Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 6

PBET1103

INTRODUCTION TO GRAMMAR IN ENGLISH

FLUENCY VS. ACCURACY IN THE TEACHING OF ENGLISH

PREPARED BY:

ZAINUL HAKIM SHAZNI BIN ZAINUL FUAD PET130026

PREPARED FOR:

DR. ADELINA ASMAWI


FLUENCY VS. ACCURACY IN THE TEACHING OF ENGLISH

To be fluent or accurate? One main problem in teaching English today is the dilemma in
choosing either to put the focus of teaching on the fluency or accuracy aspects of the English
language to students. Researchers, scholars and educators alike have been conducting countless
debates, researches and experiments to prove either one or both as the ideal/s. It is hard to
compromise between these two approaches as each has their own strengths and weaknesses. To
favour one and neglect the other will only bring harm to the learners.

Fluency, according to the Oxford dictionary, is defined as the quality or condition of being
fluent, in particular the ability to express oneself easily and articulately. Ellis and Barkhuizen
(2005), following Skehan (1998), define fluency as the production of language in real time
without undue pausing or hesitation. To put into simpler words, fluency is the ability to speak,
write and read smoothly and effortlessly. Teachers who put more emphasis on fluency aim to
produce students who are competent in expressing themselves and giving responses in
communication. They focus more on meaning and context rather than grammatical structure. The
usual classroom activities to promote fluency are public speaking, debate, role play, group works
and games.

Accuracy, meanwhile is defined by the Oxford dictionary as the quality or state of being
correct or precise. Quoting from British Councils website teachingenglish.org.uk, accuracy refers
to how correct learners use of the language system is, including their use of grammar,
pronunciation and vocabulary. In other words, accuracy is the ability to speak or write without
making any grammatical, vocabulary, punctuations and other errors. Teachers who believe
accuracy is the key help their students to produce written and spoken English with zero mistake
and perfect correctness. Typical classroom activities for accuracy-based learning are grammar
drilling, fill-in-the-gaps exercises, error analysis and grammar presentation.

Now the question arises, which of these two approaches is the best and most ideal in the
teaching of English? The answer to that may differ according to teachers preferences and students
needs. The most famous and typical answer I have heard so far is of course, a balance between the
two. Often I meet people who can speak very fluently like Americans or British but with
grammatical errors here and there that can be quite painful to the ears of grammarians. And I have
also got equal acquaintances with those who are so flawless with grammars but stutter in speaking.
These are the two types of speakers we usually meet anywhere. They are the result of the imbalance
between fluency and accuracy. But it is not impossible to produce speakers who master both. It all
boils down to the teaching methodology as Brumfit (1984) said that the distinction between
accuracy and fluency is essentially a methodological distinction, rather than one in psychology or
linguistics.

Typically, in schools where tests, examinations and grades matter most, teachers tend to
pay greater attention to getting their students to score the best grades. In this case, accuracy-based
learning is usually used. More drillings, more gap-fill exercises, more repeat-after-mes and more
and more worksheets and notes and grammatical terms for students to memorize are the harsh and
grueling reality students face in learning English. Isnt English lesson supposed to be fun?
Unfortunately, teachers obsession for accuracy just kills all the fun. I remember learning grammar
while in school up until even my foundation days. We had to memorize and recognize all the
grammatical terms such as present progressive, past progressive, present perfect, articles etc. They
were a lot to swallow even after years of learning. And my inner thought always questioned the
purpose of learning these. Sometimes, I just gave up and did not even care about all those terms
while many of my friends so proudly showcased their mastery of them. Of course, they are good
for our grammar knowledge and help a lot in improving our speaking and writing as teachers to
be. But are they really effective in helping us to be good in communication? As a result of this
kind of learning, many students find it hard to communicate in English, for fear of uttering words
with wrong grammar and pronunciation. They also take a considerable length of time to respond
in a conversation, be it formal or informal. Thus, the language becomes less able to carry out its
purpose, namely to effectively communicate ideas and information (Cotter, 2013).

However, with the communicative approach in language learning now introduced in our
education system, I am very much grateful and glad that I can finally be less stressful, I hope. In
communicative approach, contrary to the traditional approach, is a breath of fresh air in language
learning as it does not stress too much on grammar anymore, but gives more justice to the real
purpose of a language: to communicate. Indeed, through this approach, the focus is now on how
to educate learners to be effective and competent communicators. In response to this, there are
already some teachers who changed their traditional teaching methods to a more liberal one that
focuses more on the fluency of their students. While some may interpret the communicative
approach as fluency-based learning, I beg to differ. In my opinion, to be a successful
communicator, one should master both fluency and accuracy. According to Hemmens (2011),
Ultimately, we must want our students to be successful language users; able to communicate in
any situation; with full comprehension; confident and effective in their adopted language. This
requires that they are both fluent in their communication and accurate in their language choice. Its
not an either or situation; its both.

