Teaching by Principles by Douglas Brown

Reflection #4:

All things flow; nothing abides
One cannot step twice into the
Same river; Into the same rivers
We step and do not step; We are
and we are not.


Education as a social institution is seen from the pragmatic point of view, as the source of social transformations, and the catalytic agent of these changes is the school. Consequently, education is a process of growth and development. The learner is possessed with the necessary capacity to develop the habits useful in social adjustment. Thus, teaching is guiding and facilitating learning enabling the learner to learn, setting the conditions of learning

Below is the paradigm of the over-all concept of teaching.














Furthermore, teaching as reflected in the schema refers to something that takes place only when learning does. No matter what the teacher is doing in his classes, if his students are not learning something significant, he is not teaching. When the student fails, the teacher fails more.

It is along the above-context that the teaching principles pioneered by Brown would definitely serve as true basis in language teaching. As noted, there are three basic teaching principles, namely: Cognitive, Affective, and Linguistic.

As regards cognitive aspect, language teachers are expected not be hooked to teaching of the target language, English in a structural way. Although, grammatical competence is but part of the communicative dimensions, but one should consider that mastering forms alone is a futile exercise without meaning. Thus, Canale and Swain valuably substantiate the intermarriage between form/structure and meaning in the teaching of language. Once properly established, students would employ language in an automatic way without mental reservations. Thus, the students would basically experience a life-long and meaningful learning

In addition, once such level of linguistic competence is fully satisfied, students would be driven to do things more in consonance with their knowledge and skills of the English language. Since they have now built “self-confidence” as well as intrinsically motivated in using it, the students would not be afraid in doing future works/transactions done in English for they would be expecting(anticipating) better results in the future. Hence, they could easily manage to dwell on whatever language activities they would meet in the future.

Affective principles(warm and fuzzy principle), on the other pole, would also boost the morale/ego of the students in using the target language, English. Assisting the students properly kindled with matching sense of emotions would basically stimulate their inner drives to learn the language incessantly though with errors. However, errors are part of learning. Once, the students would be able to cross the bridge(new mode of thinking, feeling, and acting—second identity), they would be incessantly crafting their inner self-confidence necessary in combating future language difficulties. Once self-confidence is honed in them, students would become risk-takers in producing and interpreting language that is a bit beyond their language capacity. Thus, exposing students to any communicative situations would challenge them to engage in manifesting their knowledge and skills in the employment of the English language. At one hand, in the process of teaching the English language, it could not be reneged that every language teacher is expected to inject cultural values, practices, and norms associated with the language—for language is culture. Consequently, if students understand the culture of the target language, English, they would be eager to learn more about how to use it in transacting future endeavors without fear.

In terms of linguistic principles, individual learner is assumed to acquire language in an unconscious manner since he/she is endowed with the innate capacity to learn the language(Chomsky as cited in Brown, 2000). Such capacity is contained in a black box known as the Language Acquisition Device(LAD), the universal linguistic theory. As divulged, students’ native language has a strong influence on the acquisition of the English language system. Though the native language will have facilitating and interfering effects on the production and comprehension of the new language, the students would then acknowledge that such interfering effects would pave them to assess and identify that the structure of the native language is entirely different from that of the English language. As a result, they would start thinking directly on the target language, which is a salient feature in learning it. Such practice would actually aid students to avoid the first language “crutch” syndrome. Although in the process of learning a new language, students tend to nativize the target language(interlanguage effect= L1 and L2) which lead them to commit errors classified as local or global. For instance, a certain student who says “Does Eric can write?” may sound to be correct since it follows an internalized systematic rule which requires a pre-posed do auxiliary for English question formation. Teachers on this context should never interfere in correcting such local error but rather provide other similar samples for students to internalize the “correctness” of their statements. Hence, the principle of automaticity works here. However, if meaning suffers because of construction(global error), language teachers should come in and provide constructive feedbacks(verbal and non-verbal forms) so students would have an open arm to accept suggestions for possible growth and development in the process of learning and acquiring a new language, English.

