Author: Alexandra Koukoumialou

Should we use the learners’ native language in class?  

That is quite a common question, usually in the form of whether this is a “good” or a “bad” thing to do in class. Although this is not how I would approach this matter, since practically nothing in EFL is black or white, I do see the value of discussing this from the point of view of best practices.

This is what I’ll try to cover:

• How this debate started, in the light of learning theories and methods
• How the issue has evolved since then: changes in the teaching/learning environment over the years
• How using L1 or L2 can become a power tool
• Whether there are any benefits in using L1 and at which points in the lesson
• What problems can arise from the use of L1 and why

So, if you were looking for a quick answer, you are not in the right place 😊

In the beginning, there was the Direct Method.

Back in the late 1800s – early 1900s, this method was developed in Europe, in a response to the Grammar-Translation Method that dominated classrooms until then. The Direct Method (or Natural Method) banished the use of L1 in the classroom, insisting that translation has no place in language learning.  More specifically: [1]

• The teacher only spoke in L2.
• Only everyday vocabulary and phrases were taught.
• Both speech and listening comprehension were taught.
• Grammar was taught inductively: the learners had to work out the rules for themselves.
• New teaching points were introduced orally.
• Oral communication skills were practised through carefully constructed teacher-student question and answer exchanges, e.g., Where is the cat? It is behind the box.
• Correct pronunciation (where correct means native-speaker accent) and grammar were emphasised.
• Vocabulary was taught either through realia (concrete objects) or elicitation: never through translation.

The Direct Method played a key role in elevating native speakers as “better” teachers than non-native speakers: an attitude that still prevails in many parts of the world nowadays. More about that in another post, if you like 😉

But this is 2022!

A lot has changed since the Direct Method was first introduced, and later replaced by other approaches focusing more on vocabulary, grammar and reading, such as situational language teaching, the audiolingual approach, and communicative language teaching, to name but a few that followed.

• Classes have become increasingly multilingual, especially international on-line classes. Technological advances made on-line multilingual classes possible, and COVID forced millions into online communication and learning. There is no common L1 to rely on and use in class.
• Society has changed and “correct” RP accents are no longer the norm. Other varieties of English have become acceptable and are being taught around the world.
• Learners have more practical expectations from their lessons: the focus has shifted from sounding British/ American to being able to communicate successfully, even with mistakes. Let’s not forget that globalisation and huge immigration issues have merged populations and cultures that had previously come into little contact with each other. As a result, English has become a lingua franca for millions who use it for survival reasons: basic communication skills are at the forefront.
• The present exam-obsessed situation in many language schools (a result of an exam-obsessed educational culture in many countries) has delegated speaking to one of the 4 or 5 exam papers. More emphasis is given to correct grammar and vocabulary, which can help learners succeed in an exam and can be explained in L1 if possible and necessary.
• Also, let us not forget that a lot of English phrases are now used as part of young people’s everyday language, as a result of English-speaking culture becoming prevalent all over the world, from Greece to Korea. This blurs the lines between L1 and L2, making an already complex situation even more complicated.
• Finally, more and more teachers are getting trained and have realised that teaching is not about speaking the language with an impressive accent: it is rather about having the skills and the craftmanship needed to negotiate the modern language classroom successfully.

I could go on but I’m trying my best to be brief (not my forte!)  

Are we all the same?

This question may seem strange to some but it touches on a very sensitive issue: the balance of power in a class. What I am going to describe now is perhaps more pertinent to a class of young learners or teenagers, rather than in an adult learner class, but still quite common in many learning contexts.

It is considered natural that teachers are de facto in a position of superiority over the learners, and that they are assigned more power over the learning process.  As a result, teachers are given more freedom of choice as to what should (not) be said in class.  Even if they resort to L1 in their explanations, they may still expect the learners to use L2 at all times. Needless to say, this does not really make sense and can create some awkward situations like:

• The learners perceive this as an injustice and “defy” the teacher by using what is expressly forbidden, the L1, giving rise to a variety of discipline problems.
• The learners do not have the linguistic resources to use L2 at all times, and as a result they feel frustrated and ineffectual.
• At the hands of certain teachers, forbidding learners to use L1 in the classroom is another weapon in their arsenal, enabling them to exert more power over their learners and control the learning process.

Needless to say, such situations are not conducive to learning.

At this point, I’ll have to come to a halt as this post is getting too long.  If you want to find out whether I think it is actually bad for learners to use L1 in class, please follow me into Part 2 😊

[1] Source: Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching, Richards and Rodgers, CUP