Педагогические науки/5.Современные методы преподавания

Kovalevskіy I.V.

East European University of Economics and Management,Ukraine

AUTHENTICITY IN TEACHING ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE

The objective of the article is to increase proficiency in students’ comprehension and oral communication and to highlight the importance of degrees of authenticity, perspective of reality, classroom practices and cultural appropriateness in teaching English as a second language. There are a number of definitions related to authentic materials. An authentic text is a stretch of real language produced by a real speaker or writer for a real audience and designed to convey a real message of some sort. Authentic texts (either written or spoken) are those which are designed for native speakers: they are real texts designed not for language students but for the speakers of the language in question. A rule of thumb for authentic here is any material which has not been specifically produced for the purposes of language teaching. In the many definitions available for authentic materials there are some common factors:

- exposure to real language and its use in its own community;
- appropriate and quality in terms of goals, objectives, learner needs and interest and natural in terms of real life and meaningful communication;
- materials which are designed for native speakers; they are real text, designed not for language students, but for the speakers of the language;
- texts that are not written for language teaching purposes.

Brown and Menasche distinguish between input authenticity and task authenticity. Input and tasks each can have degrees or levels of authenticity. Brown and Menasche propose five levels for input ("genuine input authenticity", "altered input authenticity", "adapted input authenticity", "simulated input authenticity" and "inauthenticity") while noting that no type is better than the other in their view. They define three types of task authenticity: "genuine", "simulated" and "pedagogical" and note that "there is probably no such thing as real task authenticity; that classrooms are by their nature artificial. The only genuine task authenticity for language learning may well be total immersion in the target language environment without an instructor.

As a first step we need to consider the materials we use in our classrooms in light of these degrees of authenticity. If we think about the materials that are used in language classrooms some that come to mind are: textbooks, video, audio and broadcast media, "realia", charts, maps, teacher-prepared materials. We are under obligation to ensure that the materials that we bring into the classroom do not (even unintentionally) cause our learners to develop patterns of interaction that would mark them as strange or deviant or simply odd. Logical question is: "Why analyze films – should we even care about the use of films in language teaching?" The simple answer is that the use of films, television and other broadcast media in language teaching is widespread and quite popular. There has been virtually no research to assess the validity of film use as an authentic representation of actual language use although recently there have been a growing number of articles recommending the use of films for the teaching and research of pragmatics.

If pedagogical aims play such an integral role in casting the acceptability and appropriateness of materials we should now turn our attention to classroom practices – the activities that we do and what we make our learners do. The world outside the classroom is not intrinsically more "real" – it is the quality of our social interactions inside that classroom that may seem "unreal" when compared with the outside world. In some cases the classroom is the major or even sole source of input and the only opportunity for interaction. And being such, it is even more incumbent upon teachers to make the best use of class time. But it is also important for teachers to find ways to make out-of-class hours conducive to language learning. One way is through the promotion of activities for the building of language awareness. Some of the materials are based on the native speakers’ culture and for some learners it may be quite alien. Then the problem of explaining the culture to the students takes up a lot of class time and less time is devoted to the actual task based on the authentic material. Hence a teacher has to consider whether the students have the background knowledge or cultural schema for the topic while selecting the materials. Some of the materials of the native speakers and the contexts or cultural background of the materials may not be appropriate for second language contexts. The value bias may come in the way of language learning purposes if such materials are used. Hence a careful selection must be made of culturally appropriate materials.

The conclusion can be made that using authentic materials is of great practical value in developing students’ comprehension and oral communication skills.

References

1. Allen, M. (1986). Teaching English with video. New York: Pearson Education.

2. Bardovi-Harlig, K., Hartford, B., Mahan-Taylor, R., Morgan, M., & Reynolds, D. (1991). Developing pragmatic awareness: Closing the conversation. ELT Journal, 45 (1), 4-15.

3. Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Dornyei, Z. (1998). Do Language Learners Recognize Pragmatic Violations? Pragmatic versus Grammatical Awareness in Instructed L2 Learning. TESOL Quarterly, 32 (2), 233-262.

4. Baron, N.S., 1998, Letters by phone or speech by other means: The linguistics of email. Language and Communication, 18, 133-170.

5. Breen, M. P. (1985). Authenticity in the language classroom. Applied Linguistics,6,60-70.

6. Brown, H. D. (2001). Integrating the "Four Skills," in H. D. Brown Teaching by Principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (pp. 232-246) New York: Addison-Wesley Longman.

7. Brown, S. & Menasche, L. (2005). Defining Authenticity. Accessed July 29, 2006 at http://www.as.ysu.edu/~english/BrownMenasche.doc