Synthesizing the preceding contexts, one can infer that if students are honed to possess all those experiences, their communicative competence would be at par.
Communicative competence, according to Dell Hymes(cited in Brown, 1994, 2000), refers to the aspect of a person’s competence that enables him to convey and interpret messages in order to negotiate meanings interpersonally within specific contexts. There are four components or subcategories that make up the construct of communicative competence (Canale and Swain as cited in Brown, 1994, 2000). These are: (1) Linguistic or Grammatical Competence which encompasses “knowledge of lexical items and of rules of morphology, syntax, sentence-grammar semantics, and phonology. Thus, it is the competence that one associates with mastering the linguistic code of a language—focusing on sentence-level grammar; (2) Discourse Competence(the complement of linguistic competence in many ways) which refers to one’s ability to connect sentences in stretches of discourse and to form a meaningful whole out of a series of utterances. In short, discourse competence is concerned with intersentential relationships; (3) Sociolinguistic Competence which refers to the knowledge of the socio-cultural rules of language and of discourse. As such, this competence basically requires an understanding of the social context in which language is used: the role of the participants, the information they share, and the function of the interaction; and (4) Strategic Competence which pertains to the “verbal and non-verbal communication strategies that may be called into action to compensate for breakdowns in communication due to performance variables or due to insufficient competence.”

As glossed, the various teaching principles of Brown have paved us language teachers an avenue to really develop the language competency of our students. We need to approach language problems(local or global) of our students in a holistic point of view so as not to jeopardize their innate capacity to learn the target language, English.

Integrative Theory of Canale and Swain

Reflection #3:

One way of developing the communicative competence of the students in learning the target language, English, Canale and Swain (1980) encouraged every language teacher to fuse structure/form with meaning. By doing so, every language learner would be trained to learn English in a holistic approach capitalizing these two essential components of language as a sign system relevant in expressing their ideas freely without hassles.

More pervasively, communicative competence which primarily concerns with the knowledge or capability of a person to appropriately coordinate the rules of language structure and the rules of language use, Munby (1978) substantiated such claim of Canale and Swain. According to him, linguistic competence is an essential part of communicative competence which could not be divorced from other elements of communicative competence. Shown in this context, if language teachers would only be cognizant on their immediate role in motivating students to put into use their knowledge in actual communication situations then effective language learning is not far from reality.
However, since language teachers are always bombarded with lots of responsibilities(no breathing space!), they tend to go back to the traditional way of teaching the English language. As a result, language teaching here becomes so ordinary that somehow would not challenge students to learn to love the subject. Teaching along this vein would not be able to foster effective changes on the part of the language learners.
As depicted above, there should be a paradigm shift to be done by all language teachers. The concept of openness is a viable ingredient in attaining such expected task. All language teachers then should have an open arm in embarking the theory of Canale and Swain for possible changes to occur in their teaching. These are the steps involved in embarking such theory: (1) language teachers introduce the functions of language( e.g. communicating information, using appropriate language, giving instructions/directions, appreciating descriptions, explaining a process, and drawing inferences and making logical conclusions); (2) to realize those language functions, language teachers introduce the notions of language(e.g. improving listening skills through attentive, marginal, critical, and appreciative listening, observing correct and complete sentence structure, observing correct S-V concordance, punctuating sentences correctly, giving instructions and directions, carrying out instructions in forms of commands and requests, using descriptive words that are appealing to the five senses, making an inquiry on how to organize the sequence of the steps in the process, asking questions after a given explanation, observing proper ways in coordinating and subordinating ideas, using inferences in forming intelligent opinions, making observations and gathering facts on what has been heard, read and observed, and by establishing sequence of events properly; (3) After accomplishing numbers 1 and 2, language teachers are now ready to teach grammar corresponding to the language functions and notions established at the very outset employing appropriate language activities. For instance, language teachers could introduce imperative sentences to their students utilizing the language functions and notions of giving instructions/directions.
Once those steps are systematically observed by all language teachers, learning the target language, English, among the learners would become easier and functional—since this is a life-long type of learning deemed necessary in doing and accomplishing future tasks. As deduced, integrative theory of Canale and Swain is very much functional in the teaching of grammar to students. -Dr. Jerry G. Roble

Integrative Theory of Canale and Swain

Reflection #3:

One way of developing the communicative competence of the students in learning the target language, English, Canale and Swain (1980) encouraged every language teacher to fuse structure/form with meaning. By doing so, every language learner would be trained to learn English in a holistic approach capitalizing these two essential components of language as a sign system relevant in expressing their ideas freely without hassles.

