بررسی و شناساییِ روش‌ها ورویکردهای کارآمد آموزش زبان فارسی برای اهداف عمومی زبان‌آموزانِ غیرایرانی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

نویسنده‏ ی مسئول، دانشیار گروه آموزش زبان فارسی به غیرفارسی‌زبانان، دانشگاه بین‏ المللی امام خمینی(ره)

10.30479/jtpsol.2020.12538.1467

چکیده

در دانش آموزشکاوی زبان، پژوهش در مورد روش‌ها و رویکردهای مناسب آموزشی از جایگاه والایی برخوردارند. آموزش زبان فارسی برای اهداف عمومی زبان‌آموزان غیرایرانی نیازمند مطالعه‌ی روش‌ها و رویکردهای ویژه‌ی آموزش زبان دوم است. برای تحقق هدف این پژوهش، یعنی شناسایی روش‌های آموزشی مؤثر برای آموزش زبان فارسی به غیرفارسی‌زبانان، پرسشنامه‌ا‌ی به کار گرفته شد که شامل 22 گویه در پنج بخشِ دیدگاه‌های ساختگرا، کارکردگرا، بیناکنشگرا، اختصاصی و سایر دیدگاه‌ها بود. نمونه‌ی آماری در این پژوهشِ میدانی، 43 مدرس آموزش زبان فارسی به غیرفارسی‌زبانان از مراکز آموزش زبان فارسیِ دانشگاه‌­های کشور شرکت کردند. نتایج این پژوهش نشان داد که در مورد 22 روش مطرح شده در پرسشنامه، 16 روش در وضعیت مطلوب و اثرگذاری برای تدوین منابع آموزش زبان فارسی به غیرفارسی‏زبانان برای اهداف عمومی قرار داشتند. از نظر رتبه­بندی نیز 3 روش «مدرس محور و متناسب با شرایط کلاس»، «ارتباطی»، «شنیداری-گفتاری»، «تکلیف‌محور» و «رویکرد طبیعی» در رتبه‌های اول تا پنجم از نظر میزان اهمیت برای آموزش زبان فارسی به غیرفارسی­زبانان برای اهداف عمومی قرار دارند. آزمون‌های تی برای تمامی روش­ها به جز روش­های «آموزش زبان دگمِی»، «پیمسلر»، «مایکل توماس» و «یادگیری از راه یاددهی» نشان می‌دهد که این چهار روش از نظر مدرسان آموزش زبان فارسی به غیرفارسی‌زبانان کارآمدی لازم برای تدوین منابع آموزش زبان فارسی به غیرفارسی­زبانان برای اهداف عمومی را ندارند. دستاوردهای این پژوهش به مدرسان زبان فارسی کمک می‌کند تا کارآمدترین روش‌ها را در آموزش زبان فارسی و تدوین منابع آموزش زبان فارسی به غیرفارسی‌زبانان به کارگیرند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Teaching General Language Persian to Speakers of Other Languages: Investigating and Identification of Effective Methods and Approaches

نویسنده [English]

