Drama Teaching Methodology

論文

Drama Teaching Methodology and its Usagein Reduction of Monitor Activity and Removingof Barriers to Second Language Acquisition

Malcolm Barry DUFF

要

旨

本稿は，演劇理論とその教授法が，いかに日本の大学の教室環境で用いられるかを論じる。特に演劇理論によって，学生の既習の言語知識とその使用が向上する点を議論する。また，モニターの過度の使用は言語習得を抑制すること，インプット仮説が言語技能の向上に効果を及ぼすことを指摘する。演劇理論は，特にこれまで文法や読解中心の試験対策として英語を学んできた学生に，既習の言語技能を解放し，さらなる言語習得を促す。本論では，学生の既習の言語知識を同定し，それをもとにコミュニ
ケーションスキルへの気づきを引き出すことを提案する。それは，自分自身や自己の技能への気づきが，外国語能力と自己アイデンティティとの統合のための大きなきっかけとなるからである。
Keywords: affective filter（情意フィルター）, drama methodology（演劇理論）,
input hypothesis（インプット仮説）, language acquisition（言語習得）,
monitor（モニター）

Abstract
This paper looks at the use of drama methodology and teaching
techniques in the Japanese university language classroom. The issue

31

愛知大学

言語と文化

No. 32of students previously learned linguistic knowledge and its use infurthering progress in language acquisition is discussed. The
overuse of the monitor, restricting language acquisition and the
input hypothesis will be dealt with and the paper will look at its
effect on language skill development.
The use of drama teaching methodology will be shown torelease previously acquired language skills and lead to further
language acquisition in students who have been oriented towards agrammar and textual based entrance examination preparation. The
paper suggests that previous knowledge should be identified andused to lead to student awareness of communication skills. It is
posited that awareness of self and personal skills and barriers aremajor factors in integrating foreign language skills into individual
identity.
Key Words: affective filter, drama methodology, input hypothesis,
language acquisition, monitor

In the Japanese university teaching context, we often find that students arrive inclass seemingly eager but unwilling to give opinions, and willing only to respond to
set questions delivered in a particular format. They seem unable to venture away fromthat format. We also find that students’ replies are short and given nervously. In thefirst instance, it seems that a student’s English ability is very low, but on looking at
examination content and scores on university entrance tests, it seems that this is not thecase. In written tests, the students can often achieve good results, but seem to be unable
to use their knowledge in a verbal communication situation. We can see that the students
lack communication skills, and not English skills and that they are unable to see English
as a means of communication. Therefore, in this paper I will consider how to help thestudents integrate previously learned language into communication.
As the students have studied for at least six years when they enter university the
linguistic rules and vocabulary already within the students themselves need to be exposed
and reorganised, and not be ignored. Therefore it is important to identify each student’s

32

Drama Teaching Methodology

linguistic identity in order to encourage further progress. Many textbooks encourage
pattern and conversation practice but put no emphasis on recognising the student’s
individual lexical and linguistic stage in English. This is where drama methodology
can be used to encourage release of language. It is beneficial to hold a mirror up for the
students to make them aware of the natural acquisition of their mother tongue, and toencourage an approach to English similar to that of the natural acquisition of their first
language. It is necessary not only for the teacher to see the full identity of the student but
for the student to be aware of his or her linguistic identity.
The students put their failure to speak English down to a lexical inability rather than
to a lack of awareness of communicative and people skills. There may be some initial
regression after changing an overall approach due to confusion related to unexpectedteaching methods, but using theories of play (Burton, 1955) and early child development(Piaget, 1974) to provide a nurturing atmosphere, using humor and improvisation will
minimalise these. The teacher as a facilitator should release the students’ English in
front of their eyes, so that they can then be encouraged to reorganize it, and draw on it atappropriate times. For most students, work on English language acquisition psychology,
and releasing language previously learned is more important than “teaching” newEnglish. When the students open up, and can literally see themselves, using their current
English without inhibition, they will be more open to acquiring new input. In my own
experience, this does happen and the students are more eager to search for relevant new
vocabulary and expressions to help their class room experiences or in a dramatic scene
making situation. They do not hesitate to ask for what they need and to request assistanceand do not worry about showing their needs to their peers. The result of approaching
the language classroom from a different direction is a more natural use of the language
already within the students’ reference frames.

