Pada kesempatan kali ini saya ingin lebih mengingatkan diri saya sendiri untuk selalu waspada terhadap kejahatan, tipu daya, hasutan dan bisikan-bisikan iblis laknatullah, yang selalu menggoda manusia pada kesesatan yang nyata dan membuat kerusakan serta fitnah di muka bumi ini. Dan saya berharap, akan membawa manfaat bagi para sahabat dan pembaca lainnya. Harapan saya dan mudah-mudahan menjadi harapan sahabat juga, bahwa kita berusaha untuk menghindarkan diri dari hasutan dan bisikan iblis laknatullah, sehingga kita senantiasa berada dalam jalan yang lurus dan mendapatkan kebahagiaan dunia dan akhirat, Amin.
Sebagai referensi saya dalam postingan ini adalah sebuah kitab karya Muhammad Abduh Al-Maghawuri yang berjudul “Hiwarun Ma’a Iblis”, dimana kitab ini menjelaskan tentang bisikan-bisikan iblis laknatullah dalam hati manusia dan cara menangkal dari keburukan serta kejahatannya. Semoga tulisan ini dapat menambah wawasan ilmu bagi kita semua dan kita diberikan kekuatan oleh Allah Ta’ala untuk mengamalkannya sehingga menjadi ilmu yang bermanfaat untuk diri, keluarga, sahabat dan saudara-saudara kita kaum mukmin lainnya. Semoga para sahabat dan pembaca termasuk diri saya sendiri senantiasa mendapat Petunjuk serta Hidayah-Nya, Amin.