  • Amirreza Vakilifard
Corresponding Author, Associate Professor of Teaching Persian Language to speakers of other languages Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Abstract:
Language teaching methods and approaches are considerably effective in teaching Persian language and culture. This study examined the teachers' perspectives toward the use of methods and approaches appropriate for teaching Persian to students learning Persian for general purposes.
To this, the study recruited 43 teachers teaching the Persian language to non-Persian language learners at several Persian language centers across different universities. They were provided with a 22-item questionnaire probing the teachers' attitudes to the use of methods sub-categorized into five sections, namely, structural view, functional view, interactional view, proprietary methods, and other.
The results showed that the participants generally favored 16 (out of 22) teaching methods and approchs among which "teacher-oriented and appropriate to class conditions," "communicative", "audio lingual", "task-based" and "natural approach" were ranked from the first to fifth positions respectively; in their perspectives, the principles of these five methods could be used for teaching Persian Language for general purposes. The results of the t-test showed that the methods of "teaching dogmatic language," "Pimsler," "Michael Thomas," and learning by teaching were not useful in designing and developing resources for teaching Persian language for general purposes. The results of this study might encourage the Persian language teachers to employ the most efficient methods in teaching Persian to the speakers of other languages.
Extended Abstract:
Learning a foreign language is a complicated process. There are various methods and approaches to teaching a second/foreign language. The main common concern of these apprroaches is to help learners improve their language proficiency. The introduction of effective methods or approaches could remarkably motivate learners to improve their language ability level. While there are some research-based approaches to upgrade the quality of language teaching profession, the relevant literature documents no investigation evaluating their effectiveness in teaching Persian to non-Persian language learners.    
Nunan (2003) believes that methodology is a set of procedures that a teacher needs to follow in the classroom. It is grounded based on the teacher's beliefs about the nature of language and language learning. Educational researchers claim that there could be various approaches to teaching language since the language itself is a complex and dynamic system.
Language teaching methods are classified into three principal views: (a): Structural methods (grammar-translation, audio lingual), (b) Functional methods (oral-situational, guided practice) and (c) Interactive methods (direct, series, communication, immersion, silent way, group learning, hypersensitivity, natural approach, total physical response, teaching proficiency in reading and storytelling, dogme, and participatory approach).
Structural approach views the language as a system comprised of interrelated structural components to decode meanings (e.g., grammar).
Functionalist approach sees language as a means of expressing or performing a particular function, such as "asking for something."
Interactive perspective was introduced in the 1980s. It regards language as a means of establishing and sustaining social relationships, focusing on patterns of movement, actions, negotiation, and interaction in dialogue (Richard & Rogers, 2003).
Besides this classification, there are two further categories as well, namely, (1) Proprietary methods (Pimsler, Michael Thomas) and others (learning by teaching, teacher-centered, and appropriate to class conditions).
It seems that a language teaching method might be considered a significant issue in planning Persian language teaching to non-Persian speakers. Hence, one may ask this question: "which of the proposed methods or approaches could be contributive in upgrading the quality of teaching the Persian language for general purposes? The results of such analysis can be helpful in selecting and implementing sound methods and approaches for teaching the Persian language profession.
The field method design was employed to investigate and analyze the teachers' perspectives; accordingly, a questionnaire was distributed among 43 teachersteaching Persian as a second language to non-Persian language learners at different Persian language centers across several universities. This instrument was divided into five sections (e.g., structural view, functional view, interactional view, proprietary methods, and other.) investigating the participants' attitudes toward the employment of 22 existing language teaching methods and approaches. Cronbach's alpha test was used to estimate the consistency of the items in the questionnaire; the test provided us with coefficient reliability of 0.931, indicating the adequate efficiency of the questionnaire.
