Page |1
“Integrating or Segregating the Language Skills?” That’s the Question! Introduction The language skills; namely, listening, speaking, reading and writing were at first taught in isolation in the traditional approaches. For instance, proponents of the Audio-Lingual Method believed that language is basically oral and therefore the focus was on speaking. Given such an emphasis, it appeared logical to separate language skills. The outcome of this approach was learners who knew the language skills, but were not able to communicate their thoughts especially in writing. Another extreme example is that of the Grammar-Translation Method, which used to teach students to analyze grammar and to translate (usually in writing) from one language to another. This method restricts language learning to a very narrow, non-communicative range that does not prepare students to use the language in everyday life. Taking learners’ communicative incompetence into account, there was a shift away from the traditional model towards the communicative approach. One of the characteristics of the communicative language teaching was the integration of the four skills and their sub-skills to complement each other. According to Hinkel (2010) “To study a language, you may need to break the language into parts. To use it, however, the skills and components must be integrated.” Widdowson (1978) was one of the first linguists to call for integrating the four language skills in language teaching for the purpose of raising learners’ proficiency levels. He argued that “We can talk of skills in respect to usage/grammar, but if we talk about language use/communication, we need a different concept, and perhaps a different term” (Widdowson, 1998, p. 325). In the 1980s and 1990s, a great deal of elaboration and refinement took place in communicative language teaching. As it had to be not only learner-centered but interaction-centered and as authentic as possible to enable students to use the language for purposeful communication. In this respect, post method researchers such as Oxford (2001) claimed that integrated language teaching is supposed to be an effective strategy for language learning as a whole. She used the image of a tapestry to refer to teaching ESL/EFL. According to her: “for the instructional loom to produce a large, strong, beautiful, colorful tapestry, all of the strands must be interwoven in positive ways. For example, the instructor's teaching style must address the learning style of the learner, the learner must be motivated, and the setting must provide resources and values that Skills Integration vs Skills Segregation ______________________________ Mohamed Aymane Sbai, 2016
Page |2
strongly support the teaching of the language.” She adds that the four skills listening, speaking, reading and writing and their components; vocabulary, syntax, pronunciation, spelling, and meaning should be woven well to create the integrated approach. In her words: “If the strands are not woven together effectively and well, the instructional loom is likely to produce something small, weak, ragged, and pale--not recognizable as a tapestry at all” (Oxford 2001). This tapestry leads to optimal ESL/EFL communication when the skills are interwoven during instruction. This is known as the integrated-skill approach. If this weaving together does not happen, the strand consists only of discrete, segregated skills—that do not touch, support, or interact with each other. This is known as the segregated-skill. There are other terms to describe it such as the discrete skill, isolated skill, single skill, and separate skill approach. Another title for this mode of instruction is the language-based approach, because the language itself is the focus of instruction (language for language's sake). In this approach, the emphasis is NOT on learning for authentic communication. In this modest report, by defining pointing out to the deficiencies of the segregated-skill approach along with its two types; total and partial, and examining the integrated skill approach and its modes of instruction; content-based and task-based, we will understand the relevance and the necessity of integrating the skills in the ESL/EFL classrooms. 1. The Segregated-Skill Approach In such an approach, mastery of discrete language skills or subskills, such as listening comprehension, phonics, speaking, or punctuation, is often seen as the key to successful learning, and there is typically a separation of language learning from content learning (Mohan 1986; Cantoni-Harvey 1987). 2. Total skill segregation In the purest form of segregation, language is taught as an end in itself rather than a means to an end, the end being authentic interaction and communication (Dubin and Olshtain 1986). Strictly separate-skill classes sometimes end up concentrating on subsidiary skills like grammar and vocabulary, even though the course title refers to one of the main language skills (listening, reading, speaking, or writing). Memorization rather than understanding is the primary process students are involved in, in these kinds of classes. Motivation, interest, and class involvement quickly decrease when the language is taught in this fragmented, non-communicative way. Skills Integration vs Skills Segregation ______________________________ Mohamed Aymane Sbai, 2016
Page |3
2.1. Partial skill segregation In many cases, an EFL course is labeled by a single skill, but this segregation of language skills is unsuccessful or only partial. Frequently skills other than the targeted one appear. I call this situation partial skill segregation – a circumstance in which the language skills appear at first glance to be isolated in instruction but are actually not separated completely. For instance, in a class on “Intermediate Reading,” the teacher usually gives some or all of the directions orally, thus forcing students to use their listening skills to catch the details of the assignment. In this class students might discuss their readings, using speaking and listening skills and a host of subsidiary skills, such as pronunciation and grammar. Students might be asked to summarize or analyze readings in written form, thus activating their writing skills. However, the focus remains always on one skill over the other. 