Teaching Writing and Reading: What approaches should be used and what aspects to be considered?

By Sudirman

Reading and writing are two language skills that influence each other. Although reading is considered a receptive skill and writing a productive skill, both of them require literacy ability and this aspect makes them more or less the same and evokes mutual influences. What approaches and or methods should be used and what aspects to be considered in teaching these two skills are still debatable. In this essay, although not perfect, the writer tries to provide the answers.

Cazden (as cited in Gee, 2004) states that some people, advocates of Whole Language, even argue that reading ability is attained naturally in the same way as one’s native language acquisition process. Thus one does not need to learn reading with a specific approach/method, because s/he will get this ability naturally as s/he grows up. However, Gee (2004) strongly argues against this contention, Gee (2004) claims that learning to read is not a natural process, because it is not a biologically supported process as people learn to walk. Gee (2004) states that there are different priorities to be mastered before learning reading. Traditionalists believed that it should start with building phonemic awareness, then phonic awareness, next practice, and last work on comprehension skills. Other educators stress on making meaning and Gee himself is concerned with literacy. In addition, Gee (2004) agrees that there are three major learning processes, they are; natural, instructed, and cultural process, but learning to read works best with the cultural process. From this point of view, Gee’s (2004) advice is that language curriculum should include the community of the school, students’ motivation as well as all factors which underpin language and literacy learning. 

Burns (2001), whose focus was on writing, suggests the application of the genre approach in teaching writing. Her suggestion is based on her study of using systematic linguistics and notions of genre. She conducted training and in the end, it shows that the participants have been able to write a practically effective text approximating the genre. She also argues that as long as teachers and students are given the opportunity to explore language use within a framework of social and cultural purpose, the systematic-functional approaches will fit well with communicative language teaching. Burns (2004) also suggests three stages of the teaching-learning process: (1) modeling, which involved discussion of the cultural and social purpose of the genre, (2) joining negation of text, which involved the teachers and students in a joint construction to work on the same genre. (3) Independent construction, which comprised students and teachers discussing and revising their work together.

Gibbon (2002) suggests integrating language and content. It is aimed to develop second language learning hand in hand with new curriculum knowledge. Gibbon asserts that learning a language is not a linear process; it involves the students in developing language in an increasing range of contexts and so learning a language will be much more meaningful when it relates to the real context of language use. She, furthermore, claims that there are two different contexts in language; culture context and situation context. Cultural context is when speakers of a particular culture share their assumptions and expectation so that they have a clear idea of what to do dealing with that particular culture, such as how to greet someone and how to order a meal in a restaurant. Next, situation context is when a language is used on a particular occasion, for instance; to whom we speak, what we talk, and the spoken or written language we use.

In relation to teaching reading and writing skills, firstly, I would like to tell my experience and my teaching context. Recently, in Indonesia, I see that reading and teaching are taught based on genre. However, I was not taught this kind of approach at all. It was last year when I began to teach, and the students were about to face the final examination, since then I was requested by the principal to give additional classes. The principal gave me some questions from the previous final examination and I saw it was full of text. It was easy for me to answer when the questions were about vocabulary and grammar, but I was very confused when the questions were about the types of the text, whether it is narrative, recount, analytical exposition, and so forth. Then I saw the students’ textbook, and I realize that everything was changed from what I have learned before. Secondly, to conclude, I think there are some aspects to be considered in teaching reading and writing, regardless of traditionalists' or modernists’ views, they are; students’ literacy, meaning, and language form. Pertaining to the methodology, I agree with the application of both genres based and integrated based. I see, in my teaching context, the teaching methodology is more on a genre-based approach but not much on an integrated approach.

References

Burns, A. (2001). Genre-based approaches to writing and beginning adult ESL learners. In CN. Candlin, & N. Mercer (Eds.), English language teaching in its social context (pp. 200-207) London: Routledge.

Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling. London: Routledge.

Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning: Teaching second language learners in the mainstream classroom.  New Hampshire: Heinemann, Portsmouth.