More pervasively, communicative competence which primarily concerns with the knowledge or capability of a person to appropriately coordinate the rules of language structure and the rules of language use, Munby (1978) substantiated such claim of Canale and Swain. According to him, linguistic competence is an essential part of communicative competence which could not be divorced from other elements of communicative competence. Shown in this context, if language teachers would only be cognizant on their immediate role in motivating students to put into use their knowledge in actual communication situations then effective language learning is not far from reality.
However, since language teachers are always bombarded with lots of responsibilities(no breathing space!), they tend to go back to the traditional way of teaching the English language. As a result, language teaching here becomes so ordinary that somehow would not challenge students to learn to love the subject. Teaching along this vein would not be able to foster effective changes on the part of the language learners.
As depicted above, there should be a paradigm shift to be done by all language teachers. The concept of openness is a viable ingredient in attaining such expected task. All language teachers then should have an open arm in embarking the theory of Canale and Swain for possible changes to occur in their teaching. These are the steps involved in embarking such theory: (1) language teachers introduce the functions of language( e.g. communicating information, using appropriate language, giving instructions/directions, appreciating descriptions, explaining a process, and drawing inferences and making logical conclusions); (2) to realize those language functions, language teachers introduce the notions of language(e.g. improving listening skills through attentive, marginal, critical, and appreciative listening, observing correct and complete sentence structure, observing correct S-V concordance, punctuating sentences correctly, giving instructions and directions, carrying out instructions in forms of commands and requests, using descriptive words that are appealing to the five senses, making an inquiry on how to organize the sequence of the steps in the process, asking questions after a given explanation, observing proper ways in coordinating and subordinating ideas, using inferences in forming intelligent opinions, making observations and gathering facts on what has been heard, read and observed, and by establishing sequence of events properly; (3) After accomplishing numbers 1 and 2, language teachers are now ready to teach grammar corresponding to the language functions and notions established at the very outset employing appropriate language activities. For instance, language teachers could introduce imperative sentences to their students utilizing the language functions and notions of giving instructions/directions.
Once those steps are systematically observed by all language teachers, learning the target language, English, among the learners would become easier and functional—since this is a life-long type of learning deemed necessary in doing and accomplishing future tasks. As deduced, integrative theory of Canale and Swain is very much functional in the teaching of grammar to students. -Dr. Jerry G. Roble

A teacher is…

"One who, in his youth, admired teachers."
H.L Menken

Principles of Automaticity and Meaningful Learning and other related concepts

Reflection #2:

It is so refreshing to be able to read once again articles on topics like these. Basically, the principles are not new. In fact, these have been discussed and studied through all these years by psychologists, theorists and scholars on language learning and teaching. And what’s good with this is that even if there are so many principles presented by different theorist, they do not quite clash with each other rather they complement from one principle to another. I have heard of these theories way back my college years and have been thoroughly discussed by our language professors may it be in strategies of teaching or in psychology of teaching. As education students, we were exposed to these different theories. It is just that no matter how very common and maybe over studied these principles are, these are also forgotten, if not disregarded most of the times by educators hence, the cause of failure in handling language classes. And I am glad to have relearned these things that are why I said it is so refreshing.

Honestly, I go for the cognitive principles specifically the principles of Automaticity and meaningful learning among all others. I find these more realistic and applicable. In my teaching experience I have always believed on the innate knowledge of students and their capability to learn the natural way because accordingly there is already that lexicon in every man’s system. Language is learned automatically without going through a certain process and procedure. It means that it is built on and never has it required much effort. This is quite true for first langauge learners. But even with the second language learners, learning is automatic; it is as if they already know this information without going through the detail of learning it. It means that there is no such pattern like this is what is supposed to be learned first and this is what are not supposed to be learned. In this principle, automatic learning is learning all at once without much effort.

