Academia.eduAcademia.edu
European Journal of English Language Teaching ISSN: 2501-7136 ISSN-L: 2501-7136 Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu Volume 3 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 doi: 10.5281/zenodo.1064135 COMPLEMENTARY LAW IN GRAMMAR-TRANSLATION METHOD Guey, Ching-Chungi Department of Applied English, I-Shou University, Taiwan, ROC Abstract: This paper intends to analyze the Grammar-Translation Method (GTM) on the basis of the perspectives of Complementary Law from Hexagram in Chinese I-Ching, and to answer the 3 questions regarding GTM: 1). Is the combination of Teacher and Student in GTM settings optimal? 2) Is the combination of Material and Methodology in GTM settings optimal? 3) Is the combination of Objective and Assessment in GTM settings optimal? This paper starts with the analysis of the six variables (in three pairs) involved in GTM settings; namely, teacher-student, objective-assessment, and materialmethodology. Each of these variables was specified as yin or yang, depending on its individual feature, and then was examined through the Complementary Law of Chinese I-Ching. The results indicate that the overall effect of GTM is less desirable than expected, as there are two imbalances that exist between Methodology-Material, and between Assessment and Objective. Suggested solutions include replacing behavioral mode of instruction with a constructivist one in Methodology, or to changing productoriented assessment into process-oriented one in GTM settings. As I-Ching was originally developed as a qualitative interpretation, more empirical validation of its accuracy and application is needed. Keywords: grammar translation method, EFL instruction, trigram, hexagram, complementary law Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved. © 2015 – 2017 Open Access Publishing Group 169 Guey, Ching-Chung COMPLEMENTARY LAW IN GRAMMAR-TRANSLATION METHOD 1. Introduction There are various instructional approaches in EFL literature, but few relevant studies have focused on the relationships among the six factors involved in the settings of a given approach. Most of the previous studies focused on part of the variables such as teacher-student relationship (Oxford, Ehrman & Lavine 1991), while others investigated the effects of Combination of different EFL approaches (Mondal, 2012). Most of the EFL instructional literature cover mainly introduction to various approaches (Richards & Rodgers, 2001), or simply the effects of application of certain language teaching approaches (Al Refaai, 2013). Thus, the existing literature is crammed with either hodge-podge or sporadic information, leaving the development of EFL approaches in stagnation. What is needed at the moment is to offer an in-depth perspective regarding each of the EFL instructional approach they choose to apply. This paper tries to adopt a Complementary Law among the six variables involved in GTM [1] settings, to examine whether the relationship among the factors is optimal, and if not, then what suggestions can be made based on the Complementary Law. As mentioned in the previous paper (Guey, 2014), GTM, which was originally developed for CALP (Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency) [2] to help EFL learners master English grammar through induction, deduction, logical inference, imitation and drills. In this paper, we first classified 6 components (factors); namely, student, teacher, material, methodology, objective, and assessment. Next, we further subdivided each of the components into 2 categories: specifically yet arbitrarily, student (active vs. passive), teacher (studentcentered vs. teacher centered), material (rote learning format vs. discovery oriented format), methodology (behavioral .vs. constructivist), objective (knowledge vs. aesthetic), and assessment (process vs. product). For viewing / downloading the full article, please access the following link: https://oapub.org/edu/index.php/ejel/article/view/1208 European Journal of English Language Teaching - Volume 3 │ Issue 1 │ 2017 170