The Monitor Hypothesis
As linguistic rules form a major part of previous learning in university students,
an important consideration in language classes is the Monitor. It is important to analyse
the Monitor in Japanese students and relate it to the English language education methods
within Japan. It is important because the rate of language acquisition depends on the
degree of Monitor interference during production.

33

愛知大学

言語と文化

No. 32

According to second language acquisition theory and the Natural Approach(Krashen and Terrell, 1983), the Japanese can be seen to be over-users of the Monitor
as they tend to monitor all the time. They are continually checking output with theirlearned conscious knowledge of the second language. The typical qualities are that they
speak hesitantly, often self-correct in the middle of utterances, and are so concerned withcorrecting that they have difficulty with “in the moment” communication. Therefore, It
is necessary to plan classes which concentrate on content and not language and include
the use of drama methodology to make students active so that they are so involved in the
personal relationship and integration areas of communication that they have little time toconsider that they are working in a foreign language.
Optimal Monitor usage is usually considered to be a point where knowledge of
linguistic rules and self-correction do not interfere with language production. In Japanese
students, the learned knowledge is so extensive that it is very difficult to achieve
an optimum Monitor usage. Reorganizing the teacher’s attitudes to Monitor usage isnecessary. It is necessary to consider the student as a holder of linguistic rules and thento encourage the student to use this language in authentic communication. The rules areoften not viewed as part of a communication situation, but as the total communication.
We need to help Japanese students to use acquired competence to supplement learned
competence. Our students may not be used to this order of procedure and so this may
result in the affective filter being raised. Therefore, a major function of the university
English teacher is to encourage the lowering of the affective filter resulting from extreme
monitor usage. We can do this by making it clear to our students that we are not correcting
their English. Praise can be given for involvement in activities rather than language
production. Stress should be put on behavioral techniques rather than on linguistics. Thisrequires a distancing from English conversation textbooks and other such lingual-based
texts and a realignment with the students everyday experiences and cultural investment
identity.

The Input Hypothesis
Krashen (1980) suggests that comprehensible input in language learning will only
be received in a low-filter context, and he refers to the requirement for extra-linguistic
context, and knowledge of the world in its broad sense. I would suggest that world34

Drama Teaching Methodology

knowledge be referred to as life knowledge to include a wider variety of world andcultural experiences for Japanese and to include their own experiences. It is necessary
to ask students about their interests, worries and out-of-school lives, so that they canuse English in a relevant way to their daily existence. Using drama to enact situations
from their homes and their part-time job situations enables them to use English based on
their own life experiences and does not require cultural transference as well as languagetransference.
With the assumption that language acquisition is desirable comes the theory that
there is variety in rate and extent of acquisition. The acquisition rate in Japanese atuniversity level will depend on the balance of their current level of knowledge and new
input. The new input has to be appropriate to the individual student’s personal identity
stage. In other words, we have to consider our students’ personalities, and the way
they view themselves and the way others view them in their own society. We cannot
stereotype them by expecting them to be at the same stages of development as American
nineteen-year-olds. Some students are ready to give opinions while others have beentaught by their teachers and parents that it is not appropriate for them to behave in thisway. Some male students, for example are not ready to converse with young females
but do not feel awkward with any communication involving a mother figure. Throughrole play communication may be achieved when such inhibitions are masked throughtransference analysis of family situations. Recently, many students are ready to clearlyshow their individuality and show this in various ways by fashion, dying their hair, etc.
It is the personal identity stage that we often ignore when considering input. We need toknow more about our students and to do this lessons should be centered around situationsand value concepts which are safe for them, their interests, fashions and attitudes tothings they came into contact with, e.g., the homeless at the stations , places, plants andliving things they see every day. Also, It is necessary to balance this with their common
cultural values, e.g., a desire to do the same as others, a desire not to ask questions in classas this results in shame from showing misunderstanding, and a desire not to speak firstas this appears aggressive.
We must realize that our students need a chance to show their world (Japaneseculture) using English, and that we should not impose texts on them about such stereotypes
as John and Betty characters. We need to look at our Japanese students at play and incoffee shops and to notice their fashions and interests and to gear our input topics to their

