Introduction
Second language teaching has been the focus of various studies and researches and every study that has been done on the topic has brought out very interesting findings. Some of the most significant studies suggest that various methods and strategies can be adopted in the teaching of the second language and many of them claim to be effective in the second language teaching strategy. In a recent study, ‘Exploring Input Processing in the Classroom: An Experimental Comparison of Processing Instruction and Enriched Input,’ Emma Marsden provides enough reasons why such claims may be challenged. In her research on Input Processing Model Marsden “argues that additional evidence is required to support the specific claim, within Input Processing theory, that integrated assigning of meaning to a form is essential for second language acquisition (SLA). That claim is operationalized by the referential activities of PI, but has not yet been challenged in a classroom-based study.” (Marsden, 2006). Therefore, it is very obvious that the existing methods are not totally error-free or completely proven and no single method can be effective in teaching strategy. Therefore, it can be very well established that “there is no one method that will be the best in teaching strategy, and that works for every student.”
Literature Review
There has significant research evidence that indicates the inefficient strategies of several of the second language teaching methods. Important research investigation reports suggest that there are several unnoticed limitations with every single method of second language teaching. Thus, in the paper ‘Exploring Input Processing in the Classroom: An Experimental Comparison of Processing Instruction and Enriched Input,’ by Emma Marsden one finds the evidence of why the hypotheses in VanPatten’s Input Processing model, which are claimed to underpin Processing Instruction can be challenged in seeking clarification and further research evidence. Thus, the study investigates tests “the claim made in the Input Processing approach to the second language (L2) acquisition that interpreting the meaning of language form is essential for learning” and comes to the essential conclusions that support the thesis point that has been established in this paper. (Marsden, 2006) Thus, the research evidence suggests that there needs to be a further explanation to the claim that has been made in the Input Processing approach to second language learning. This has a further implication in suggesting that any single method in teaching strategy will not be the best among many and it cannot be effective in every student.
Similarly, in another specific research investigation, i.e. ‘Use of evidence-based, small-group reading instruction for English language learners in elementary grades: secondary-tier intervention’ the method of second language teaching has been proven inadequate in support. The key findings of the research and the recommendations prove this. They “include continued experimental investigations of secondary-level interventions with a focus on direct instruction and evidence-based interventions for ELL students. Further, investigations addressing specific instructional components contributing to student outcomes are needed, with a focus on the systematic selection of effective practices within ESL services.
It appeared in the urban schools in our sample that there are insufficient resources available to address both language and literacy instruction, especially considering the rapidly growing ELL population in larger cities. Finally, additional study regarding non-responders and tertiary-level interventions is warranted.” (Use of evidence-based, 2007). Therefore, the investigation suggests that there is insufficient support to the efficiency of the use of evidence-based, small-group reading instruction for English language learners in elementary grades. This also points to the fact that there will be no single method that will apply to every second language teaching environment as well as to every type of student. An analysis of the effective teaching techniques concludes that the following are some of the techniques that were proven to be successful with the 2nd-grade focus groups. They include, Students Work in Small Groups, Direct Instruction, Activities that Foster Phonemic Awareness, Learn and Reviews For Alphabet Letter Names and Sounds, “See-Hear-Say-Write” with words, chunks, sentences, and paragraphs, Decoding – Sounding Out Tough Words – Stretching, Practicing Oral Reading of Chunks, Examples: “ack, ish, it,” Answering Questions About the Meaning, Choral Reading, etc.
The research investigation ‘How Problems of Reading Fluency and Comprehension Are Related to Difficulties in Syntactic Awareness Skills Among Fifth Graders’ by Kouider Mokhtari H. and Brian Thompson analyzes several studies and these studies are important in that they suggest the comprehension difficulty levels of various students. These are significant in that they suggest the various comprehension levels of the students and in this background, one can realize that no single method of second language teaching can apply to every student. “The findings of these studies and others highlight the important role syntax plays in reading development and provide documented evidence that that poor comprehenders appear to have language processing difficulties encompassing awareness of the syntactic or grammatical structure of the language, although their decoding skills are often adequate. Many of these language-processing weaknesses have typically been associated with word decoding, sentence or text comprehension.” (Kouider & Brian, 2006). In this background, one method that will be the best in teaching strategy which works out for every student cannot be distinguished.
Conclusion
It is most significant that there are various methods in second language learning and foreign language learning. “There are many different methods that have been used for FL acquisition throughout history. Each method of FLT has its supporters and its critics, mainly because each method is derived from different perspectives of FLL. However, some methods have received wide recognition due to the historical roles they have played in the views encompassed in this subject.” (Methods, 2001). Various strategies are available to the learning and teaching of a second language. It is, remarkably, very evident that the existing methods are not error-free or and no single method can be effective in teaching strategy. In this background, it can be very well established that “there is no one method that will be the best in teaching strategy, and that works for every student.” Several research evidence prove that the strategies that are currently used in second language teaching are insufficient in explaining many critical aspects. All these contribute to the thesis followed in this paper.
References
Marsden, Emma. Exploring Input Processing in the Classroom: An Experimental Comparison of Processing Instruction and Enriched Input, SOURCE: Language Learning 56 no3 507-66 S, 2006. (Suggested by the customer).
Use of evidence-based, small-group reading instruction for English language learners in elementary grades: secondary-tier intervention. (2007). The free library by farlex. Web.
Kouider, Mokhtari H., & Brian, Thompson. How Problems of Reading Fluency and Comprehension Are Related to Difficulties in Syntactic Awareness Skills Among Fifth Grader.’ Source: Reading Research and Instruction 46 no1 73-94 Fall, 2006. (Suggested by the customer).
Methods. (2001). Tripod. Web.