The results showed that the participants generally favored 16 (out of 22) teaching methods and approchs among which "teacher-oriented and appropriate to class conditions," "communicative", "audio lingual", "task-based" and"natural approach" were ranked from the first to fifth positions respectively; in their perspectives, the principles of these five methods could be used for teaching Persian Language for general purposes. The results of the t-test showed that the methods of "teaching dogmatic language," "Pimsler," "Michael Thomas," and learning by teaching were not useful in designing and developing resources for teaching Persian language for general purposes.
It is well accepted that practical teaching skills and methods are considered very significant in the language teaching profession, and the learning will not be realized if an appropriate methodology is not followed in teaching the language. In addition to classical ones, there are some new empirically-based methods for language instruction characterized by some particular strengths and weaknesses. The methods are expected to have corresponded with the language learners and learning content; from this perspective, the teacher's teaching skills are a set of various factors being in line with human being characteristics; the important teaching skills could be highly significant in stimulating the students' motivation. Generally, the language teaching methods should be exclusively dynamic, appealing, and influential since the lack of these characteristics may make the teaching activities highly annoying, seriously demotivating Persian language learners in the long run.
Some language teachers may prefer and follow teacher-centered methods based on the class environment. This group of instructors probably believes that teachers are not required to follow the most appropriate language teaching methods. Instead, they argue that the language teachers need to be sufficiently familiar with the characteristics of the existing methods. It is, in this case, that they can benefit methods based on the wants and needs of the students as well as the factors in the teaching contexts. In other words, these teachers assert that educational context and students' cognitive condition that encourage the teachers to choose a specific appropriate teaching method or approach. In fact, in this way, the teacher connects his/her methodological perspective to the method-oriented world to make sound pedagogical decisions in challenging situations
Textbooks, considered as the most essential and fundamental educational resource for language learners, could quickly reflect language teaching methods. Given this issue in mind, Persian language textbooks could adequately make the appropriate principles of a sound method explicit. That is, effort should be practiced to upgrade the content of Persian language textbooks making it sufficiently influential in teaching and learning the Persian language. The Current and available textbooks have been organized based on the principles of traditional language teaching schools, and, therefore, a serious revision is warranted to modify or alternate the contents of these language textbooks. Persian language practitioners might pinpoint the strengths and weaknesses of the available course books for further modification practices to make these educational materials considerably contributive in teaching and learning the Persian language. 
Language teachers following a specific teaching method will not be significantly successful in achieving their educational goals. Language instruction is equivalent to time management, and Persian language instructors are required to be familiar with all methods and approaches so that they can benefit the principles upon the situation factors making the learning process adequately meaningful, successful, and sustainable by Persian language learners. 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Language Teaching Method
  • Language Teaching Approach
  • Language skills
  • Persian Language Teaching for General Purposes
استاینبرگ، دنی. (1382). درآمدی بر روان‌شناسی زبان. ترجمه‌ی ارسلان گلفام. تهران: سمت.
بروان، داگلاس. (1378). اصول یادگیری و آموزش زبان. ترجمه‌ی منصور فهیم. تهران: رهنما.
تاجالدین، ضیاءالدین و عشقوی، ملیحه. (1392). آموزش زمان‌های فارسی به غیرفارسی‌زبانان: مقایسه‌ی روش‌های تدریس ساختاری و ارتباطی. دوفصلنامه‌ی علم زبان،1 (1)، صص: 83- 108.
دبیرمقدم، محمد. و صدیقی‌فر، زهره. (1391). آموزش جمله‌های شرطی زبان فارسی به غیرفارسی‌زبانان: مقایسه‌ی دو روش تدریس ساختاری و تکلیف‌محور. پژوهش‌نامه‌ی آموزش زبان فارسی به غیرفارسی زبانان، 1 (2)، صص: 35-59.
رحیمی، مهرک و آژغ، حوریه. (1389). تأثیر آموزش تکلیف‌محور بر مهارت خواندن و پیشرفت تحصیلی دانشجویان مهندسی در درس زبان تخصصی. نشریه‌ی علمی پژوهشی فناوری آموزش، سال پنجم، 5 (2)، صص: 135-145.
صدیقیفر، زهره سعادت‌حسینی، زهرا و علویمقدم، سید بهنام. (1394). بررسی اثربخشی آموزش مبتنی بر روش تکلیف‌محور برخواندن و درک مطلب فارسی با اهداف ویژه. پژوهشنامهی آموزش زبان فارسی به‌غیرفارسی‌زبانان. 4 (1، پیاپی9)، صص: 79-101.
ضیاء حسینی، محمد. (1385). روش تدریس زبان خارجی/ دوم. چاپ اول. تهران: رهنما.
فرجی مرزنگو، سلیمان. (1379). آموزش زبان فارسی به غیر فارسیزبانان با روش ارتباطی (پایان‌نامه‌ی کارشناسی ارشد). شیراز: دانشگاه شیراز.
میردهقان، مهین‌ناز؛ داوری اردکانی، نگار و عبداللهی پارسا، طاهره. (1392). تأثیر رویکرد تکلیف‌محور و انگاره‌ی اندرسون بر درک متون اسلامی. پژوهش‌نامه‌ی آموزش زبان فارسی به غیرفارسی‌زبانان. 2 (3)، صص: 117-142.
ناعمی، علی‌محمد. (1389). روان‌شناسی آموزشی مهارت‌های ارتباط زبان. چاپ دوم. مشهد: آستان قدس رضوی.
 