Sesungguhnya sudah menjadi kewajiban setiap muslim sejati yang berpikiran sehat dan jernih, yang beriman dan berakal sehat, yang mengharapkan dapat bertemu dengan Sang Khalik, yang menginginkan pahala akhirat dan kebahagian di dunia, untuk senantiasa hati-hati serta waspada terhadap gangguan iblis laknatullah dan bala tentaranya. Mengapa? Karena iblis laknatullah tak pernah mau berhenti sekejap pun dalam melakukan kegiatannya yang terkutuk untuk menggoda manusia, oleh karena itu, sedetik pun setiap mukmin tidak boleh lengah dan senantiasa mengisi hatinya dengan berdzikir dan bersyukur. Dan kita harus ekstra hati-hati dan waspada terhadap segala tipu daya dan bujukan iblis laknatullah. Itulah kewajiban setiap mukmin sejati dan orang-orang yang selalu mengharapkan kebahagiaan di dunia terlebih di akhirat nanti.
Berdasarkan sebuah keterangan, iblis laknatullah tidak dapat secara langsung menyeret seseorang kepada kekufuran, tetapi dia akan menebar fitnah, kebencian dan permusuhan diantara hamba-hamba Allah, sehingga mereka tersesat dan menyimpang dari rel yang benar. Sebagaimana disebutkan dalam sebuah hadits Nabi Shalallahu Alaihi Wassalam ;
“Sungguh iblis telah putus asa menggoda supaya dirinya disembah oleh orang-orang shalat. Tetapi ia tetap berupaya keras menghasut (supaya timbul permusuhan) diantara mereka.” (HR. Muslim)
Sekiranya ada pertanyaan ; Manfaat apa yang akan diperoleh iblis laknatullah dengan pecah belahnya kaum muslimin? Maka Insya Allah jawabannya kira-kira seperti ini, jika kaum muslimin berpecah belah, maka tercapailah tujuan yang diinginkan iblis laknatullah. Sebab ia dengan mudah menggoda setiap manusia, sebagaimana terdapat dalam salah satu hadits Nabi Shalallahu Alaihi Wasssalam :
“Sesungguhnya iblis meletakkan arsynya (singgasana) di atas air, kemudian ia mengirim bala tentaranya (untuk menggoda manusia). Diantara bala tentara itu, yang terdekat kedudukannya di sisi iblis, ialah yang paling besar fitnahnya diantara mereka. Lalu salah satu dari mereka datang dan berkata, “Saya tidak akan tinggalkan orang ini sampai saya berhasil memisahkan dari istrinya.” Lalu iblis memeluknya dan berujar, “Sungguh bagus kamu.” (HR. Muslim)
Hadits ini memberikan gambaran pada kita, bahwa kita harus senantiasa berhati-hati dengan segala tipu daya iblis laknatullah, terutama karena iblis laknatullah sangat pandai dalam membuat suatu fitnah sehingga menimbulkan kerusakan yang sangat besar. Bila kita simak dari hadits di atas, maka termasuk poin penting adalah bahwa dengan fitnah yang dihasutkan pada jiwa seseorang, maka dia akan memecah hubungan satu manusia dengan manusia lainnya, sehingga bila ia dalam kesendiriannya, disitulah iblis bisa menghancurkan keimanannya dan menambahlah temannya di neraka nanti.
Sesungguhnya dalam beberapa keterangan, disebutkan bahwa iblis laknatullah tidak akan mampu menggoda manusia yang melakukan segala sesuatunya berdasarkan keikhlasan hati, yang selalu mengokohkan keimanannya dan selalu bertawakkal pada-Nya. Semoga kita termasuk ke dalam golongan orang-orang yang ikhlas, golongan orang-orang yang selalu mengokohkan imannya dan senantiasa bertawakal kepada-Nya. Amin.
Siapakah sebenarnya iblis itu? Untuk menjawab pertanyaan ini, saya mencoba mengemukakan salah satu pendapat dari seorang ahli ilmu dan ahli tafsir terkemuka yaitu Ibnu Katsir (semoga Allah merahmati Beliau) dalam sebuah kitabnya yang berjudul “Qashasul Anbiya” yang mengatakan bahwa “Iblis adalah dari bangsa jin yang pada mulanya tinggal di satu daerah di muka bumi yang bernama Al-Jazair. Di daerah itu ia tinggal bersama bangsanya dalam jumlah yang banyak sekali. Kemudian, karena mereka berbuat kerusakan di muka bumi, maka mereka diperangi oleh para malaikat, dan sebagian dari mereka ditawan, diantaranya iblis ini. Setelah mendapat ampunan dari Allah dan sekaligus menyembah-Nya, jadilah ia pemimpin malaikat yang berada di langit dan di bumi. Iblis mulanya mahluk yang sangat dekat dengan Allah. Nah ketika datang perintah sujud kepada Adam, iblis menolak perintah itu dan malahan menyombongkan diri karena merasa lebih mulia daripada Adam. Sejak itulah dia menjadi syaitan yang terkutuk.”
Lalu apakah sesungguhnya perbedaannya iblis dengan syaitan laknatullah? Sebagaimana Iblis laknatullah yang telah diuraikan diatas, maka syaitan laknatullah adalah setiap yang berbuat maksiat dan durhaka kepada perintah Allah dari golongan jin dan manusia. Bahkan binatang pun ada yang termasuk syaitan. Menurut cerita bahwa dalam bahasa Arab, ular juga disebut syaitan. Allahu ‘Alam bi Showab.
