30 Language Teaching Methods (quickly)

read a quick recap of 30 different language teaching methods

I read Thornbury’s 30 Language Teaching Methods so you don’t have to, and here’s a quick recap with the good, the bad, and what we can implement in our own classrooms to improve our teaching practice.

1. Total Immersion: the idea is to recreate the learning of L1 (though Second Language Acquisition tells us the processes for learning a second language are different), and round-the-clock exposure, which is ideal, but learners not always integrate in the new community. Another issue is that, since there is no instruction, learners don’t receive negative feedback, so they might become effective communicators, but lack grammar structures, with negative repercussions on accuracy, as well as other skills being significantly weaker.
2. The Natural Method / Approach: learning happens through communication, with the focus on meaning (which is good!). Grammar explanation and error correction (yikes!) are discouraged .
3. The Direct Method: language should be taught directly, so no translation. The focus is on spoken language, with the idea that we acquire an L2 the same way we acquire an L1 (spoiler: we don’t). Associations between language items and real objects is the basis of this method. The takeaway would be to maximise chances of exposure to the target language.
4. The Oral Method: language study is a habit-forming process, and the initial focus is on receptive skills, as it is believed learners need this “incubator” period. This is paired, initially, with imitation, in order to “fix” the target items in your memory. The good thing they got was the importance of lexical chunks (to develop fluency), the value of implicit learning, the importance of comprehensible input, and scaffolding. On the other hand, the hyper-focus on accuracy and the slim chances for learners to make mistakes is something we can let go of.
5. The Reading Method: no surprises here when I tell you that the focus and ultimate goal is reading. Texts are graded, and learners are encouraged to infer meaning from context (which is an important learning strategy). Reading aloud also occurs, to strengthen the relationship between written and spoken word.
6. The Audiolingual Method: similar to 4, habit formation and avoidance of translation are at the core of this method. A typical lesson would focus on pattern practice, changing some elements each time. The main issue is that it focuses too much on imitation, leaving little space to creativity. On the other hand, memorisation of formulaic chunks increases fluency.
7. Total Physical Response: you associate commands with the action. These commands increase in complexity, while learners remain silent while performing the actions, though at a later stage, they can be the ones giving commands. Rather than taking it as it is, this can be useful if integrated, and is often used with young learners (think Simon Says).
8. Explication de Text: this focuses on text analysis, with pages on pronunciation, translation and various exercises. The main issue is that metalinguistic knowledge, as in this case, does not automatically translate to practice. On the other hand, analysing a text more in depth would be a good option against the usual scanning and skimming (think inferencing for higher levels).
9. Text Memorisation: it focuses on rote learning (aka memorisation) of long lists on vocabulary. What is crucial for it to work is deliberate attempts to retrieve and use the memorised materials.
10. Grammar-Translation: translation to and from L1 happens mainly at sentence level, rather than text, which is easier to control, but not ideal for learners, as they will miss out on coherence and cohesion. The one thing we can consider is the re-evaluation of translation in the classroom as a helpful tool rather than something to chastise.
11. The Lexical Approach: grammar is no longer the main focus, but lexis is: word groups, collocations, patterns and formulaic language. The idea is that language is primarily lexical, and not grammatical, and materials should be text rather than sentence-based. This is all positive, and as a con I would say that finding course books and materials that favour this approach might be more difficult to find, though many are currently catching up.
12. Text-Based Instruction: we go beyond the sentence, and work at text level, so the curriculum is text-based, and lessons focus on features of genre, as well as their social and cultural functions. The issue though, is that lessons can be dry, and are mostly written.
13. The Comparative Method: based on contrastative analysis, so the differences in languages. We like that new knowledge is constructed on prior knowledge.
14. The Situational Approach: language use is entirely context-dependent, and the situation becomes material for the lesson itself, as well as the core of the syllabus. It is an inductive approach, so we start with an example, moving on to rules of form and use. This provides opportunities for guided discovery, and to see language in context. On the other hand, if strictly followed, the approach presents quite a rigid format, with pre-selected language (so very little chances to deal with emergent language), and a strong focus on accuracy, which might negatively impact fluency.
15. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT): this is what you will read in 90% of language school’s marketing materials, basically. The idea, which most teachers will already be familiar with, is that we help learners develop communicative competences (with whom, when, where, in what manner we communicate) to be effective communicators, so with a main focus on fluency, rather than accuracy. There is a reason why I used the verb help, and that is because the teacher assumes the role of counsellor. In commonly used course books, if you look at the syllabus, you will see it is based around functions e.g. making requests — this is a “weak” version of CLT, as course books, and obviously teachers following the book, tend still to focus greatly on grammar and accuracy.
16. Task-Based Language Teaching (TBL): we move from activities, to what are now called tasks (see Willis). The difference is not only in terminology: a task is an activity where the learner needs to use the target language for a communicative purpose, or goal, in order to achieve an outcome. TBL inverts the order of things, suggesting that out of fluency comes accuracy, so the focus on form comes after the task, not before. Think of it as a more extreme Test-Teach-Test. The benefits are numerous: learners need to “push” their language, the task primes them for the focus on language, and you can then target specific issues. On the other hand, this may be difficult for new teachers, as lessons are more unpredictable, and you need to think on your feet.