3. The Integrated Skill Approach In past decades, EFL classes gave prominence to one or two of the four traditional skills separately, sometimes excluding the other three; each skill did not support or interact with each other. Rather, these segregated-skill-oriented (SSI) courses had language itself as the focus of instruction to the extent that excessive emphasis on rules and paradigms taught students a lot about language at the expense of teaching language itself (Brown, 2000: 218). As Oxford (1990) maintains, in segregated skill instruction courses, language learning is separate from content learning, which did not guarantee adequate preparation for later success in academic communication, career-related language use, or even everyday interaction in the language. The opposite of this approach is known as the integrated skills approach, that is, the linking of the language skills for the purpose of real communication. In an instructional approach that favors integrated skills, the skills are interlocked, exactly as they are in everyday life. Practice with any given skill reinforces other skills. Two types of integrated-skill instruction are content-based language instruction and task-based instruction. The first of these emphasizes learning content through language, while the second stresses doing tasks that require communicative language use. Both of these benefit from a diverse range of materials, text- books, and technologies for the ESL or EFL classroom.
Skills Integration vs Skills Segregation ______________________________ Mohamed Aymane Sbai, 2016
Page |4
3.1. Content-Based Instruction One of the most important modes of skill integration is called content-based instruction, in which students practice in a highly integrated way all the language skills while participating in activities or tasks that focus on important content in areas such as science, mathematics, and social studies (Brinton, Snow, and Wesche 1989). In his work on content-based language learning, Mohan (1986) argues: “Any educational approach that considers language learning alone and ignores the learning of subject matter is inadequate to the needs of the learners…. What is needed is an integrative approach which relates language learning and content learning, considers language as a medium of learning, and acknowledges the role of context in communication.” In contentbased language instruction, the language teacher’s primary goal is to help students develop communicative competence.
The primary goal requires the use of normal, real-life,
communicative language, which in turn presupposes the integration of the four main language skills their sub-skills. The teacher’s secondary goals are to introduce concepts and terminology relevant to a given subject area, to reinforce content-area information learned elsewhere, and to teach specific learning strategies for writing, reading, or general study via the means of interesting content (Mohan 1979 & 1986). The most commonly used form of content-based instruction is called theme-based, in which the language skills are fully integrated in the study of a theme, for example, weather, family, ecology. The theme must be of strong interest to students and must allow a wide variety of language forms and functions to be practiced. “Theme-based instruction works effectively because the themes are chosen for their relevance, importance, and interest to the students. These factors are central to students’ motivation” (Crookes & Schmidt, 1989). Content-based language instruction is valuable at all levels of proficiency, but the nature of the content might differ by proficiency level. For beginners, the content often involves basic social and interpersonal communication skills, but past the beginning level, the content can become increasingly academic and complex. This is the most useful and widespread form of content-based instruction today, and it is found in many innovative ESL and EFL textbooks. 3.2. Task-Based Instruction Another widely used form of skill integration is task-based instruction in which students participate in communicative activities in English. “These are activities that can stand alone as fundamental units that require comprehending, producing, manipulating, or interacting in authentic language Skills Integration vs Skills Segregation ______________________________ Mohamed Aymane Sbai, 2016
Page |5
while attention is principally oriented to meaning rather than form” (Nunan 1989). In task-based instruction, basic pair work and group work are often used to increase student interaction and collaboration. For instance, students work together to write and edit a class newspaper, develop a television commercial, enact scenes from a play, or take part in other joint tasks. More structured cooperative learning formats can also be used in task-based instruction. Task-based instruction is relevant to all levels of language proficiency, but the nature of the task varies from one level to the other. Tasks become increasingly complex at higher proficiency levels. For instance, beginners might be asked to introduce each other and share one item of information about each other. More advanced students might do more intricate and demanding tasks, such as taking a public opinion poll at school, the university, or a shopping mall. The task-based model is beginning to influence the measurement of learning strategies as well, not just the teaching of ESL and EFL. 4. Advantages and Limitations of the Integrated-Skill Approach 4.1. Advantages: It is very important for every EFL program to provide numerous and extensive opportunities for natural communication that integrates the main and subsidiary language skills in principled ways. In actual language use – the way we really communicate – any single skill such as listening is rarely employed isolation from other language skills like speaking or reading. This is because communication requires the integration of both the main and the subsidiary language skills. In integrated-skill instruction, learners are exposed to authentic language and are involved in activities that are interesting and meaningful. Integrating the main language skills and the subsidiary language skills has many advantages: (1) Language becomes not just an object of academic interest but a real means of interaction among people. (2) Skill integration allows mutually supportive growth in all the main skills and the subsidiary skills. (3) In an integratedskill format, language instruction promotes the learning of real content, rather than the discussion of language forms. (4) The learning of authentic content through language is highly motivating to students of all ages and backgrounds. (5) Teachers are given the power and the opportunity to track students’ progress in multiple skills at the same time.