35

愛知大学

言語と文化

No. 32everyday lives in order to to get them impassioned and involved so that they forget they
are using English. To this end it is preferable to physically involve the students making
things, showing things and going out from the classroom and bringing in things that will
engage them emotionally rather than encourage detachment and “ foreignness” .

The Affective Filter Hypothesis
The affective filter is the part of the brain’s internal processing system that
subconsciously analyses and screens incoming language and communication basedon what psychologists call “affect.” In this definition, I think the important word is“subconsciously.” In my Japanese students it is the lack of awareness of this filter kicking
into action, which is the filter’s most difficult aspect. The major part of our work asteachers should be to help our students become aware of the subconscious, e.g. by looking
in mirrors and at their own photographs, and to help them remove their own barriers tolanguage acquisition so that they can optimize their use of life energy. Many students areunaware of their own barriers and so are unable to attempt to remove them.
As language teachers, we should develop methods that sometimes remove
subconscious barriers without the student being aware of them, e.g., this can be doneby setting up activities where the students knock down and rebuild physically, so theygo through the actual process of reconstruction. Lessons which detract attention fromEnglish, the barrier creating element, will encourage a subconscious lowering of affective
filters and so allow the input monitor to gain balance. Moreover, we should explain to
our students about barriers and the reasons for working in certain ways so that they canconsciously work on lowering their own barriers to language production to reduce theiranxiety.
The affective filter hypothesis (Dulay and Burt, 1982) shows how affective factors
relate to the second language learning acquisition process. In the diagram below, language
input can be seen passing through the affective filter before it can be processed by thestudent’s natural mechanism for language acquisition, the language acquisition device.
When comprehensible input can reach this device it is processed and is ready to be usedas part of the student’s new acquired language competence. It cannot be processed if
it is blocked by the filter, and therefore, will not become part of the student’s language
communication skills.

36

Drama Teaching Methodology

Language
Input ~ Filter ~ Acquisition ~ Acquired Competence
DeviceDulay and Burt often refer to the affective filter in the singular, but I feel that theterm should be used in the plural, as there are numerous filters that overlap at the sametime. These may be anxiety (in my students related to fear of failure), family pressure,
fear of teacher, fear of being singled out, or quite simply fatigue, (in Japanese students,
due to part-time job commitments or long hours of travel to school).
The affective filter hypothesis implies that we should not only supply comprehensible
input, but also create a situation that encourages a low filter. Stevick (1976) posits thatclassrooms with low filters are those that promote low anxiety among students, and as ismost important in Japanese students, keep students from “being on the defensive.”
In Japan, acquisition techniques have not been employed through the high schoollevel. Students enter university with an affinity to the Grammar Translation Method,rather than possessing an inbred tendency to use their natural language acquisition skills.
Rote learning of grammar rules has been done over at least six years in compulsory
English classes, and students have been tested at various points in their educational
careers, but only in the form of written reproduction. The output of verbal communication
has not been tested or encouraged and students are unable to produce language easily innatural communication situations.
The tendency in a native speaker’s university English class in Japan, is to immediately
push students into unfamiliar territory without explanation (students are required tochat freely, give opinions, comment in front of the class or asked to perform skits).
This often ignores each student’s personal barriers, which prevent usage of previous
learned language rules. It can also result in a seemingly external lowering of the filter
but an internal confusion accentuated because students will not admit their lack ofunderstanding in the language classroom. This also results only in temporary success but
not long term acquisition. Students often hide their insecurity behind the external frontof the statement, “We enjoy conversation with foreigners.” as if this were different fromconversations with friends.
The result is that the student feels inadequate in future instantaneous language
production contexts after graduation. When previous patterns or whole conversations are