17. Competency-Based Teaching: in short, the idea is that learners should be able to do something they could not do before. In order to do this, we have a functional syllabus (similar to 14 and 15), with an analysis of specific behaviours and skills needed to succeed in doing something, which can take the form of can-do statements. It may result too rigid, but if negotiated with learners, so that situations may apply to their actual needs and goals, it could be successful.
18. Whole Language Learning: this approach has quite a few good things going on, such as learner-centredness, the importance of social interaction, and integrated skills. At the core of it, there’s the idea thst language components are learnt through the integrated whole, so we go from the whole to the part. As in TBL, you start with a task, and collaboration is a key component e.g. writing follows a process approach. As for the cons, there is a lack of focus on form, which would still be needed.
19. Content-Based Instruction (CLIL): this is basically the teaching of other subjects through English, hence a “classroom immersion”. Obviously, the syllabus is organised around content/subjects. This is no easy task, as the teacher will need to grade their language, scaffold, and assess both language use as well as correctness of content. On the upside, the content is engaging and real, compared to certain texts and activities that might sometimes be present in the ESL classroom e.g. oh-so-boring invented news articles.
20. DOGME or Teaching Unplugged: knowledge is co-constructed, and lessons are dialogical and learner-led. In its purest form, no materials are allowed but what can be found in the classroom. The idea is that language is supposed to “emerge”, and by removing everything else, we are facilitating this process. Obviously, this is a fluency-first approach, with a strong focus on meaning. The main issue here would be for teachers who rely heavily on materials, who get stressed easily, and for new teachers, as it requires to be highly reactive in order to be able to deal with emergent language. I would suggest this for a change of pace, which might also be welcomed with curiousity and increased motivation by learners. If it feels too extreme, cheat a bit by walking into class with something that sparks conversation, and take it from there. For extra cheating, have a plan B ready in case it proves too difficult (you will be fine but the plan B in your pocket will make you feel more relaxed).
21. Community Language Learning (Counselling): this, as the name suggests, takes from counselling practices, and stresses the vital role of language in building and maintaining communities. Learners, or “clients”, have conversations, translated with the help of the teacher, or “counsellor”. A typical session sees learners in a circle having a conversation, with the teacher translating for them. Then, they repeat until satisfied, and at that point the whole conversation is recorded, played, and then transcribed to work on language. The main issue is that most of the lesson would end up being in L1, which the teacher would need to speak. A takeaway from this would be, though, to reconsider the positive role of translation in the classroom, as well as the benefits of learners being able to listen to themselves.
22. Suggestopedia: this comes with some crazy claims (memorisation of 1000 words in just an hour!!) and ideas (you’ll have to listen to Baroque music). It gets right an important aspect, though, which sometimes we forget about: affective filters, which are lowered through some relaxation techniques and positive suggestions (and this does actually contribute to optimal learning). On the other hand, it is all very… theatrical, which I guess it’s part of the appeal for these intensive classes of 4 hours a day, six days a week.
23. The Silent Way: imagine going to a language lesson, and the teacher barely speaks — this is it! Only the target language is allowed, and visual aids such as cuisinaire rods are used to illustrate and elicit language items. The takeaway for teachers is to rethink our teacher-talking time because, if we have people barely speaking while teaching, do we really need to talk that much?
24. Crazy English & the Rassias Method: this is a two in one as they have their similarities and they are both, as one of the names suggests it, a bit cuckoo. There is a strong focus on drilling, made it more fun and enjoyable through some very theatrical performances. Crazy English believes the tongue to need muscle training (hence drilling), while Rassias expects each student to “speak at least 65 times in a 50-minute lesson — I will leave the maths and logistics of it to you… As crazy (see what I did there?) as it sounds, there is something we could actually take from this: the performative aspects take away fears and inhibitions, which (like in 22), help lowering affective filters.
25. Orientalists: we are in the self-study realm. And this, more than a real method, is a recount of polyglots from a long time ago, and what they did to learn languages. Namely: reliance on memorisation, reading aloud and use of authentic texts — this last one is a very strong yes for me!
26. Prendergast’s “Mastery System”: the self-study method relies heavily on the memorisation of a set of sentences, plus a subset that may be created from the original set, by changing some elements. Grammar explanation is prohibited, which is an issue, I would say. What it gets right is the idea of distributed practice, so short bursts of practice distributed over increasingly longer intervals.
27. Brand name Methods: Assimil, Michael Thomas, Pimsleur: we have structural syllabi and grammar acquired inductively. Vocabulary input is restricted, which we don’t love, and everything is translated and recorded (per 21, this would be our takeaway).
28. Programmed Instruction: Duolingo: from one challenge to another, we have positive reinforcement and gamification, which we love, as well as spaced repetition. On the other hand, our owl friend is a master at providing random sentences, there is little to no creativity involved, and it is strictly an accuracy-first approach, with no interaction.
29. Online Polyglots: this is a generic self-help method, rather than something properly structured. Usually there is a generalised rejection of grammar study, favouring instead communication and fluency, which has its benefits as we know. You will find some interesting things related to learning strategies (which are quite important), such as word cards, spaced repetition, shadowing and so on.
30. Principled Eclicticism: this is what I hope you would take away from this list. The idea is that, based on principles (aka ideas we can justify) we can pick and choose from different methods and approaches in order to help our students. So instead of religiously sticking to a method, we can borrow and create our own Frankenstein method!

If you’ve made it this far, thank you so much! And if you want more, please consider subscribing.

P.S. you can also find me on YouTube, where I have plenty more content related to English teaching.