In balancing between fluency and accuracy in teaching, many scholars like Hemmens
(2011) and Cotter (2013) have come up with the recommendation that accuracy should be
introduced first in the beginner level and fluency comes along as the learners progress. The reason
being is that, as learners dont have much vocabulary and knowledge of the language in the
beginning, they are not really able to engage in a lengthy conversation and thus, they should be
first taught a few basics and how to get them right and accurate. For example, they will be taught
how to greet and reply greetings, how to ask for directions and also the present and past tenses.
Repetition is needed in the early stage as it will help the learners to remember and be familiarize
with the language. Once students get hold of the basics, they will be wanting for more, they speak
faster than before and this is when fluency is at its early development. Students will need more
speaking practice so activities like public speaking, role play and group interaction should be
encouraged. When students reached the intermediate level, they become reasonably independent
language users where they have a mix of fluency and accuracy in the language, with the focus still
on developing their fluency. Speakers who are in the advanced level will have perfect fluency and
this is when the focus is shifted again to accuracy. Some fluent speakers may make mistakes even
though they are in the advanced level so it is important to help them correct their mistakes in order
for them to learn better. By correcting learners errors, teachers not only provide this feedback, but
they convey the message that accuracy is important (Thornbury, 2000). As such, this shows just
how equally important fluency and accuracy are especially in Second Language Acquisition
(SLA).

As a student myself, I agree with this method whereby accuracy comes first and fluency
next and the two intertwine and integrate along the way. I think this method will suit ESL students
best as it will teach them the basics and the correct grammar in the beginning and move further to
develop more fluency in them. However, one important thing that every teacher should take note
is the individual learners differences. Individual differences in how we learn a second language
call for language teaching to be flexible and adapted to suit all different types of individuals
(Nilsson, 2012). Teachers should be well aware of the level of learning of the students; some may
pick up easily in a short time while some may have a hard time to digest an information. To cater
to all the needs of both low-proficiency and high-proficiency students, teachers should put more
varieties into their teaching activities. For example, different types of worksheets are prepared for
the students so that they meet the students level and prevent them from feeling left out in the class.
It is very crucial to take into consideration the students individual differences as it will help to
maintain the motivation to learn in them.

To sum up, fluency and accuracy are two contrasting things. The former is how smoothly
and effortlessly one speaks and writes while the latter is speaking and writing without grammatical
and structural flaws. They each bring different effects to students. In a study done by Nilsson
(2012), she found that those who were in the fluency group were more motivated to learn; while
those in the accuracy group were pretty demotivated as evident when at the end of the study, only
two students in the group stayed when the others had left. Nevertheless, both groups have shown
tremendous increase in their fluency, accuracy and self-confidence. Krashen (2002 cited in Nilsson
2012) points out three different types of learners: the ones who feel the need for accuracy to the
extent that it inhibits the communication, the ones who have acquired most parts of the language
and speak without knowledge of rules or fear of being incorrect, and finally, the ones who integrate
acquisition with learning and use rules in written and prepared speech, and fluency during
unprepared speech. Indeed, we all hope to be the third type of learners which is the ideal type
where we have a good grasp on both fluency and accuracy in English. It is not easy yet not
impossible for us, second language speakers to achieve the desired target. For learners, we need to
keep practice and have strong determination in learning. While for teachers, we must not neglect
either one but put equal stress on both aspects in order to produce students who are not only
accurate but also competent communicators.
REFERENCES

1. Cotter, C. (2013). Accuracy and fluency. Retrieved from


http://www.headsupenglish.com/index.php/esl-articles/esl-four-skills/494-
accuracy-and-fluency

2. Hemmens, A. (2011). Accuracy vs. fluency. Retrieved from


https://www.esl-library.com/blog/2011/07/05/accuracy-vs-fluency/

3. Nilsson, E. (2012). A comparison of the effects of accuracy vs fluency based tasks on


student motivation, self-confidence, accuracy and fluency. Halmstad University.
Retrieved from
http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:526221/FULLTEXT01.pdf

4. Oxford Dictionaries: The Worlds Most Trusted Dictionaries. Retrieved from


http://oxforddictionaries.com/

5. Thornbury, S. (2000). Accuracy, fluency and complexity in English Teaching


Professional. 16, 3-6. Retrieved from
http://nebula.wsimg.com/05a8f4b5d20b235d9ac54e06502cb50d?AccessKeyId=1
86A535D1BA4FC995A73&disposition=0&alloworigin=1

6. Thornbury, S. (2009). F is for fluency. Retrieved from


http://scottthornbury.wordpress.com/2009/12/17/f-is-for-fluency/

7. https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/knowledge-database/accuracy

8. http://www.icaltefl.com/index.php/how-to-teach-english/accuracy-vs-fluency.html

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi