Semiotics and Didactics:
The Classroom: Forum or Arena?
Dimitrios Thanasoulas
University of Athens
1.Introduction
During the last twenty-odd years we have been inundated with various new teaching
methodologies that purport to make the learning process more thought-provoking for both educator
and pupil. Admittedly, the non-human components, that is to say syllabi, have so far made a
significant contribution to foreign language learning, whether we refer to the structural
syllabus, which was in its heyday in the 50s and 60s, the notional syllabus, or the
notional-functional syllabus. We will not dwell on this any further, since in-depth
examination of the various types of syllabus is not within the purview of the present work. Yet, we
have to note that, among the wide diversity of approaches that have permeated foreign language
learning, the Communicative and Progressivist Approaches are of particular importance and value.
The philosophy underlying the former approach is that language is to be viewed as a
vehicle for communication; a conduit through which people express feelings or exchange
information and opinions, in a given social context. In short, the tenet that informs its structure and
methodology is embedding language in its situational context. It is perhaps (Dendrinos,
1992: 116) a modern recasting, so to speak, of Saussure's parole:
The logic behind the first approach is that language is a means of communication
in a social environment and we need it in order to use it when we are discussing certain topics /
themes or when we find ourselves in certain situations. With its appearance in the foreign language
teaching scene, there was a move away from focusing on language as a system of autonomous
meanings, expressed by its formal properties, to concentrating on language in operation, which
implies that meaning is dependent on the context of situation and on the speakers using
it.
The latter, i.e. the Progressivist Approach, takes a holistic view of the teaching-learning
process, with the aim of fostering the student's development of the whole persona in an
unfragmented way. Consequently, the pupil is no longer considered to be a passive
subject that is called on to function in a predefined, systematic way; on the contrary, he
or she is looked upon as a self-actualizing individual whose cognitive, emotional and educational
needs are to be respected and promoted. As Dendrinos notes,
progressivists consider learners as effective participants in the process of learning and
responsible for its outcomes and the teacher as a guide and facilitator who creates conditions for the
development of an inventive, problem-solving capacity (ibid., p. 131).
However, no matter what kind of approach, design or procedure we may resort to, it is an
indisputable fact that, unless human interaction, inside or outside the classroom, leads to authenticity
and self-fulfilment, the whole process is bound to fail. There has to be room for both teachers and
students to grow into. In this kind of relationship, methods and techniques are merely
facilitating devices, whereas the cognitive, affective and social growth of teachers and
learners is the keynote. In light of this, we will endeavour to shed some light on the role the
aforementioned participants play, and address ourselves to some of the most besetting problems
confronting both parts of the educational process.
|
Page + 1