Communicative Approaches vs Use of Students' Native Languages in ELL Classrooms

I was once hired to work at a Middle School in Brazil and was asked to teach English using "the" communicative approach. For the school I was hired, that meant not using the students' native language in the classroom. Although I had never taught English that way (to novice and intermediate-level students), I had heard of schools that adopted the same approach.

According to the British Council, a "communicative approach is based on the idea that learning language successfully comes through having to communicate real meaning." For example, if the teacher asks their students to find words to describe their classmates by asking them questions, then that teacher is using a communicative approach. The school coordinator did not speak English at the time, and the task to teach English only in English seemed to be quite complicated--most students were novice English speakers.

The material the school proudly adopted had been designed for ESL (English as a Second Language) classrooms, although that was an ELL (English Language Learning) or EFL (English as a Foreign Language) classroom. ESL classrooms are in countries where students live in an English-speaking country whereas ELL classrooms are located in countries where English is not predominant. It is common for ESL schools and classrooms in the US and Canada, for example, to require their students to speak only in English in the school, while interacting with learners from the same or different countries.

Following the school's recommendation, I started teaching English by conducting each class in English. Most students, who had never traveled abroad or had any meaningful experience in English before, not only complained they could not understand much of the class, but also felt like they were not smart enough to learn the language. For many of them, the only contact they had with that language was during those weekly classes.

The school's strict approach was also against telling the students the translation of words. So if a student did not understand a word, teachers would have to try different ways to explain it. That is commonly the norm in ELL or ESL classrooms, especially considering that most ESL teachers are native speakers who cannot speak the students' native language.

Several questions arise:

1. Should translation be avoided at all cost?

2. Are native English speakers better teachers?

3. Is it appropriate to adopt materials designed for ESL classrooms in ELL/EFL ones?

To me, the answer to those 3 questions is NO.

The "best" schools in my region had classes conducted in English, adopted the beautiful, imported ESL books, and tried to hire only native speakers or teachers who had lived for a long time in the US. While they took all these measures intending on delivering high-quality learning experiences, these factors did not determine students' success. In my meetings with other English teachers, I heard similar experiences they had with their own students. Students did not feel like they were learning, because they could not keep up with classes and would then fail.

The fact is that students who were learning better were privileged kids who had either a history of traveling abroad or parents who could speak English (whose did then expose their kids to the language). Students who never had any of these privileges would hardly ever learn English as effectively. Additionally, some of these disadvantaged kids would be faced with a certain judgment from teachers and classmates if they could not keep up with the classes and workloads.

Translation may actually help students

The theoretical concept of cognitive load might help teachers and schools better understand why those strategies do not work. The extraneous load generated by trying to explain something in English to a student who simply cannot communicate in this language only increased the students' anxiety towards the classes and the English language. Had translation been used in those classes, chances are students would have felt more successful and would learn more and faster.

Experts are not always the best instructors

Native English speakers are definitely experts because they have mastered the English language and know the more nuanced components of the English language. However, teaching is a skill that is unrelated to being proficient at the language. Skilled language teachers may or may not be native speakers. When teaching non-native English speakers, native speakers should adopt a culturally-responsive approach and acknowledge students' different learning processes.

Materials should be designed to the specific audience that will use them

ESL books today look great and have improved over time (for ESL students, definitely). ELL/EFL students still need books (or any other type of material) that are not only culturally-responsive, but also cognizant of the cognitive load generated by each activity. Instructions to teachers should also differ from the ones given to ESL teachers, since it is the instruction itself that makes a huge difference.