Talk:Audio-Lingual Method

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The audiolingual method: problems with the entry

There are several major inaccuracies in your entry concerning the audiolingual method. Thus joining it with anything is problematic.

First, your entry associates the audiolingual method with the work at Michigan in the 1950's (actually begun in 1940/41). In fact, the audiolingual method had nothing to do with the philosophy or methodology used at Michigan to teach English in the ELI there. Indeed C. C. Fries himself was opposed to audiolingual methodology. He advocated what he called 'the oral approach' (with 'approach' interpreted as in the article by Edward Anthony 'approach, method and technique'). The oral approach had NOTHING to do philosophically with conditioning nor with Skinnerean psychology.

Second, both the oral approach and the audiolingual approach had their beginnings much earlier than the 1950's. Fries always said that he first began to develop his oral approach to teach classical Greek (his first teaching job). The audio lingual method, as I understand it, was an outgrowth of the army teaching materials developed during the second world war. (A number of young linguists were intimately involved with that project.)

It is of interest that none of the references mentioned in the entry were produced by the people involved at the time.

The entry is correct when it speaks of the integration of linguistics and teaching English as a foreign language at Michigan. One of CCF's major emphases was that approaches to practical problems such as teaching foreign languages should be based on the best current knowledge about the nature of language.

I would suggest that you delete all references to Fries and Michigan from the page on the audiolingual method. Then, if you wish to do so, add a separate entry or set of entries concerning Fries, the oral approach etc.

--12.183.38.194 09:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Peter H. Fries