Background: the ELT pendulum

The history of English language teaching methods has often been presented as one similar to a pendular swing between extremes. Each time a new teaching philosophy was put forward, it was most of the time in sharp contrast to the ideas of a previous approach. As a result, we have often moved from one extreme to another. As McCarthy reminds us (2016), people were learning foreign languages as early as the Middle Ages. The lingua franca at the time was Latin and people learnt spoken Latin in order to be able to communicate when they were travelling around Europe. So people learnt spoken grammar and the focus was entirely on using Latin rather than learning how the rules governed the language.

Then things changed when science became dominant: Latin was still used but as the language of thought, and it was written rather than spoken. As a result, written grammar prevailed when Latin was superseded by English as the national vernacular. William Bullokar, who wrote the first grammar of English in 1586, attempted to show that English was bound by as many rules as Latin. This was when Latin terminology was imported into English with words such as clause (clausa), verb (verbum) and perfect (perfectum). So, the focus shifted from the ability to use the language to an emphasis on analysing the rules of the language.

Towards the end of the 17th century, the focus changed again, from a rule-based analysis of the language back to an emphasis on utility when Comenius highlighted an essentially inductive approach to language learning which was based on exposure to the target language rather than studying its rules (Comenius, 1657, cited in Thornbury, 2019).

As Figure 1 shows, there have essentially been these two types of approaches in English teaching: the ones that focus on analysing the language and the ones which focus on using the language. Over the centuries, we have witnessed these backs and forths on the pendulum. It is important, however, to consider what can be learnt from each approach.

This article aims to show that these two main dimensions, which are often presented as being opposed, can, in fact, be reconciled and put together into a holistic approach to language teaching, an approach that combines the best practices of the methods that have been used up to now. As a case in point, drilling activities will be presented here as an example of practice that prevailed in the days of audiolingualism. Beyond this, the question will be raised as to whether drill practice activities still have a place in today’s classroom, and, more generally, whether there is still a need for a method in 21st century English language teaching.

Where do drills fit in?

In order to answer the two questions above, it is necessary to briefly locate drilling within the history of language teaching methods and see whether it can be accommodated within current methodologies.

Audiolingualism, the method which gave rise to drills, came as a reaction against the teaching of the rules of English and as a shift away from the emphasis on reading and writing found in grammar translation. Conversely, audiolingualism put the focus on speaking and considered language as a set of habits to be learnt. Instead of rules, patterns were taught and repeated – with teaching procedures including mechanical drills, learning dialogues off by heart and repetitions. Little attention was devoted to vocabulary as it was believed that learners would pick it up by practising the patterns of language. As with grammar translation, the audiolingual method maintained the focus on accuracy and the goal was for learners to produce grammatically correct sentences, with little consideration of meaning and context.

Coming up to the present, Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) highlights the importance of communication: language learning is not about learning rules, vocabulary lists or sets of habits. In task-based instruction, the best way to learn a foreign language is by communicating in it. Therefore, teaching procedures involve the completion of tasks through speaking English. Task-based instruction is highly learner-centred and there is a shift away from accuracy to fluency; the important thing being for the learners to get their ideas across and that mistakes are part of the learning process.

Figure 1 (left): The ELT pendulum

Figure 2 (middle): Major developments in English language teaching

Figure 3 (right): Bloom’s taxonomy (1956)

Drilling techniques

Going back to audiolingualism and the assumption that language learning is habit-formation, drill work was a key feature of audiolingual methodologies. Basic drilling means listening to a model provided by the teacher and repeating what is heard, i.e. a repetitive oral practice of a particular target structure. At low-level proficiency, drills can be used for practising syllable stress, weak forms or consonant clusters which may cause difficulty.

However, we should see to it that drills are not too repetitive and tedious. There are numerous variations to repetition drills. BBC Learning English (2017) suggests other types of drilling techniques.

• Substitution drills: we change one word every time.
  

  Teacher:	I like milk.
  Learner:	I like ______ (it).
  Teacher:	I like old English books.
  Learner:	I like ______________ (them).

• Transformation drills: we change the person, the tense or make it negative.
  

  Teacher:	I often go abroad.
  Learner:	I often go abroad.
  Teacher:	My best friend
  Learner:	My best friend often goes abroad.
  Teacher:	Simple past
  Learner:	My best often went abroad.
  Teacher:	Negative
  Learner:	My best friend didn’t often go abroad.

• Chain drilling: the teacher asks a question in a particular target structure to a student. That student responds and asks a question to the next student, who asks a question to the next student, etc.
  

  Teacher:	Have you visited Germany?
  Learner 1:	Yes, I have / No, I haven’t
  Learner 1 (to learner 2):	Have you visited __________?
  Learner 2:	Yes, I have / No, I haven’t
  Learner 2 (to learner 3):	Have you visited __________? etc.