References:
Aslan, S. (2015). Is Learning by Teaching Effective in Gaining 21st Century Skills? The Views of Pre-Service Science Teachers. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 15 (6),1441-1457.
Bell,D. M.(2007). Do teachers think that methods are dead?ELT Journal, 61(2), 135–143.
Brown, D. (1999).Principles of Language Learning and teaching, Translated by Mansour Fahim, Tehran: Rahnama.[In Persian]
Brown, D. & Le, H. (2015). Teaching by principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy, (4thed). NY : Pearson Education.
Celce-Murcia, M. (2015). An Overview of Language Teaching Methods and Approaches, In M. Celce-Murcia, D. M. Brinton, M. A. Snow (eds.), Teaching English as a second or Foreign Language (2-14), (4thed), US: Pearson Education.
Dabirmoghaddam, M. & Sedighifar, Z. (2012).Teaching Persian Conditional Sentences to Non-Persian Speakers: A Comparison Between Task-based and Structural Methods, teaching Persian language to non-Persian speakers of Others languages , No. 1(2), 117-142.[In Persian]
Faraji Marzango, S. (2000). Teaching Persian language to non-Persian speakers based on communication method (Unpublished master's thesis). Shiraz :Shiraz University. [In Persian]
Ghazal, S. & Singh, S. (2014). Teaching Unplugged: Applications of Dogme ELT in India.International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies. 2 (1), 141-152.
Hall, G. (2011). Exploring English Language Teaching: Language in Action. London, NY: Routledge.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). Understanding language teaching From method to postmethod. Mahwah, NJ Lawrence Erlbaum.
Larsen-Freeman, D. & Anderson, M. (2016). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching (3rd ed). NY: Oxford University Press.
Lichtman, K.(2015). Research on TPR Storytelling. In B. Ray & C. Seely, Fluency through TPR Storytelling(364-380), (7thed.),Berkeley:Command Performance Language Institute.
Li, J., Steele, J., Slater, R., Bacon, M., & Miller, T. (2016). Teaching practices and language use in two-way dual language immersion programs in a large public school district. International Multilingual Research Journal, 10 (1), 31-43.
Long, M. & CrooKes, G. (1991). Three approaches to task-basedSyllabus design.  ESL Quarterly. 10 (1), 10-36.
Meddings, L., & Thornbury, S. (2009). Teaching unplugged: Dogme in English language teaching. Peaslake: Delta Publishing.
Mas, R.N.& Baiguatova, G. (2015). Growing Participator Approach: Our Experience as Amharic Students and Teachers of Spanish and RussianLanguages. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 178: 169–174.
Mirdehghan, M., Davari ardakani, N.& Abdollahi Parsa, T. (2013). The Effect of Task-based Method and Anderson’s Reading Model in Comprehension of  Islamic Passages, teaching Persian language to non-Persian speakers of Others languages, No. 2(3), 117-142. [In Persian]
Naemi, A. M. (2009). Educational Psychology of Language Communication Skills. (2nd ed.),  Mashhad: Astan Quds Razavi. [In Persian]
Nagaraj, G. (2008). English Language Teaching: Approaches, Methods and Techniques (2nded) New Delhi: Orient Blackswan.
Nunan, D. (2003).Practical English Language Teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pimsleur, P) .2013). How to Learn a Foreign Language? New York: Simon& Schuster.
Rahimi, M, & Azhegh, H. (2010). The Impact of TBLT on Mechanical Engineering Students’ Achievement and Reading Comprehension in an ESP Course, Education technology, 5 (2), 135-145. [In Persian]
Ray, B& . Seely, C. (2004). Fluency Through TPR Storytelling: Achieving Real Language Acquisition in School (7th ed.). Command Performance Language Institute: Blaine Ray Workshops.
Richards, J. C.)2006(. Communicative Language Teaching Today. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. (1990) The Language Teaching Matrix.NY: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T.  (2003).  Approaches  and  methods  in  Language  teaching.NY:Cambridge  University  Press.
Shi, Y. & Ariza, E. (2018).A Study on the Natural Approach (NA) and Teaching Proficiency through Reading and Storytelling(TPRS). Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 185, 405-409.
Sedighifar, Z., Sadat Hoseini, Z., & Alavi Moghadam, S. B. (2015). The Effect of Task – Based Language Teaching on Reading Comprehension in Farsi for Specific Purposes, teaching Persian language to non-Persian speakers of Others languages, No. 4(1), 79-101.[In Persian]
Solity, J. (2008). The Learning Revolution, London: Hodder Educational.
Steinberg, D. (2003). An Introduction to psycholiguistic, Translated by Arsalan Golfam, Tehran: SAMT. [In Persian]
Stollhans, S. (2016). Learning by teaching: developing transferable skills. In E. Corradini, K. Borthwick and A. Gallagher-Brett (eds), Employability for languages: a handbook (161-164). Dublin: Researchpublishing.net.
Swan, M. (2005). Legislation by hypothesis: the case of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics. 26(3), 376-401.
Tajeddin, Z. & Eshghavi, M. (2013). Teaching Persian Tenses to the Speakers of Other Languages:Impact of Structural and Communicative Tasks, Language science, 1(1), 83-108. [In Persian]
Thornbury, S. (2000). A Dogma for EFL. International Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign Language (IATEFL)Issues, 153 (2), 2.
Xerri, D. (2012). Experimenting with Dogme in a mainstream ESL context. English Language Teaching, 5(9), 59-65.
Ziahosseiny, M. (2006). Foreign language teaching methods, Tehran: Rahnama.[In Persian]