Formalism vs. Activism in Language Teaching: A Critical Appraisal of Methodological Trajectories and Their Implications
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/twh03477Keywords:
Formalism, Activism, Language TeachingAbstract
This paper critically examines the trajectories of formalism and activism in language teaching methodologies. By analyzing their historical development, key features, and representative teaching methods, it reveals the strengths and limitations of each approach. And it is concluded that in ‘Postmethod’ era, teachers need to pay more attention to the diversity and openness of language teaching methods.
Downloads
References
[1] Rivers, W. M. 1992. Ten principles of interactive language learning and teaching [A]. In W.M. Rivers (Ed.). Teaching Language in College: Curriculum and Content [C]. Lincolnwood, Illinois: National Textbook Company.
[2] Mackey, W.F. 1967. Language Teaching Analysis [M]. London: Longman.
[3] Ren Ruiqi. The Effects of Grammar-Translation Method and Communicative Ap-proach on Oral English Teaching[J]. Overseas English, 2016(5):89-90..
[4] Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31(1), 21 - 32.
[5] Hu Xiaoou. The Application of Positive and Negative Transfer of Mother Tongue in English Teaching [D]. Jilin University, 2007.
[6] KUMARAVADIVELU B. The Postmethod Condition: (E) merging Strategies for Second/Foreign Language Teaching [J]. TESOL Quarterly, 1994(3).
[7] Cheng Xiaotang. Foreign Language Teaching Methods and Schools[M]. FLTRP, 2008.
[8] Wei Yuxuan. A Comparative Study of Traditional English Teaching Method and Post Method Teaching Method [D]. Changchun Normal Uiversity,2015.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Journal of Education and Educational Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
