Whenever a teacher teaches, she makes assumptions about how students learn, but so often she fails to fully consider what these assumptions are. To develop as teachers, we need to be constantly questioning our assumptions. Teaching technique is not enough. Technique is the icing on the cake, and so often fits into place once we are aware of more fundamental assumptions. A teacher with the most wonderful techniques in the world will not succeed unless she is aware of herself and aware of where all these techniques are taking her students.
Whenever a teacher says, "Repeat after me," she is making the assumption that one human being learns effectively by repeating after another human being. Whenever she praises a student, she is making the assumption that praise will help the student. But are these assumptions correct? Has she ever really thought about these things, and considered all the possible arguments for and against, or does she do them automatically without being aware of her assumption
Many Japanese students study English at school for years but retain very little of what they have learned. Many Japanese students can perform well in the classroom when the teacher is there, but can't use English outside the classroom. Many Japanese students use English like parrots rather than like thinking human beings. These problems, and many like them, cannot be solved until we all deeply question the assumptions we make when teaching. It's not good enough to teach according to common sense, or follow the techniques of some famous writer or a textbook published by a famous publisher. The concept of "common sense" just stops us from thinking and questioning for ourselves, and we have to ask what situation that famous writer was writing for or that textbook originally published for, and what the differences are between those situations and our own. A method developed for second language learners in the U.S., or a general textbook written for a number of different teaching situations can often do far more harm than good, especially if we don't look closely at the assumptions on which the method or textbook are based.
For example, it is sometimes assumed that we should input language and not expect students to produce it before they are ready to do so. There are many excellent arguments in favor of adopting this approach in a class of second language learners, which is the kind of situation where the approach became famous, but with Japanese students it so often fails. Most Japanese students are never ready to really produce the language.
Even when Output Approaches are used, it is very often assumed that a teacher should model language before students produce it. What so often happens in Japan is that the students go through the motions of doing the exercises and activities the teacher sets up for them, but still can't really produce the language by themselves outside the class. As soon as the teacher models a language point, she is sending out the message that it is the students' role to follow the teacher. The learning environment becomes a classroom. It doesn't matter how enjoyable the activities are, it was the teacher that provided the spark that started it all off. But in a real-life communicative situation there is no teacher and there is nobody else to provide that spark, and if teachers consistently model language the student isn't being trained for that situation.
Creating a Need
Too many approaches and too many course books assume that students need English, at least to some extent. But do most Japanese students really feel they need English? High school students often need English to pass entrance exams to university, but it's a particular kind of English, and to most of the students it doesn't really matter if they are able to use English after the examinations. They may understand with their heads that English will come in useful some day, but not really with their hearts.
Japan is a very comfortable country where people can get by very well without using English. It's not like some countries where English is a passport to a good job, or where being able to speak English is a way out of poverty. There is little passion for English in Japan. Even those Japanese people who work for large companies with overseas branches usually only start to study English hard when they find out they will be transferred abroad or to a section that requires a lot of English.
This must all sound very negative. Does it mean we might as well give up and go home? Certainly not! All it means is that any approach we use that assumes students need or want English is generally doomed to failure in Japan. Almost any exercise that feels like something the teacher wants the students to do will make little impression. Whether it's a listening exercise, a gap-fill, a communicative task, it makes no difference. Students will just fall into the role of passive followers. And anything academic, or that has a classroom feel to it is bound to fail except with that small percentage of students who will succeed anyway.
In Japan, before we can go anywhere, we have to "create a need." We have to stimulate students' genuine interest in what we want them to learn. We have to train them to initiate the learning process, build their ability to ask questions, and stimulate them to want to explore the fascinating world of English. Most importantly, we have to generate genuine emotions and curiosity and make a classroom not feel like a classroom. Much of this applies to learning situations all over the world, but it applies ten times as much in Japan. Half measures are ineffective. Any technique which doesn't start with these assumptions is missing the point in Japan.
Accepting Students as They Are
This doesn't mean we have to get out of the classroom and have classes in the park or always do very lively and dramatic activities. To do so would be following an assumption that students will be motivated and enjoy the freedom of this kind of approach. However, many Japanese students are more likely to find this style of lesson intimidating. Before we can go anywhere, we need to accept the students for what they are and get on the same wavelength as them. If they are noisy, we can be noisy, and if they are quiet and sensitive, we can be quiet and sensitive, too. We have no right to assume that students should be noisy or should be physically active, and if we do assume this, we shouldn't be surprised by the results. We need to generate a comfortable non-threatening atmosphere where the students can be themselves, and break down the traditional student-teacher relationship in order to curb students' tendency to simply follow the teacher.
So What Should We Do?
We make assumptions all the time: every time we prepare a lesson, every time we open the door to a classroom, every time we open our mouths. I have only touched on the subject in this article. If we want to develop our teaching, all of these assumptions need to be questioned, not just the one or two I've mentioned here. So what should we do? How should we go about questioning these assumptions?
Clearly, we need to adopt the attitude that nothing is sacred, and we need to debate fundamental points with other teachers and our students. It also helps to look at other disciplines. It is often shocking to find that so many ELT classroom techniques have no theoretical justification. It is as if ELT has developed its own logic. I would suggest that to draw on psychology and social psychology can be particularly helpful. All aspects of our teaching need a psychological justification. By turning to psychology and looking closely at many of the debates in that discipline, it becomes much easier to see many of the assumptions we are making in the English classroom.
It is time for ELT and psychology to become much more closely linked. Internationally, this is beginning to happen more, but not enough has been done that specifically relates to the ELT situation in Japan. It's time to have more debate on this, and it's time for all of us to have a much closer look at the assumptions we are making.