• Split drilling: the teacher separates a sentence across a number of students and gets them to say one word each, or group them according to gender, or first row, then second row, etc.
  

  Teacher:	We love learning English, especially on Thursday mornings.
  Boys:	we
  Girls:	love
  Boys:	learning
  Girls:	English
  Boys:	especially
  Girls:	on
  Boys:	Thursday
  Girls:	mornings
  Whole class:	We love learning English, especially on Thursday mornings.

• Backchaining: start at the end of the sentence and gradually work your way to the beginning. This technique is effective for practising the features of connected speech, such as vowel reductions, word linking or distinguishing function words from content words. Here is an example for drilling the third conditional: ‘If I’d known you were coming, I’d have stayed at home.’
  

  Teacher:	at home
  Class:	at home
  Teacher:	stayed at home
  Class:	stayed at home
  Class:	I’d have stayed at home
  Class:	I’d have stayed at home

• Frontchaining: after backchaining apply frontchaining. Start at the beginning of the sentence and move your way forward.
  

  Teacher:	If I’d known
  Class:	If I’d known
  Teacher:	If I’d known you were coming
  Class:	If I’d known you were coming
  Teacher:	If I’d known you were coming, I’d have stayed at home.
  Class:	If I’d known you were coming, I’d have stayed at home.

Recent research has brought to the fore the renewed importance of drilling in today’s EFL classroom. Penston (2021) identifies the following reasons for using drills. Firstly, there is a need to focus on accuracy at certain stages of the lesson. Drills provide immediate feedback on the learners’ accuracy and many learners expect to be corrected. Secondly, drills provide a safe environment for learners to experiment with the language. Those learners who like to repeat should be given the opportunity to do so. This also builds confidence among learners who are afraid to speak in class. These learners may gain confidence on hearing their classmates and may eventually feel like joining in. A third reason for using drills is that they strengthen the physical aspect of fluency. At low levels, learners still need to get used to the sounds of English and need to get the right muscles to work properly. Learners need to be taught to feel the articulators involved (what is happening with the tongue and the lips), until they can proceed to larger chunks of language in connected speech. Fourthly, we really do learn through repetition as practice, in the same way as children learn to speak their L1. Furthermore, research suggests that motor skills sharpen with every iteration and this goes further than sheer mechanical repetition, so cognition is enhanced. Lastly, drill work makes it possible for the learner to move from lower-order to higher-order skills. This becomes apparent when we look at Bloom’s taxonomy.

Learners need to achieve lower-order thinking at the bottom of the pyramid before they move on to higher-order thinking. They need to establish that foundation, i.e. the remembering and understanding stages, so they can apply that information to a new context and eventually get to the point where they can create and produce their own language, without the teacher’s scaffolding (Bridge Education Group, 2022).

Meaning first

With the Communicative Language Teaching approach, the focus shifted from parrot-like repetition to meaningful interaction and context should indeed be key in language learning (Penston, 2021). Monotonous chanting of decontextualised chunks of language should be avoided. For drills to be meaningful, learners need to understand what they are being asked to say. Creating meaning through viable context should guide us, EFL teachers, in everything we do in the classroom. It is therefore important to ask ourselves how to extend the drills, twist them and link them to meaning. Below is an example of how decontextualised drilling can be made meaningful, moving on a scale from unnatural, non-communicative practice to natural, communicative language production.

Figure 4: From non-communicative to communicative practice (based on Davies & Pearse, 2000).

What really matters in ELT

As we have seen, there is still a place for drilling in today’s classroom and it can easily be incorporated into all types of lessons. Drills make an insufficient, yet necessary step towards further, freer language practice, and with just a little tweaking, they can be made challenging and creative. Linking drilling to meaning and real-life communication also demonstrates the need for holistic teaching. As Thornbury (2019) puts it, there is no single best method, but there is good methodology and good methodology does not change. Our teaching style may be more learner-centred or teacher-centred at different points of the lesson, but what really matters is that what we do in the classroom, our pedagogy should always be conducive to learning.

References

Bullokar, W. (1586). William Bullokar Pamphlet for English Grammar. Edmund Bollifant.

Comenius, J.A. (1657). The Great Didactic.

Davies, P. & Pearse, E. (2000). Success in English Teaching. Oxford University Press.

Penston, T. (2021). Using Drills in English Language Teaching. TP Publications.

‘Guiding your Students from Lots to Hots Bloom’s taxonomy in the ESL classroom’. Bridge Education Group. Available from https://app.livestorm.co/bridge-education-group/guiding-your-students-from-lots-to-hots-blooms-taxonomy-in-the-esl-classroom?type=detailed (Last accessed January 2022).

‘The Teacher’s Room: Drilling Techniques’. BBC Learning English. Available from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9x1KrKJUsU (Last accessed 19 January 2023).

‘What’s the latest teaching method?’ Thornbury, S. (2019). Available from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nue8AN9XsuY (Last accessed 19 January 2023).