Ada salah satu hadits Nabi Shalallahu ‘Alaihi Wassalam yang bisa dijadikan gambaran bahwa iblis dan syaitan adalah penyebutan dua mahluk yang berbeda. Hadits tersebut sebagaimana diceritakan oleh Aisyah, bahwa , pada suatu malam Rasulullah Shalallahu Alaihi Wassalam pernah keluar rumah meninggalkan dirinya. Katanya,”Lalu saya keluar pula membuntuti Beliau dari belakang. Ketika Beliau melihat apa yang saya lakukan, Beliau pun berkata, “Apa yang engkau lakukan, hai Aisyah. Apakah kamu cemburu?” Saya jawab, orang seperti saya kenapa tidak cemburu kepada Anda ya Rasul. Beliau berkata, “Atau barangkali setanmu telah mendatangimu?”, Apakah saya disertai syaitan, ya Rasulullah? Tanyaku heran. “Ya” jawabnya. Apakah tiap-tiap manusia disertai syaitan? Tanyaku. “Ya” jawabnya. Anda juga disertai syaitan ya Rasulullah? Tanyaku lagi. Beliau menjawab, “Ya, saya juga disertai syaitan. Tetapi Tuhanku telah menolongku atasnya sehingga ia tunduk.”
Dari keterangan di atas, beberapa ulama menafsirkan bahwa “Iblis itu dari golongan syaitan karena kedurhakaannya. Sedangkan syaitan laknatullah sendiri itu, bukanlah iblis, karena iblis adalah kata untuk jin tertentu bernama “Azazil”. Disamping itu setiap manusia disertai syaitan laknatullah. Akan tetapi setiap manusia tidak disertai iblis laknatullah” Dan sebagian ulama mengatakan bahwa “hadits diatas menunjukan bahwa adanya perbedaan antara kata iblis dan kata syaitan.” Dan saya berkata Allahu ‘Alam bi Showab, hanya Allah Yang Maha mengetahui segala sesuatunya.
Wahai saudaraku, sahabatku juga kaum muslimin semuanya, hendaklah kita selalu waspada terhadap perilaku-perilaku jahat dan buruk, dari kesombongan dan kecongkakan, dari segala tipu muslihat iblis laknatullah yang telah dihembuskan pada syaitan laknatullah dari golongan jin dan manusia, yang setiap saat menggoda kita, yang setiap waktu berniat menyesatkan kita dan berkeinginan memperbanyak umat yang dapat menemaninya di neraka kelak. Dan kisah kesombongan iblis laknatullah ini diabadikan dalam sebuah ayatnya dalam Al-Qur’an, yaitu :
“Dan Ingatlah tatkala Kami berkata kepada malaikat, sujudlah kalian kepada Adam. Lalu mereka pun bersujud kecuali iblis. Dia justru enggan dan menyombongkan diri, dan dia termasuk golongan orang-orang kafir.” (QS. Al-Baqarah : 34)
Marilah kita bersama-sama untuk saling mengingatkan untuk mendekatkan diri kita pada Allah Ta’ala sebagai Raja sekalian alam, yang menguasai langit dan bumi beserta seluruh mahluk ciptaan-Nya, karena mereka (syaitan laknatullah) telah bersumpah di hadapan Allah untuk menggoda manusia dari segala penjuru, sebagaimana yang diterangkan dalam sebuah ayat –Nya :
“Iblis menjawab, berilah saya tempo sampai waktu mereka dibangkitkan.” Allah berkata, “Sungguh kamu salah satu dari mereka yang diberi tempo.” Iblis menjawab, “Karena Engkau telah menghukum saya tersesat, maka saya benar-benar akan (menghalang-halangi) mereka dari jalanmu yang lurus. Kemudian saya akan datangi mereka dari depan dan dari belakang, dari kanan dan dari kiri mereka. Sehingga Engkau tak akan dapati kebanyakan mereka yang bersyukur/taat .” Allah berfirman, “Keluarlah kamu dari surga itu sebagai mahluk paling hina lagi tersesat. Sesungguhnya barangsiapa diantara kamu (manusia) yang mengikutimu, sungguh Aku akan masukkan mereka ke dalam neraka jahannam bersama kamu sekalian.” (QS. Al-Baqarah : 34)
Dari ayat di atas, beberapa ulama sepakat bahwa tugas atau pekerjaan iblis laknatullah adalah menggoda, menyesatkan dan menghalang-halangi cucu Adam dari jalan yang lurus serta senantiasa menjerumuskan mereka ke lembah kesesatan. Kesesatan yang membawa pada penyesalan yang tiada arti dan dari kebinasaan yang tak pernah dibayangkan sebelumnya. Dan semoga kita bisa menjaga diri dari segala tipu daya iblis laknatullah, yang senantiasa menggoda kita baik dari golongan jin dan manusia, terlebih dengan syaitan yang menyerupai manusia, karena mereka nyata terlihat namun samar untuk diketahui, Amin.
Insya Allah pada tulisan berikutnya saya akan mencoba untuk belajar mengingatkan diri saya sendiri dengan materi yang berkaitan dengan hal di atas, yaitu tentang cara iblis menggoda manusia dan beberapa pelajaran penting lainnya. Dan mudah-mudahan juga dapat membawa manfaat serta kebaikan pada para Sahabat dan pembaca lainnya. Dan saya hanyalah seorang hamba yang sedang belajar memperbaiki diri menuju kehidupan yang lebih baik. Semoga kita termasuk ke dalam golongan orang-orang yang beruntung, dimana salah satunya dapat terhindar dari bisikan dan hasutan iblis laknatullah berkat pertolongan dan perlindungan dari Allah Ta’ala, Amin.
By : Makna Hidup

st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
<!– /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:”"; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:”";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

Madrid, D., Robinson, B., Hidalgo, E. Gomis, A. Verdejo, M. J., Ortega, J. L. (1993):

“The Teacher as a Source of Motivation in the EFL Classroom”, INTERNATIONAL

CONFERENCE OF APPLIED LINGUISTICS, Universidad de Granada, 11-15 de enero

de 1993, pp. 492-500.

Pág. 492

THE TEACHER AS A SOURCE OF MOTIVATION IN THE EFL CLASSROOM

Daniel Madrid, Bryan Robinson, Encarnación Hidalgo, Annette Gomis, Mª José

Verdejo, José Luis Ortega

University of Granada

1. TEACHERS AND LANGUAGE LEARNING

It is currently assumed that the success or failure in learning a foreign language

depends on some fundamental factors:

a) The learner’s social context: sociocultural and socioeconomic factors.

b) The learner’s personal characteristics: age, cognitive and affective

characteristics and personality traits.

c) The learning process: quality of strategies, techniques and cognitive

operations.

d) Conditions under which learning takes place, which includes EFL and/or ESL

situations.

Our work has been done in EFL contexts, that is, in Spanish classrooms where

English is taught as a compulsory curriculum subject, in a non-supportive environment.

In these situations, results depend very much on the didactic treatment applied by the

teacher:

- Types of objectives that teacher and students aim to achieve.

- Contents selected to obtain the objectives

- Strategies and techniques employed in the classroom

- Materials and resources used

But not only the didactic treatment in itself is important, the personal

characteristics and personality traits of the person that applies that treatment in the

classroom, his/her teaching style, attitudes and personal qualities are also fundamental.

Dunkin and Biddle’s model of teaching (1974:38) also make the outcome of the

teaching and learning process dependable on three major set of variables:

a) The teacher’s characteristics (presage variables)

b) The pupil’s properties (context variables)

c) The classroom teaching (process variables: includes teacher and students’

classroom behaviour)

According to this model, EFL teachers exert certain effects (presage variables)

depending on their characteristics as individuals, their formative experiences, their

training, etc. EFL teachers’ classroom behaviour and teaching styles are considered

process variables and are influenced by the former.

Stern (1984:500) also maintains the same major variables identified by Dunkin

and Biddle (1974) but introduces some changes in the model he proposes. The

teacher’s together with the leaner’s characteristics are considered presage variables

and influence the process variables.

Both models can be included within the process-product paradigm (see for

example Gage 1978, Brophy 1983, Good 1979, Wittrock 1986) and consider that the

teacher’s didactic and personal qualities have a great influence on the learning

process and consequently on the learning product. The influence on the learning

process is exerted not only through effective teaching strategies and techniques, but

also by generating positive attitudes and motivation for learning the FL.

Pág. 493

2. TEACHERS AS MOTIVATORS

Finocchiaro has identified twenty-four hallmarks of superior teachers, some of

which are related to personal and affective factors (1988:3-5):

- Making learners feel loved, respected and secure and that they can achieve

success by concentrating on the teacher’s comprehensible input and tasks.

- Keeping motivation of students at a high level.

- Offering a relaxing atmosphere for learning.

Prodromou (1991) aimed to discover students’ views of good and bad language

teachers and found out that students

like teachers to dislike teachers to

be friendly be very strict

know how to treat them be too authoritarian

be forceful, but not strict be very serious

be educated be bad tempered

be funny talk too much

believe in students speak flat

be proud of students be distant from students

have a personality of their own treat kids like objects

be good advisers be too sarcastic and ironic

be experienced make them feel anxious

We believe that all these attitudes -and others- towards the foreign language

teacher have a strong influence on the student’s motivational state because

motivational factors determine to a great extend the degree of learning success.

Gardner, in his social-educational model (1985:147), relates the student’s

outcomes to four individual differences: intelligence, language aptitude, attitudes and

motivation and situational anxiety. In previous works, Gardner has summarized the

major components of motivational characteristics. He distinguishes a set of variables

(1975:58):

- Group specific attitudes. In our case, attitudes towards English speaking

communities and desire to integrate into those societies.

- Attitudes toward English as a subject in comparison with other curricular

subjects.

- Attitudes toward the foreign language teacher

- Attitudes toward the classroom methodology: activities tasks and teaching

resources.

- Influence of parents and the social environment as sources of motivation.

3. OUR RESEARCH WORK

We have also controlled those variables in the Spanish educational context and

have presented some provisional results in Madrid et al. (1993). In this paper, we have

focused our attention on the teacher as a source of motivation.

3.1. Variables controlled

The first questionnaire provides information about the motivational agents or

factors that influence most the student’s interests and attitudes toward the study of

English, among the following:

- Tasks carried out in the EFL classroom

- EFL teacher’s qualities

Pág. 494

- Parents

- Characteristics of the subject in itself, as a linguistic discipline

- The desire to integrate and live in the foreign country

- The instrumental importance of English in present day society

The second questionnaire was open. It gave us reasons why students like or

dislike their EFL teacher and their opinion about the fundamental characteristics and

qualities of good English teachers.