37

愛知大学

言語と文化

No. 32

reproduced intact, the student feels successful, but when the context is changed or partsof learned linguistic sets are required, the student flounders. In my classes I have foundthat stressing content, in-the-moment experiences, and action through drama, break
down this barrier and therefore, reduce the raising of the affective filter.
Research by Krashen (1980) posits that various affective filter variables relate tosuccess in second language acquisition and places these in three categories:
Motivation—Students with high motivation tend to do better in second language
acquisition.
In Japanese students, there may be a lack of motivation due to a feeling of lack ofnecessity for the language or having no practical use for the language, i.e. no chance togo abroad and meet foreigners, or from saturation due to rote learning, exam fear, etc.
Self-confidence—Students with a good self-image and self-esteem do better thanstudents without.
While the Japanese do often have a positive self-image, their culture encourages
them to deny this verbally. They will often say, “I’m not good at …” as a matter ofprotocol. To deny the value of the self is in fact a way of increasing the value of self byamae, indulgence (Doi, 1973). In fact, in Japan, verbal patterns suggesting a negative
self-image are considered signs of self-esteem. Indeed, humility is considered to be thequality of someone with a positive self-image. Therefore, activities that involve total
self-esteem building or conversations involving immodesty or total exuberance may betotally “foreign” to the point that they cannot encourage internalising of the language
experience but only increase detachment and performance rather than involved language
production. It is therefore important to distinguish between linguistic humility related toself-esteem and linguistic hesitance based on a poor English esteem.
Anxiety—Low anxiety is conducive to language learning.
Krashen (1995) with Naimon, Frohlich, Stern and Todesco (1978) suggest that theeffect of low anxiety levels are particularly relevant when considering language as acommunicative skill rather than a learned reproduction of sounds and rules.
Japanese are particularly aware of surroundings and peer pressure to conform, so
in reducing anxiety levels, it is particularly important to consider inner culture groupconformity. Any activity encouraging separatism or individualism may in itself increase
anxiety. Requesting responses from individuals rather than groups is often an anxiety
provoking action in Japan. Therefore, one of the strongest affective filters in our students

38

Drama Teaching Methodology

is peer group identification. The individual student cannot be seen to question the teacher
or to fail to understand. Therefore, the language classes should be student-centred andstudent evaluated and the students should set the level of language production guided
by the teacher rather than be controlled totally by the teacher or text. This is achieved
by giving freedom from required language production. Foe example in a “ show andtell” style class a student can feel or touch and pass objects rather than talk about them
if they wish. The use of objects, sounds, music and food, etc. should be central to lesson
experiences and opting out should be treated as an option rather than a negative action,and in my experience this results in chosen participation at a later stage.
Native speakers often forget that in Japan it is not the lack of knowledge of Englishthat raises the affective filter, but anxiety, the lack of motivation, or self-confidence that
restricts communication. We have to consider the individual student as a person with a“personal social identity” (social self-image), and “communicator identity,” (image in
relation to others), in any communicative verbal practice. We have to work to reducebarriers to language acquisition and production. In the next section I will explain thesebarriers and suggest ways to remove them.

BREAKING DOWN BARRIERS IN THE CLASSROOMThe English teacher at university entrance level rarely approaches his or her workfrom the point of view of analyzing barriers. These barriers have been put in place by
previous language learning experiences and society’s attitudes to pedagogy and foreign
language learning in general. Concrete “here and now” topics are essential for language
acquisition, e.g. the classroom is actually put into disarray and students must tidy up anddiscuss how to go about this; groups are sent out to carry out various tasks and must comeback with attained information. Many teachers use patterns from English conversation
texts without applying them to a meaningful context in the students’ lives in the here andnow.
In Japan, some of the common barriers to language acquisition are more easily
recognizable than in most countries due to cultural conformity, but many students areunaware of their own barriers to language learning. Therefore, the first work I do in myclasses is to encourage students to list their own personal barriers. Students list theirbarriers after a simple explanation and question and answer routine, involving questions