I believe there is nothing wrong with this principle as this actually addresses the natural way of a child to learn. However, that Automaticity alone defeats the purpose of acquiring proficient learning because for that previous knowledge to be worthwhile, it has to have meaning. In other words, language learning should be meaningful. And this is quite true. It suggests that as a child learns a language, the best, easiest and most meaningful way is associative. This means that each detail of information is associated to sound, symbols, and experience and the likes to make it more meaningful and therefore, there is retention to learning as opposed to rote learning which is learning information in isolated bits that are not connected with one’s existing cognitive structure.

Aside from the two principles I specifically mentioned, all the rest of the principles are contributory to one’s learning. They actually enhance language learning of individual in varied ways. These may be varied and are presented in different principles, views and angles but as I personally see it and as based from my personal experience in language learning and even in my experience as a teacher myself, all these principles have effect on language learning. The impact may differ but in whatever way, they surely contribute to one’s learning.

Man has these different aspects namely cognitive, affective and linguistic, each aspect needs to be tapped and addressed accordingly. In cognitive concept of language learning, motivation is even important as well as the concept of one’s anticipation of reward in learning and so with intrinsic motivation and the important role of strategies and Instructional Materials. Other principles which fall under affective such as language ego, self-confidence, risk – taking and language – culture connection are factual concepts we cannot do away in language learning because it always follows that every time we learn a language, we attribute it to culture thus we cannot just dislodge the notion of language-culture connection. They always go together.

Moreover, the linguistic concept, as I have understood, also speaks about Noam Chomsky’s Nativist theory of Language Acquisition. Everything, as I have mentioned in my previous earlier, works together as an important entity in an individual’s language learning.

Lastly, let me wind up this reflection with my own notion on language learning based from the theories I have read. I strongly believe that no isolated principle or theory will ever work best in isolation as far as language learning is concerned. They definitely work hand in hand and are quite true in language acquisition. All have important contribution in language learning. But it is not necessary that all individuals have gone through or would go through the same pattern in language learning.

Acquisition vs. Learning

Reflection #1:

Sometimes it is thought that acquisition and learning are the same but as far as second language learning is concerned, these are two different processes. In Krashen’s Monitor Model (1981, 1982), it has been described that both “acquired” and “learnt” knowledge are located at the left brain. However, the difference between the two is that, the acquired knowledge or implicit knowledge is located in the language area while the learnt or explicit knowledge is not but is available for monitoring purposes. According to the underlying principle of this theory, acquisition is a subconscious process and of “acquiring” a language as a result of an individual’s exposure and participation to natural communication. Unconsciously while an individual interacts he unknowingly absorbs and acquires new language and are stored in the language area. Without giving much effort, the speaker acquires the language because of his constant and natural exposure. The important thing here is that the communicators’ understand each other and are a able to decode the meaning of what the other person is communicating. On the other hand, learning occurs as a result of conscious study of the formal properties of the language. This involves grammar structure, sounds and meaning.

I agree with the proponent of this theory. This is definitely true. Learning can never be equated with acquisition. In other words, there is not much effort in acquiring knowledge unlike learning. While it is true that acquisition of knowledge is implicit and that it comes out of the blue, this is being supported by the theory of John Locke which principle suggests that the mind of a child is like a blank slate, a tabula rasa. Therefore, it is capable of recording anything around his environment and I think this is how I have understood Noam Chomsky’s Universal grammar where such principle stipulates that a child acquires this grammar as he uses it to create correct and appropriate grammatical sentences in the language to which they are exposed. In fact, in linguistics, we are also taught of a thing called “lexicon” which refers to our mental dictionary. In other words, the child unconsciously creates a mental dictionary in his language exposure. He maximizes this acquired knowledge in his communication and interaction with other people.