Finally, we administered a closed questionnaire in order to know:

Which of the following characteristics are more relevant for students:

- The English teacher physical appearance

- His/her scientific knowledge

- The teacher’s didactic preparation

- Personality traits

Which specific qualities and behaviours are liked and disliked, among the

following:

Physical appearance:

1 Being handsome/pretty

2 Being elegant

Scientific preparation:

3 Have a deep knowledge of the subject

4 Have a good pronunciation

5 Being fluent

Teaching performance:

6 Prepare classes

7 Inform about objectives and contents

8 Try to motivate students

9 Explain with clarity

10 Follow an adequate pace

11 Organize games

12 Being fair with grades

13 Encourage participation

14 Assign homework

15 Control discipline

16 Assign pair work

17 Prevent anxiety

18 Offer oral activities

19 Assign written tasks

20 Use the students’ names

21 Test students frequently

Personality traits

22 Tolerant and flexible

23 Hard, rigid, strict

24 Hardworking

25 Authoritarian

26 Fair and just

27 Available and helpful

28 Kind and polite

29 Active

30 Original and creative

31 Responsible

32 Balanced and quiet

33 Firm and confident

34 Tidy and careful

35 Happy, optimist and friendly

3.2. Sample

The three questionnaires were administered in the three educational levels:

Primary education (Grades 7th and 8th), Secondary education (Grades 3rd and 4th)

and University level (Translation and interpretation students, 1st year)

3.3. Results and conclusions

3.3.1. Primary Education (Grade 7th, age 12-13)

This sample consisted of 34 learners studying 7th grade at a Private, church

sponsored primary school in Granada.

In the first part of the questionnaire the students were asked to rank in order the

influence of six given factors. The instrumental value of the language in society,

followed by parental influence and classroom activities were, in that order, the three

most important sources of motivation. At the opposite end of the scale come the

teacher’s qualities, the subject itself, and the integrative motive.

Learners had also to explain, in an open questionnaire, the reasons why they like

or dislike their teacher and gave their opinion about the fundamental characteristics and

qualities of good English teachers.

Pág. 495

A large majority of the learners like their current teacher (88%). The reasons

given are:

- She understands learners

- She feels very confident and explains well.

In support of this they indicate that the qualities of the teacher which they most

highly value are that he/she should be pleasant, and that they should use the FL in

class.

In the closed questionnaire, a list of qualities were given to the learners to make

them choose the most relevant. First, they gave their opinion about the importance of

the English teacher’s physical appearance, scientific knowledge, didactic preparation

and personal traits.

Academic training takes priority over the other aspects of the “ideal” teacher. It is

followed by didactic abilities, personal characteristics, and appearance, in that order.

These kids liked their English teacher and their opinion of her is not only that of a

normal student but that of those who in a big number go to other places to have private

lessons. They know how an English class is given by another teacher, the number of

things that can be done in the classroom and that can be the reason why the activities

they would like doing in class are not the ones they really do.

On the other hand, they want their teacher to use the FL in class. Nevertheless,

they know that if their teacher used English in class it would be really difficult for some

of the students to understand her. The solution she is going to give to this situation after

having read these results is to use English from the lowest level, and that way she will

make the students feel better when having to use English in class.

In this group, the use of the FL in class was an important source of motivation.

Some of the students have demanded that though the teacher insists that most of them

are not going to understand her.

3.3.2. Primary Education (Grade 8th, age 13-14)

The age of the students tested ranged from thirteen to fifteen years-old. When, at a

very specific level, students were questioned in relation to their sources of motivation, it

was obvious that the figure of the teacher did not seem to be very important when

compared to other potential motivating factors (leit motifs). Instrumental and integrative

incentives, the influence of the parents etc. were regarded by students as more

attractive sources of motivation. We should not forget that the learning of a second

language differs broadly from other disciplines also imparted in a classroom setting.

Obviously, the main difference lies in the very peculiar circumstances (conditions)

surrounding this particular subject. Indeed, the attractiveness intrinsic to the learning of

a second language contributes to the existence of a significant increase in the degree of

motivation. In this specific case, we are not just dealing with the teacher and the student

somehow isolated in the classroom. The learning of a second language is not only

restricted to the subject itself. On the contrary, the learning of a second language also

implies the acquisition of a vast amount of cultural input reflecting all different aspects of

an idiosyncratic nature. A possibility to communicate with other individuals belonging to

completely different cultures, the opportunity to understand different ways of

expression, music, traditions and customs undeniably lessen the strength of the teacher

as a potential source of motivation.