39

愛知大学

言語と文化

No. 32such as;Do you enjoy speaking English? Why? Why not?
Why are you afraid of making mistakes?” and statements of support are introduced suchas;
Remember no one cares if you make mistakes.
Other students are happy if you ask questions because it helps them.
Some barriers to speaking English my students listed are:“ Negative thoughts that I can’t do.”“ I’m afraid of mistakes when I learn with other students.”“ I’m ashamed of making mistakes.”“ When I think the lecture is no use for my future.”“ In the class, I do not like making a mistake and being pointed out in the presence.”“ If I have the class whose teacher I don’t like, I feel stupid, before class begins.”“When I have a big anxiety, I can’t hear the teacher. I can’t think anything.”“ I don’t remember how to do the grammar.”“ I am not good at solving question quickly, it barriers to speaking English.”Some students are simply satisfied by comments referring to their shyness, lack ofknowledge, and inability in language production. However, they are rarely aware of why
they are shy, etc. These reasons can be discovered as the term progresses, so students
should keep adding detail to their barrier lists, and should note their progress in breaking
down the barriers. Further work on barrier breaking in the practical context can be doneby the teacher on observing and analyzing students’ discoveries.
Another fundamental problem in the language classroom, which actually occurs
before the student enters the class, is that the labeling of the class as “English” createsa barrier to language usage. Students in Japan have a particular attitude and reaction to
the label “English,” as they relate it to a demand for perfection of utterances, accuracy,
grammatically correct sentence structure, and the necessity to achieve high scores oreven as, quite simply, a time for chatting with a foreigner. So, one of the ways to remove amajor barrier to language acquisition is to re-name the language class and to label it moreparticularly to its life-value content, e.g., “Meeting People” or “Relationships with People
with Different Languages.” A class entitled “How do others think?” or “Yourself and40

Drama Teaching Methodology

Beyond,” would be much more effective in preparing the student to consider the receiverand not only the sender of a communicative message. These titles would also suggest new
horizons to the students.
Another problem with the English language classroom is that there is a suggestionof a lack of reality in the label, and the student’s behavior is often found to be unreal
and unnatural in the language classroom. Therefore, one of the major requirements ofa communicative approach language class in a Japanese university is for the student to
be encouraged to bring her or himself into the classroom. Students need to be aware ofthemselves, their emotions, their natural potentials, and capabilities and to use these to
produce language. Drama rehearsal techniques and improvisation can be used to promotethese qualities within a lesson.
It is drama methodology, the main purpose of which is to find the “why” of life andto discover the individual, which would be particularly beneficial in the initial stages in
the Japanese university, language classroom. One of the mistakes a native speaker makes
on first arriving in Japan is to presume a lack of individuality because of superficial
use of accepted speech patterns and uniformity. Recently, with the reorganization ofJapan and the influx of world knowledge through the Internet, and the watering down oftraditional customs and values in young people, individuals are looking for new beliefs
and values on which to base their lives. Therefore, this is the ideal time to approach theteaching of English through drama in this analytical and therapeutical way. Krashen(1980) refers to a student “finding himself” and thus gaining more self-confidence andself-assurance. Through drama we can help our students to find themselves, so that they
can present their identity to others rather than simply draw on others.

CHOOSING A TEACHING METHOD AIMED AT LOWERINGAFFECTIVE FILTERS AND BARRIERS
It is vital that the input in an English class is interesting and relevant, and that thelanguage study element of the classroom should not be dominant (Krashen, 1980). One of
the main difficulties for teachers is introducing topics which they feel will be relevant tothe students, especially in the early stages of a course where the students’ goals, interestsand backgrounds differ tremendously from those of the teacher’s. It seems especiallydifficult for the foreign teacher in Japan to gain information on young Japanese people’s

