The Structural Approach to the Teaching of English: the Possible Grounds for Dissatisfaction

The structural approach to the teaching of English is technique by which students are taught to master the pattern of sentences. In the words of Menon and Patel, the structural approach is based on the belief that in the learning of a foreign language, mastery of structures is more important than the acquisition of vocabulary. This approach employs techniques of the direct method of teaching. Speech is mainly stressed but reading and writing is not neglected. The structural approach is not a method in the strict sense of the term. It is an approach, a technique, a device which can be used to put into practice any method successfully. It is a way to teach English by using only of the traditional method like grammar translation or direct method etc. According to Prof. B. D. Srivastava, “The structural approach is, in fact, the situational approach of language teaching."

 Thus it is a method of teaching English that focuses on grammar, sentence structures, and language patterns. It aims to provide learners with a systematic understanding of how English works by emphasizing the repetitive practice of language forms. Despite its widespread use, several grounds for dissatisfaction with this approach have been raised over time, especially in the context of modern language teaching.

Objectives of the structural approach –

According to Menon and Patel the following are the objectives of the new structural approach:

1. To lay the foundation of English by establishing through drill and repetition about 275 graded structures.

2. To enable the children to attain mastery over an essential vocabulary of about 3000 root words for active use.

3. To correlate the teaching of grammar and composition with the reading lesson.

4. To teach the four fundamental skills, namely understanding, speaking, reading and writing in the order names.

5. To lay proper emphasis on the aural – oral approach, activity methods and the condemnation of formal grammar for its own sake.

Principles of the structural approach:-

Prof. F. G. French has entitled the following principles underlying the structural Approach:

1. Importance of framing language Habits – The structural approach lays stress on the importance of forming language habit, particularly the habit of forming words in English.

2. Importance of speech – The structural approach is based on the principle of effective used of speech.

 3. Importance pupil’s activity – The structural approach is based on the principles of the pupils’ activity. The importance of pupil’s activity rather than the activity of the teacher is the sure way to learning English.

4. The principle of oral work – Oral work is the sheet anchor of the structural approach. Oral work is the basis and all the rest are built up from it.

5. Each language has its own grammar – Instead of teaching grammar of the target language and its structures are to be taught. Each language has its own grammar.

Main features of structural approach –

The structural approach makes use of the following features for teaching the language.

 Word order – Word order or the patterns of form is very important in English language. Each word in ascertain arrangement has a fixed place which can not be changed. If we do so, we distort the meaning, considering the following arrangements -

a)      Ram killed a snake

b)      A snake killed Ram.

 The presence of Function words – Function words are structural words. They function as the structural links. Function words help in modifying meaning consider the following sentences –

a) I kill a snake.

b) I am killing a snake.

c) I shall kill a snake.

d) I have killed a snake.

e) I have to kill a snake.

The use of a few Inflections: Another important characteristic is that English language makes used of an inflection as compared to other languages. Inflection changes are prominent in the following examples:

a)      In verbs; I play; he plays; I am playing; I played.

b)      In Nouns: One boy; two boys; one man.

c)      In adjective and adverb.

i)                    great –greater – greatest.

ii)                   Great –greatly.

Incorporating these features into the structural approach facilitates a comprehensive understanding of the English language's underlying mechanics. This approach offers learners a strong foundation, enabling them to construct grammatically correct sentences, understand how function words shape meaning, and recognize the power of inflections in conveying precise information. By honing these skills, students not only enhance their language proficiency but also develop a heightened appreciation for the intricacies that make English a versatile and expressive means of communication.

Limitations of the Approach:

The structural approach to teaching English, which gained prominence in the mid-20th century, has been widely utilized in language education. This approach prioritizes the understanding of the underlying grammatical structures and rules of a language. While it has demonstrated effectiveness in certain contexts, there are several potential reasons for dissatisfaction with this approach.

The structural approach to teaching English has inherent limitations, primarily finding its optimal utility in the initial stages of language instruction. Unfortunately, it falls short in prioritizing oral proficiency and dynamic speech engagement, often leading to monotonous repetition of structural elements in verbal lessons. Furthermore, this approach tends to overlook the crucial domains of reading and writing, impeding the comprehensive expansion of children's language acquisition. By disregarding the potential benefits of incorporating students' native languages, the approach misses out on valuable learning opportunities. Moreover, its effective implementation necessitates skilled educators, a resource that is often lacking. Given these challenges and its incompatibility with the context of Indian schools, the structural approach's feasibility and adequacy for covering the syllabus are also questionable.

