What is the worst pain you have experienced? What were the circumstances? What could others have done to ease your pain? What could you have done?
Sample Solution
Consciousness-Raising rejects Natural Approach which splits the learning in conscious and unconscious processes. The approach also rejects the linear form of grammar learning and seeks a deeper view of it. Some researchers do not accept the concept that second language acquisition is accumulated gradually and a direct exposition to grammatical rules should be replaced by an inductive manner, thus Consciousness-Raising turns into a process. Others considered that there should be made a distinction between explicit knowledge (received information) and implicit knowledge (an analytical process of language features). The outcome of analysing Consciousness-Raising on grammar is that it can be done explicitly and implicitly, and a traditional form-focused approach should not be the goal for teaching grammar. For Ellis , consciousness-raising offers learners explicit knowledge, helping them to create implicit connection systems. Long considered that there should be four reasons to avoid the âmethods trapâ, the first being the fact that all methods believe in error corrections. The second reason is that lesson transcripts excerpts cannot be easily identified as part of some method or another. Next is that there are no long-term advantages or disadvantages of using a certain method. The last reason, according to Long, is that methods do not exist because teachers have their own way of teaching, regardless the support for a method or another. The concluding idea is that teachers care more about what they can achieve in classrooms than the method they use, the most important part being the pedagogical process. According to Nunan , there are two types of grammar: prescriptive and descriptive. While prescriptive grammar is about language structures, the descriptive grammar is about the way people use the language. In the classrooms, grammar tends to be more prescriptive than descriptive, turning into a minus for the learners. Proficient learners, whose knowledge of grammatical structure is advanced, need a descriptive manner to improve even more their acquisition of L2. From the appearance of teaching methods, the syllabuses used were different form one method to another, and most of them were grammar-based. Translation was considered a tool for learners to understand the tasks, and only in Grammar-Translation Method, was used as a learning activity. Some methods like Natural Approach or Total Physical Response rejected grammar and the use of L1 in classrooms, emphasizing the necessity of using L2 to facilitate its acquisition. As Nunan stated:>
Consciousness-Raising rejects Natural Approach which splits the learning in conscious and unconscious processes. The approach also rejects the linear form of grammar learning and seeks a deeper view of it. Some researchers do not accept the concept that second language acquisition is accumulated gradually and a direct exposition to grammatical rules should be replaced by an inductive manner, thus Consciousness-Raising turns into a process. Others considered that there should be made a distinction between explicit knowledge (received information) and implicit knowledge (an analytical process of language features). The outcome of analysing Consciousness-Raising on grammar is that it can be done explicitly and implicitly, and a traditional form-focused approach should not be the goal for teaching grammar. For Ellis , consciousness-raising offers learners explicit knowledge, helping them to create implicit connection systems. Long considered that there should be four reasons to avoid the âmethods trapâ, the first being the fact that all methods believe in error corrections. The second reason is that lesson transcripts excerpts cannot be easily identified as part of some method or another. Next is that there are no long-term advantages or disadvantages of using a certain method. The last reason, according to Long, is that methods do not exist because teachers have their own way of teaching, regardless the support for a method or another. The concluding idea is that teachers care more about what they can achieve in classrooms than the method they use, the most important part being the pedagogical process. According to Nunan , there are two types of grammar: prescriptive and descriptive. While prescriptive grammar is about language structures, the descriptive grammar is about the way people use the language. In the classrooms, grammar tends to be more prescriptive than descriptive, turning into a minus for the learners. Proficient learners, whose knowledge of grammatical structure is advanced, need a descriptive manner to improve even more their acquisition of L2. From the appearance of teaching methods, the syllabuses used were different form one method to another, and most of them were grammar-based. Translation was considered a tool for learners to understand the tasks, and only in Grammar-Translation Method, was used as a learning activity. Some methods like Natural Approach or Total Physical Response rejected grammar and the use of L1 in classrooms, emphasizing the necessity of using L2 to facilitate its acquisition. As Nunan stated:>