Skills Integration vs Skills Segregation ______________________________ Mohamed Aymane Sbai, 2016
Page |6
Among other advantages, many research findings show that skill integration:
Helps learners carry over their skills and declarative knowledge from one skill to another which facilitates and simplifies the improvement of the other skills (Strang, 1972).
Creates a dynamic and exciting classroom environment (Richard-Amato, 1996).
Enables learners to have a more realistic access to authentic language learning, whereas a segregated approach does not offer a meaningful understanding of language or a motivating style to learning a foreign language (Myers & Hilliard, 1997).
Leads to focus on realistic language and can therefore lead to the students’ all-round development of communicative competence in English (Jing, 2006).
Was enthusiastically accepted by students and most of them had a positive attitude toward this approach (Mitrofanova & Chemezov, 2011)
Leads to better comprehension of the material by students (Mitrofanova & Chemezov, 2011).
Increases learners’ motivation and self-confidence by presenting something worthwhile to talk about;
Reduces their level of stress and anxiety by engaging them in real communication of ideas rather than mechanical practice of skills and components;
Shifts teachers’ attention away from coverage of the textbook towards involving students in communication since integration saves time;
Encourages simultaneous use of all the language skills and creates conditions that are conducive to real communication as opposed to contrived practice of isolated skills;
Provides the learners with reflection time. This is something which is missing in the communicative approach to teaching since it focuses on spontaneous language use and penalizes reflective learners;
Reconceptualizes teachers’’ role, i.e., it is conducive to a learner-centered approach since students have an active part in constructing and meaning during reading, writing and conversational exchange with the partners.
Skills Integration vs Skills Segregation ______________________________ Mohamed Aymane Sbai, 2016
Page |7
4.2. Limitations: Actually the integrated-skill approach has little or no limitations compared to its segregated counterpart. However, since there is no perfect approach, I had to think of some disadvantages of the Integrated-skill oriented courses.
The challenge of the necessity of teachers to maintain an appropriate balance between integration and separation.
Integrating the four skills: can be demanding from the part of the teacher (understanding discourse, using textbook flexibly); can be time-consuming, requiring a lot of preparation.
Assessment in skills integration is not defined precisely since all the skills are assessed at once while it must be borne in mind that whatever the teacher does, s/he will always find students with better writing skills, others with better oral abilities and so on.
Nevertheless, the limitations of this approach should not prevent teachers from using it because – up to now- it is the optimal approach when it comes to skills instruction.
Skills Integration vs Skills Segregation ______________________________ Mohamed Aymane Sbai, 2016
Page |8
Work Cited_________________________________________ • Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley Longman. • Crookes, G. & Schmidt, R. (1991). Motivation: Reopening the Research Agenda. Language Learning, 41, 469-512. • Hinkel, E. (2010). Integrating the four skills: Current and historical perspectives. In R. B. Kaplan (Ed.), Oxford Handbook in Applied Linguistics (pp. 110-126). Oxford: Oxford University Press. • Mohan, B. (1986). Language and content. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. • Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. • Oxford, R. (2001). Integrated Skills in the ESL/EFL Classroom. Washington DC, US: Maryland University. • Scarcella, R., & Oxford, R. (1992). The tapestry of language learning: The individual in the communicative classroom. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. • Widdowson, H.G. (1978). Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Skills Integration vs Skills Segregation ______________________________ Mohamed Aymane Sbai, 2016
