Many methods for teaching English as a Second Language have developed over the years. While many have fallen by the wayside, others have become widely used in today’s classrooms. Virtually all have provided some kind of ‘stepping stone’, towards an approach or theory, which has ultimately aided the progression of teaching methods as a whole. An approach to teaching is a theory, a perception based on multiple assumptions about how people learn, and how they respond to new languages. It is the ‘Method’, how those theories are put into practice, which sets objectives and presents an organised role, for both teachers and students in the classroom. A method is a specific strategy, a set tasks, which aim to move the student towards achieving the objective, to learn a foreign language.

In nineteenth century Europe, the Grammar Translation Method was the most influential foreign language technique. A technique which profoundly concentrates on grammar, awareness and analysis of the systematic mechanisms used within a language. This method was described by linguist, Leopald Bahlsen as "a veritable forest of paragraphs, and an impenetrable thicket of grammatical rules." (The Teaching Of Modern Languages - Leopald Bahlsen Ph.D. - 1902/1903 -source www.archive.org/stream/teachingofmodern00bahluoft/teachingofmodern00bahluoft_djvu.txt)

When we teach grammar, we teach syntactic rules, the processes by which a language functions. Students follow a gradual path of discovery, learning to read and write. This method was derived from a traditional teaching method, used for students of classical languages. Text is translated methodically and the student memorises the rules and the exceptions to those rules gradually. Understanding literary masterpieces and ancient texts is priority, and this method continues to be favoured for classical languages today. It is successful in what it sets out to achieve, but it is the goals which are limited. No skills are gained with regards to communicative, spontaneous speech, or pronunciation.

The nineteenth century heralded many influential linguists, such as Phonetician and Grammarian, Henry Sweet (1845 – 1912). An Englishman who was referred to as the person “who taught Europe phonetics". (Howatt Anthony Philip Reid; Widdowson, Henry George: A History of English Language Teaching. Oxford University Press (2004 - p198–207). Sweet authored many works on Phonetics and the use of Grammar, with regards to foreign language teaching methods. It was his first publication, the ‘Phonetic Handbook’, in 1877, which brought about a ‘revolution’. It promoting the systematic teaching of speech, therefore moving away from utter independence of the Grammar Translation Method, and upon ancient texts. Sweet’s books continue to be published and used today. His ideas continue to be highly influential and are an incorporative, core consideration to the more popular TESOL methods used today. The Grammar Translation Method was used in schools right up until the sixties, therefore the most influential foreign language teaching method for, quite literally, decades.

Contemporary theories and methodologies have seen many innovative approaches evolve, especially over recent years. Many notable linguists have worked towards developing increasingly effective methods, by using various ‘teaching principles’. The intention of each new method being to ‘progress’ and improve upon it’s predecessor. However, this does not mean to suggest, previous methods should be regarded as ineffective, therefore useless. Moreover, evolution is a response to the changing ‘needs’ of a modern world, and for the very same reasons, The Grammar Translation Method was ‘destined’ to evolve. Today, communicative speech is considered an important, necessary and integral part of learning a foreign language. Understanding and being able to communicate proficiently reaches beyond the ability to translate.

Post war, and during the depression , various experimental foreign language teaching methods were being evolved. The Direct Method exchanges the teaching of a foreign language, using grammar texts and long vocabulary lists, in favour of pronunciation. Speech being advocated from the onset. It’s theory and method encompasses the principles of a child, learning speech and communication for the first time, through association, activity and participation. Therefore, responses to the target language are through a natural progression (hence, referred to as the ‘Natural Method).

The Direct Method emphasises the use of the target language, avoiding use of the mother tongue and therefore ‘translation’. In context, a child would not rely on a first language to learn it’s mother tongue. Adopting the direct method, students learn to correctly pronounce the language, in a natural and responsive way. They also absorb the whole, entire ‘meaning’ of their target language. Fundamental to each ‘contemporary’ method today, is the psychological aspect of learning a second language. That is, cultural absorption, which in turn, leads to the true ‘understanding’ of any foreign language.

The Direct Method concentrates on oral communication, first and foremost. Therefore students learn to think and speak in their target language. Reading is introduced later, once the student has a good understanding of speech, with a gradual progression into writing and spelling. Therefore, expanding the students use and understanding of the target language naturally. Diller, Karl Conrad (1978 - The Language Teaching Controversy Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House) describes the Direct Method step by step. Beginning with simple question/answer lessons, requiring students to name common objects around them, for example, books, table, chair etc Once a good grasp of general vocabulary has been achieved, students are introduced to verbs and encouraged to use the language in a more ‘complete’ and structured way. Therefore, progressing naturally in the use of sentences and grammatical structure. The Direct method is highly motivating to students. Being able to use the target language immediately means they feel a relationship with it, right from the start.