Neglect of Communication Skills: The structural approach often emphasizes grammar rules and sentence patterns to the detriment of communication skills. Language is a tool for effective communication, and focusing solely on structure may lead to students who can construct grammatically correct sentences but struggle to engage in meaningful conversations or written exchanges.

Lack of Contextual Usage: Language is not learned in isolation but in context. The structural approach may isolate sentence patterns and vocabulary, making it challenging for students to understand how these elements are used naturally in real-life situations. This can result in rote memorization rather than true language acquisition.

Limited Vocabulary Exposure: Vocabulary acquisition is a crucial aspect of language learning. However, the structural approach might not adequately address the importance of learning a wide range of words and phrases. This can hinder students' ability to comprehend diverse texts and express themselves comprehensively.

Monotonous Lessons: Relying heavily on grammar drills and exercises can lead to monotonous and uninspiring lessons. Students may become disengaged due to the repetitive nature of the instruction, potentially impacting their motivation to learn.

Inadequate Speaking Practice: Language is meant to be spoken, yet the structural approach may not provide sufficient opportunities for students to practice speaking. Developing speaking fluency requires practice in real conversations, and a solely structural approach may not prioritize this aspect.

Cultural Disconnection: Language is deeply intertwined with culture. A focus solely on sentence structures may neglect cultural nuances, idiomatic expressions, and the sociocultural context in which language is used. This can lead to a superficial understanding of the language and hinder effective cross-cultural communication.

Limited Creative Expression: Language is a means of creative expression, allowing individuals to convey emotions, thoughts, and ideas in unique ways. The structural approach's rigid focus on rules might stifle students' creativity and hinder their ability to use language expressively.

Uneven Skill Development: While the structural approach may excel in developing grammatical accuracy, it might not equally address other language skills like listening comprehension, reading comprehension, and writing proficiency. This imbalance can result in students who are strong in grammar but struggle in real-world language interactions.

Changing Language Needs: In today's globalized world, the needs of language learners have evolved beyond mere grammatical correctness. Effective communication often requires familiarity with various registers of language, including informal, formal, and digital communication. The structural approach might not adapt well to these changing needs.

In conclusion, while the structural approach to teaching English has its merits, it's essential to acknowledge its potential shortcomings. A more holistic approach that integrates communication skills, cultural awareness, vocabulary enrichment, and creative expression can better prepare learners for real-world language use and meaningful interactions.

👊Drawbacks of Structural Approach:

1. The structural approach has limited application. It is best suited for the early stage of teaching English.
2. The structural approach never emphasizes oral work and speech manipulation. There is blind repetition of structural items during oral teaching.
3. The approach ignores reading and writing children fail to expand their language acquisition.
4. This approach fails to exploit children’s mother tongue.
5. The proper working out of the structural approach requires efficient teachers. There is acute dearth of such teachers.
6. It is not practicable in Indian schools.
7. It will not help cover the syllabus.

Conclusion:

While the Structural Approach to teaching English has its strengths, particularly in providing a solid grammatical foundation, it also has significant limitations. The lack of focus on communication, creativity, and contextual learning can lead to dissatisfaction among both students and teachers. Modern language teaching increasingly emphasizes communicative competence, cultural awareness, and learner autonomy, areas where the Structural Approach falls short. Therefore, while it may be useful for certain aspects of language learning, it should be supplemented with more interactive, student-centered, and communicative techniques to provide a well-rounded language education.

Ardhendu De

References

1. Elizabeth, M. E. S. (2010). Methods of Teaching English. Discovery Publishing House. p. 67. ISBN 978-81-7141-809-1.

2. Arwood, Ellyn (2011). Language Function: An Introduction to Pragmatic Assessment and Intervention for Higher Order Thinking and Better Literacy. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. p. 10. ISBN 978-1-84905-800-1.

3. Farmer, David John (1995). The Language of Public Administration: Bureaucracy, Modernity, and Postmodernity. Tuscaloosa, Alabama: University of Alabama Press. p. 180. ISBN 0-8173-0784-2.

4. Mukalel, C Joseph (2005). Approaches to English Language Teaching. New Delhi: Discovery Publishing House. pp. 58, 59, 61. ISBN 81-7141-400-1.

5.The Teaching of English as a Foreign Language. : Structural Approach,  Thekkey Kottiejath Narrayana Menon, M. S. Patel (n.d.). Google Books. https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Teaching_of_English_as_a_Foreign_Lan.html?id=1Ne1AAAAIAAJ

6. French, F. (1963, December 1). Teaching English as an International Language [English]. Oxford University Press.

7. B.D. Srivastava, Structural Approach to the Technique of English, (1966).