Start afresh or return? The impact of the Reform Movement on northern German English language teaching

IF 0.2 3区 文学 Q2 HISTORY
Tim Giesler
{"title":"Start afresh or return? The impact of the Reform Movement on northern German English language teaching","authors":"Tim Giesler","doi":"10.1080/17597536.2021.1996088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The 19th century Reform Movement is often regarded as a ‘language teaching innovation’ or as a contribution to ‘a questioning and rejection of the Grammar-Translation Method’ (Richards and Rodgers 2001: 7). This view usually fails to explain why ‘direct’ methods focusing on functional aspects of language teaching had already been in use for centuries, while Grammar-Translation Methods are still widely popular. One explanation could be the distinction between the Reformers’ influence on the theoretical debate on the one hand and their impact on teaching practice on the other. In the late 1960s, Rülcker investigated the impact of Reform Methodology on French language teaching by analysing German school programmes (Schulprogramme). He stated that in spite of some traces of Reform Methods, French language teaching until the First World War was still mainly based on grammar and translation (Rülcker 1969: 35-37). In my paper, I take a similar view on English language education by looking at the Reform Movements’ impact on Realschule (middle school) curricula in northern Germany and focus on the question whether stronger traces of Reform Methodology can be found in this context. This seems plausible as learning English was generally underlined by more practical reasons than learning other languages, and Bremen schools in particular had been the first ones in the German context to introduce English as a first foreign language with a traditionally stronger functional focus (cf. Giesler 2018a). I focus my analysis on Bremen school programmes which – compared to modern curricula – not only show desired methodological designs, but can be understood as more closely documenting actual teaching practices, and I use these insights to question the originality of some of the Reformers’ ideas, the validity of some of their claims and, by extension, the strength of their impact on teaching practice.","PeriodicalId":41504,"journal":{"name":"Language & History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language & History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17597536.2021.1996088","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

ABSTRACT The 19th century Reform Movement is often regarded as a ‘language teaching innovation’ or as a contribution to ‘a questioning and rejection of the Grammar-Translation Method’ (Richards and Rodgers 2001: 7). This view usually fails to explain why ‘direct’ methods focusing on functional aspects of language teaching had already been in use for centuries, while Grammar-Translation Methods are still widely popular. One explanation could be the distinction between the Reformers’ influence on the theoretical debate on the one hand and their impact on teaching practice on the other. In the late 1960s, Rülcker investigated the impact of Reform Methodology on French language teaching by analysing German school programmes (Schulprogramme). He stated that in spite of some traces of Reform Methods, French language teaching until the First World War was still mainly based on grammar and translation (Rülcker 1969: 35-37). In my paper, I take a similar view on English language education by looking at the Reform Movements’ impact on Realschule (middle school) curricula in northern Germany and focus on the question whether stronger traces of Reform Methodology can be found in this context. This seems plausible as learning English was generally underlined by more practical reasons than learning other languages, and Bremen schools in particular had been the first ones in the German context to introduce English as a first foreign language with a traditionally stronger functional focus (cf. Giesler 2018a). I focus my analysis on Bremen school programmes which – compared to modern curricula – not only show desired methodological designs, but can be understood as more closely documenting actual teaching practices, and I use these insights to question the originality of some of the Reformers’ ideas, the validity of some of their claims and, by extension, the strength of their impact on teaching practice.
重新开始还是返回?改革运动对德国北部英语教学的影响
摘要19世纪的改革运动通常被视为“语言教学创新”,或是对“语法翻译方法的质疑和排斥”的贡献(Richards和Rodgers 2001:7)。这种观点通常无法解释为什么关注语言教学功能方面的“直接”方法已经使用了几个世纪,而语法翻译方法仍然广受欢迎。一种解释可能是改革者对理论辩论的影响和他们对教学实践的影响之间的区别。20世纪60年代末,Rülcker通过分析德国学校课程(Schulprogram),研究了改革方法论对法语教学的影响。他指出,尽管有一些改革方法的痕迹,但在第一次世界大战之前,法语教学仍然主要基于语法和翻译(Rülcker 1969:35-37)。在我的论文中,我对英语教育持类似的看法,通过观察改革运动对德国北部中学课程的影响,并关注在这种背景下是否能找到更有力的改革方法论痕迹。这似乎是合理的,因为学习英语通常比学习其他语言有更实际的原因,尤其是不来梅学校是德国背景下第一批将英语作为第一外语引入的学校,传统上更注重功能(参见Giesler 2018a)。我将分析重点放在不来梅学校的课程上,与现代课程相比,这些课程不仅展示了所需的方法设计,而且可以被理解为更紧密地记录了实际的教学实践。我利用这些见解来质疑改革者的一些想法的独创性、他们的一些主张的有效性,其对教学实践影响的力度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Language & History
Language & History Multiple-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
20.00%
发文量
13
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信