And since learning is a different thing and can never be interchanged with acquisition, as it requires one’s effort and conscious way of studying specific language, one should give much effort to learning than just merely acquiring. This is where the need for formal school comes in. It is in the school where we are taught of the prescriptive grammar as the school is the authority to give rules in second language learning.

The question now is how this theory can be best applied in actual language teaching practice for second language learning. Just as how simple the question is, the answer is also very simple and maybe in some ways, hard to comprehend. But basically, this theory can be best applied in our own teaching field, specifically in language teaching. We start with the micro before we go to the macro. Teachers are supposed to maximize the innate language ability of the child and capitalize this for him to learn the macro way in language. We cannot expect a child to learn other languages unless we learn their language (their legitimate system) and never reject it and maximize this child’s exposure in his own right for him to learn wider and broader knowledge by connecting his own language to what is acceptable and understood universally.

When we apply this to our class (where students have their own language that we sometimes don’t understand), we cannot enforce our own and teach them other languages but as I have said earlier, we allow them to connect this previous learning to what is accepted universally. That way, we open their doors to learning that is more worthwhile and at the same time we are motivating a child to love “to learn” rather than “hate to learn” language. We should not enforce language learning to a child as something that is hard to do as this will create trauma to a child’s experience. But we should make them realize that indeed it is part of their system and that there’s nothing they should be frightened of about language learning and development.

As teachers or language teachers, our biggest role is to enhance love for learning among individuals and make them feel good that they are not discriminated. We should make them feel accepted and that whatever he has learned is something that makes him who he is and the things that we will help him learn can help him who will he become in the future. Definitely, we could not unlearn what the child has already learned, in that sense, as language is innate among individuals, it is just imperative to enhance his own language so that he will become more productive.

The bottom line is, language is part of man’s person as he is. And that it functions as an important element for his communication at the time he started to reach out and communicate with others even before he starts to walk. In other words, we don’t teach and change a child as far as language development is concerned but we are supposed to develop in him what he has stored already in his system. In short, we can capitalize his acquired knowledge, allow our students to collate and connect his acquired knowledge to learning so that his second language learning can be easier and interesting.

A message of thanks to all GREAT TEACHERS in this world

thank you for being such wonderful teachers, exemplary role models, and caring people. Thank you for knowing your subjects and sharing your knowledge. Thank you for not being afraid to treat students like real people. Thank you for showing acceptance, approval, and appreciation. These are all gifts that are so important to a student's development and that your students will always remember, just as they will also remember you.

Words of encouragement, a little respect and simple gestures of kindness from a teacher promote the perfect climate for students to study, learn, and grow. Your attitude translates into a spirit of friendliness and goodwill toward others in a sometimes unfriendly world. Progress is easier in an atmosphere of creative, freedom, joy, and ease and you foster the feeling in your classroom.

I salute the good work you have done, I appreciate the people you are, and I hank you for your positive influence. You have passed n invaluable instruction and wisdom and created pleasurable moments associated with learning that will always be sweet memories.

Thank you for answering the call to be teachers. Thank you for the enduring impression you've made in the lives you have touched. Every community needs people like. Your contributions are immeasurable. Your lessons are permanent. You improve our world. You are so important. - Donna Fargo

Teaching as an art

"Not only is there an art in knowing a thing, but also a certain art in teaching it." - Cicero

What is a teacher?

a teacher is someone who sees each child as a unique person
and encourages individual talents and strengths.

a teacher looks beyond each child's face
and sees inside their souls.

a teacher is someone with special touch and a ready smile
who takes time to listen to both sides and always tries to be fair.

a teacher has a caring heart
that respects and understands.

a teacher is someone who can look past disruption and rebellion,
and recognize hurt and pain.

a teacher teaches the entire child
and helps to build confidence and raise self-esteem.

a teacher makes a difference in each child's life
and affects each family

and the future of us all.

- Barbara Cage

metaphor of a teacher's influence

"Imagine a wave, breaking in, pausing, and returning to the ocean. Note that the wave, upon returning to the community carries with it a residue, a part of the sacred shore."

-Foster & Little, 1980