41

愛知大学

言語と文化

No. 32interests and thoughts without spending considerable time in the host country. However,a few hours watching and note taking in a university coffee shop or cafeteria will give theteacher plenty of information.
We should also remember that unlike ourselves as educators, most students haveno interest in linguistics and language derivatives. However, a point that the student andforeign teacher have in common is that of life experience. Even though they are different
nationalities, they share common emotions, desires, frustrations, and joys. Therefore, astarting point in educating students from a different culture is that of common humanemotions. Finding out what the students find joyful or sad should be a major part of thenative speaker’s observation work in order to enable the teacher to evoke these emotionsin the classroom. A teacher often expects the students to react to situations in the same
way as they do. In drama methodology we try to observe and evoke these emotions rather
than impose them through our own concepts of humor, etc.
Stevick (1976) suggests that many students in a language class are put on the
defensive and shows that teaching methodology should not merely reveal weaknesses
but should help the student acquire more confidence. In other words, the affective filter
should be kept low, keeping the student open to input. One of the main ways to do this is
to supply comprehensible input focused on the message and not the form. If the subject
being studied is of interest and provides a source of enjoyment in itself, the pressure oflanguage learning will be removed. So activities based on “things I like, my favorite
place, my favorite music,” etc., are preferable. Krashen (1980: 74) writes, “I think adesirable goal is that the student forget in a sense, that the message is actually encoded inanother language.” This is also another argument for the use of emotional experiences in
the classroom rather than the use of false situational language practice.
Stevick (1980) also suggests that the teacher should not insist on early language
production, but should wait until the student is ready. It is argued that the Total PhysicalResponse Method allows students to avoid early language production and so reduces
the filter. However, it only does so in this one area. We must not consider that students
producing language when they are ready is a similar concept to that of using natural
patterns of communication possessed from childhood.
Students should be encouraged to experience and to look at themselves as humanbeings with natural rhythms, physical qualities and powers, and should be encouraged
to be aware of the living environment that surrounds them. The initial role of the foreign

42Drama Teaching Methodology

language teacher in Japan is to help students to see and hear life patterns. Within thisrealization comes an awareness of silence and stillness as a productive force, rather
than it just being a gap in communication. Students are often unaware of their use ofsilence in English classes and therefore cannot see how to reorganize it to create positive
communication.
Also acquisition research tells us that errors in early language production are
inevitable and therefore, should be accepted as such. Problems with the students
inherent grammatical training are very evident at the university level where the filter
created by the desire to be grammatically accurate comes into action immediately thestudent speaks. Error correction has the immediate effect of putting the student on
the defensive. Therefore, it is quite obvious that the Grammar Translation Method is amethod quite contrary to a search for an approach devoted to lowering affective filters.
The methodology of the audio-lingual method, using drills and repetition is also contrary
to a methodology aimed at lowering students’ affective filters. However, repetition by theteacher in a correct form to reiterate content is often not seen as correction, but is viewed
as reinforcement and can be used to lower affective filters.
Another element, which raises the affective filter, is a method requiring the
instantaneous reproduction of language. This is often required in the so-called “English
Conversation” class in Japan and while many foreign teachers lower the affective filter
through creating a relaxed atmosphere in the classroom, they at the same time heighten
the affective filter by demanding instant conversations or group discussions. Anotherdemand of the English conversation class can be to require performance in front of theclass, which in itself is barrier creating. Language lessons should require involvement, anecessary quality of drama classes, but not performance.
The Natural Approach could be considered as the method most true to the input
hypothesis and could be thought to reduce sources of anxiety and tension. While this isvery true, the Natural Approach tends to avoid the issue of creation of natural patternsof acquisition. Students are rarely allowed the freedom to produce language as and when
they think necessary, according to their natural emotions. In considering a suitable
method for teaching Japanese university students, we should be careful to analyze what
approaches and methods do not cover as well as looking at what they do cover. It is very
easy to be shortsighted and ignore missing elements.
Suggestopedia is an approach seemingly aimed at lowering the affective filter.

