, for instance,
students learn how to order coffee (if learning English, for instance, “I’d
like a coffee, please”) and the proper response to questions asked. These situations
can also help them understand phrases that may not be possible to teach through
a total physical response approach – when a barista responds by saying, “Coming
right up” in reference to the coffee, students will learn the phrasal verb in
action and thus help them retain its meaning and context easily. In this stage
of learning, the teachers speak more than the students. This is because the
teacher establishes the appropriate form of the language while introducing the
vocabulary. Another way of engaging students in these low levels is through the
introduction of assignments that take place outside the classroom. For
instance, the instructor can assign students a children’s book in L1 that will
in turn be discussed in the target language during the next course. Encouraging
outside classroom activities like reading can help build vocabulary, especially
when linked to classroom discussions.
As proficiency and competence
in the language are attained, then a thematic structure to the lessons will be
used. At this level, students need more real life, situational and contextual knowledge
of the language. Here the Bonga system drops the total physical response aspect
and focuses more on the communicative approach to language learning. Here the
amount of speaking done by the student is increased while that of the
instructor decreases. Knowledge of the contextual usage of the language is also
increased through the introduction of film and role-plays in the classroom. The
audio-visual aids, however, will be related to the particular context of
language use and will be limited to 3 minutes.[6]
The Bonga system’s also encourages the use of information exchanges where in
the discussion of a topic, students have different pieces of information that
must all be contributed to the discussion so as to have a more complete picture
of the topic at hand. This method is more dynamic and challenging to L2
students than one where all students have similar information because students
are forced to contribute to the discussion, whereas if they all share the
information then its likely those who do not want to engage will simply remain
quiet.[7]
The focus on the thematic and interactive nature of learning is driven by the realizing
that it is at these more advanced stages of language acquisition that student
will be able to interrogate language for its context and meaning.
The Bonga method also takes
into consideration the teachers, who are guides. The teacher in the Bonga
method is not just a facilitator but also a learner. They must learn how to
adapt the lessons to each classes and levels needs, styles and strategies. The
teaching methods taught in each level differ. As a result, the method requires
35 hours of teaching before certification occurs. The increase in teacher
training leads to increased language knowledge, which is directly correlated
with increased student learning, fluency and competence (Celya et al. (2007). The
method also links teachers into a network of instructors who provide guidance
and advice on how to improve their teaching techniques so as to have a better
effect on their students’ language acquisition.
The method proposed as it
becomes clear borrows from some methods but is progressive. Relying on one
method can lead to unnecessary obstacles to language acquisition.
[1] It is
interesting to note that some researchers find a significant effect in learning
where suggestopedia is used. The effect,
however, is only noticed after a long interval from when the treatment is
administered, when the teaching method was conducted. There is no
acknowledgement of inter-temporal interference that may have enhanced learning
rather than the teaching method itself (Adamson 1997, Levison 1991).
[2] Measurement
of student abilities shows that they are unable to transfer their language skills
to situations outside the classroom.
[3] Students who
are interested in simply learning the target language only for business
purposes, will, by the end of the end, be able to speak the target language in
all contexts, not just professionally.
[4] Interference
is the influence that the student’s L1 exerts over the target language. It is
driven by the perception of what is transferable and by stage of development in
the target language (L2) (Ellis 1997).
[5] Though total
physical response as a technique was previously criticized, it’s use in
combination with another more respected technique alleviates some of the
concerns. The communicative approach refers to pedagogical approaches that
focus on interaction and communication in the target language. This is not
restricted to linguistic competence; however. It included all four aspects of
language communication: listening, speaking, reading and writing. The approach
also teaches students the appropriate use of language in different contexts.
[6] Clips longer
than this fails to focus the attention of students leading to a lack of
retention of the relevant material.
[7] This
approach to encouraging discussion also helps tackle issues of avoidance that
accompany interlanguage. Avoidance in interlanguage means that students who
find the structure of L2 different from L1 simply avoid using the structure.
This interactive method forces students to use the language and its structure
and if errors are made, they can be quickly rectified.