Two approaches, theories, are used in TESOL methodologies. The deductive approach reflects more traditional teaching methods, the inductive approach relates to more modern day methods and practices. “The Deductive Approach represents a more traditional style of teaching in that the grammatical structures or rules are dictated to the students first” (Rivers, Wilga M., Temperley, Mary S. A Practical Guide to the Teaching of English as a Second or Foreign Language. Oxford University Press, 1978 - p.110 ) A methodology which represents a certain similarity to the Grammar Translation Method. Priority is for students to learn grammar structures and the rules which govern them. Here, the teacher remains the ‘nucleus’ of the class, by directly explaining and presenting new syntax to them.

“The Inductive Approach represents a more modern style of teaching where the new grammatical structures or rules are presented to the students in a real language context” (Goner, Phillips, and Walters. Teaching Practice Handbook: Structures: Grammar and Function. Heinemann, 1995 - p.135). As with the Direct Method, students learn how to structure the target language within ‘real’ situations, therefore, in context. Structure is understood through practice and examples taken from everyday life situations, by using objects around the classroom, horoscopes, menus etc “The teacher's role is to provide meaningful contexts to encourage demonstration of the rule, while the students evolve the rules from the examples of its use and continued practice” (Rivers, Wilga M., Temperley, Mary S. A Practical Guide to the Teaching of English as a Second or Foreign Language. Oxford University Press, 1978 - p.110 )

Both these theories of approach, and therefore the teaching methods adopted to carry them out, have their advantages and disadvantages. “The deductive approach can be effective with students of a higher level, who already know the basic structures of the language, or with students who are accustomed to a very traditional style of learning and expect grammatical presentations” (Goner, Phillips, and Walters. Teaching Practice Handbook: Structures: Grammar and Function. Heinemann, 1995 - pg 134). For students of a lower level however, especially young students, this complex approach to language rules and syntax is less suitable. A more Inductive Approach, for example using the ‘Direct Method’, allows students to focus on using the language. Learning through practice, without being bombarded with rules and regulations which can often inhibit progress. Students are encouraged to participate more, the emphasis being upon the language, not the teacher. This approach has been found to be highly successful when teaching English as a second language. However, students accustomed to more traditional methods find this approach difficult. Therefore, it is paramount for a teacher to be aware of the students needs and responses to both these approaches, in order to construct lessons aptly. “Understanding the disadvantages and advantages of both approaches, may help the teacher to vary and organize the EFL/ESL lesson, in order to keep classes interesting and motivating for the students” (Goner, Phillips, and Walters. Teaching Practice Handbook: Structures: Grammar and Function. Heinemann, 1995 - p.129).

Frenchman, Paul Passy, was credited as ‘creator’ of the terminology, “Direct Method”. Also referred to as the ‘Natural or Phonetic Method’. Realistically, Passy was simply the ‘reformer’ who summarised the aims of his predecessors and contemporaries. Francois Gouin's ‘Series Method’ was inspiration for the famous advocate of the Direct Method, Charles Berlitz. Francois Gouin wrote ‘L'art d'enseigner et d'étudier les langues’, first published in the UK as ‘The Art of Teaching and Studying Languages’ in 1894. In this book, he describes his failure to be able to speak the German language. Gouin was a Latin teacher, who moved to Hamburg in order to learn the language, therefore used the Grammar Translation Method. Without actually entering into conversation, with the target language, he memorised almost two hundred and fifty irregular verbs and more than thirty thousand words from the German dictionary. He also memorised a complete book of German grammar, translated Goethe and Schiller. However, ultimately, he could not hold a conversation with native speakers. Gouin returned to France and was struck by the fact his young nephew had learned to speak French during the time he was away.

So why had this child been able to learn a language, yet he had failed? Gouin observed the boy in order to find out, noticing that young children learn the concept of a language through a sequence of related ‘events’. The ‘Series Method’ was conceived from his conclusions. Gouin believed such direct "translation” of experience into words, makes for a "living language". (The Art of Learning and Studying Foreign Languages -1880 - Francois Gouin - p59) The Series Method was taught language as a sequence of events and experiences. For instance, leaving the house, opening the door. There are two main differences, between the ‘Series Method’ and the ‘Direct Method’. The Series Method involves learning primary vocabulary through translation, using the student’s mother tongue. “While Gouin believed that language was rule-governed, he did not believe it should be explicitly taught” (Diller, Karl Conrad (1978). The Language Teaching Controversy) Gouin’s method was short lived, although groundbreaking.