43

愛知大学

言語と文化

No. 32

However, the authority of the teacher is considered central to the flow of the classroom.
In Japan, the authority of the teacher is also a strong factor in raising the affective
filter. Therefore, while a suggestopedia approach may be suitable in a teaching context,
adjusting the role of the teacher is essential. According to drama methodology, the teacher
can play an authoritative role in an improvisation, e.g., the teacher can keep control bybeing a conductor collecting tickets while the students experience an improvisation on
the train, or the teacher could be a policeman dispensing a group of homeless or could be
one of the homeless themselves.
In Japan, another area rarely discussed is the administration of homework. Often
homework is viewed as an appendage and adds barriers to those set up in class. We
must remember that we should support an affective filter reduction approach used in theclassroom by setting homework related to the observation of people and surroundings.
Work related to observing surroundings is preferable to that which stresses language
practice, and revision for testing.
Having looked at other approaches to teaching language, and the role of homework,
I would propose a teaching methodology for Japanese university students based on thecriteria below, which have their roots in the drama methodology of Copeau (Rudlin1986), Stanislavski (1924), Burton (1955) and Brook (1972), and their methods fortraining truthful and natural actors based on the natural development stages of young
human beings and their tendency to play.

Drama Methodology in the Language Classroom
1.

Input is based on opening the eyes of the students to themselves, and their own
natural body-flow and rhythms, co-ordination, balance of verbal and non-verbal
skills, and their relationship with surroundings and space.

2.

Input is based on giving students awareness of their own vocal cavities and ability
to change flow of sound, volume and pitch.

3.

Input is based on freeing human emotions, joys, desires and frustrations.

4.

Language production occurs as and when the students feel ready, and instantaneous
production is not required.

5.

Input is based on the natural instinct to play.

6.

Homework should be related to awareness of birthplace, environment, and empathy

44

Drama Teaching Methodology

through observation of others, to link the classroom with reality and should not belinked to language practice.
7.

Performance is not required unless students really insist on showing their work.

8.

The teacher acts as a mirror or as a support means.

9.

The class concentrates on “in-the-moment experience” and not contrived projections.

10. All language production in the students is a result of the above. The above should not
develop from language practice activities.
I would suggest that the above criteria be used as the basis for English courses with
university students, and used effectively will open up the students’ previous learned
language skills and will encourage rapport and freedom within the classroom. Workon recognizing and removing the students‘ barriers to English usage and spontaneity
should be of prime importance. Teachers will need to practice with drama methods andthe methodology involves a great deal of risk and spontaneous decision making by theteacher but the key to success is observation and fine tuning during the class and thedevelopment of great sensitivity to non-verbal messages from the students during theinitial stages. Progress may also not be visible initially but will lead to a more natural
usage of English communication in the long term.
Bibliography
Brook, Peter. (1972) The Empty Space. Penguin.
Burton, E. J. (1995) Drama in Schools: Approaches, Methods and Activities. Herbert Jenkins.
Doi, Takeo, translated by John Bester. (1973) The Anatomy of Dependence. Tokyo: Kodansha
International.
Dulay, Heidi, Burt, Marina, Krashen, Stephen. (1982). Language Two. Oxford University Press.
Krashen, Stephen D. (1980) Second Language Acquisition. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House Publishers.
Krashen, Stephen D. Terrell Tracy D. (1983) The Natural Approach: Language Acquisition in theClassroom. Alemany Press.
Krashen, Stephen D. (1995) Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Europe:
Prentice Hall.
Naimon, N. Frohlich, M., STern, D. and Todesco, A. (1978) The Good Language Learner. Toronto:
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Piaget, Jean. Trans. Marjorie Gabain. (1974) The Language and Thought of the Child. New York: New
American Library.
Rudlin, John, Copeau, Jacques. (1986) Directors in Perspective. Series Cambridge: Cambridge

45

愛知大学

言語と文化

No. 32

University Press.
Stanislavski, Constantin. (1924) Trans. J. J. Robbins. My Life and Art. London: Eyre Methuen
Stevick, Earl. (1976) Memory, Meaning, and Method. Rowley. Ma: Newbury, House.

46