Nevertheless, we should take into consideration that, when in a different part of

the test, students were asked to evaluate their attitude towards their teacher, the result,

surprisingly, could be regarded as fairly positive. We can infer from this that the figure of

the teacher seems to develop his/her work correctly without intervening, at least in an

evident way, as a crucial factor in the sources of motivation. A homogeneous 42.1 % of

the indiviuals asserted that they liked their teacher; a 44.7 % of them selected the

second choice (I like him/her a little bit) whereas just a small percentage of a 13.1 % of

the students chose the third alternative (I do not like him/her) as the option reflecting

their personal attitudes. A striking fact to be underlined is that the students configuring

this 13.1 % of the total number of individuals were characterized by a high level of

academic achievement. However, a significant number of the subjects who showed a

Pág. 496

preference for the first option controversially presented a low level of academic

achievement. How are we supposed to handle this? In a different section of the test,

students were asked to justify, in very specific terms, their positive attitude towards the

teacher. Two factors were constantly repeated:

- She explains well.

- She is nice.

Congeniality, as we can infer from the outcome of the tests, is one of the most

important aspects for these individuals who, we should always bear this in mind, have

ages ranging from thirteen to fifteen years-old. On the other hand, it becomes clear that

students pursue an ideal teacher with a good academic/professional standing and, at

the same time, a more casual way of implementing his/her work. They want a good

teacher (in a stricter academic sense) but they also want a good communicator as their

instructor; a person who shares their problems and goals and who, to a certain extent,

becomes their friend.

In relation to the physical features, it is interesting to point out that even though

they are taken into consideration by the students, they are not highlighted as an issue

of outstanding relevance. In fact, when students were requested to express their

preferences with respect to the (most important) qualities that should define an ideal

teacher’s profile, we found that those related to the physical appearance were located

low down on the scale.

However, those qualities referring to the personal, didactic and scientific aspects

were regarded as decisive by a significant number of individuals. Consequently, we can

infer the importance not only of a good academic standing but also the relevancy of the

teacher’s personality. The classroom, it is important not to forget it , is a living body

formed by emotional individuals, in short, by human beings. This reflects a need for a

teacher who offers a positive feedback and responds to very specific requirements of

support, help and understanding.

In a more concrete and detailed study of these four aspects mentioned above

(physical, didactic, scientific and personal), we found the following conclusions:

- In relation to the scientific training of the teacher, the subjects of our

study regarded “having a good pronunciation” as a key quality in the

teacher, even more important than for instance “having a good knowledge

of the subject”.

- When asked about the didactic aspect, the students considered that “to

explain with clarity” and “to create a relaxed atmosphere” in conjunction

with “organizing games in the classroom” and “being fair and equitable”,

were very significant features in a teacher.

Nonetheless, other options such as “to give homework regularly”, “to set exams”

and “to organize an important amount of written activities”, were not very popular

among students.

Obviously, once again we can test our hypothesis that there exists no inclination

towards those alternatives implying a stricter and more academic view of the task

developed by the teacher. Finally, when dealing with the personality of the teacher,

qualities such as being nice and polite, congenial, funny and optimistic were considered

by students as very important. Nevertheless, other qualities such as being demanding

and authoritarian, which obviously denote a stricter view of the system were

characterized by an evident lack of popularity.

3.3.3. Secondary Education (3rd grade, age 16-17)

The results are part of a research developed in the spring of 1992 at a state

secondary school located in the northern district of the city of Granada. The group

comprised 28 students (15 female, 13 male).

Our primary task was to analyse the main sources of motivation in the EFL

classroom, following the theoretical approached defined by Gardner (1985);

nevertheless, it came to be pretty obvious, later on, that the context in which we had to

carry out our project would compel us to modify -to some extent- the final conclusions

of Gardner’s work. It was then that we could observe how important the teacher was in

the language learning (LL) process by influencing the student’s motivational state.

It was easy to confirm that their main source of motivation was not any other than an

instrumental one, after which came some others concerned, on the one hand, with the

LL situation -the subject itself, the classroom work, the teacher’s qualities, and, on the

other, with a very distant integrative motive and an apparently irrelevant parental

encouragement.

Pág. 497

All this made us think, first of all, that when students do not have any real contact with

the language -as in our case- they will necessarily be interested in it or moved towards

it simply because of some practical reasons; and secondly, that, as a consequence, the

teacher must be ascribed an important role in this process for having to introduce the

student to the foreign language -English- and to the subject -Inglés III- for becoming the

only -closest and most decisively influencing- representative of both of them in a nonbilingual

context, and for moulding -consciously or not- the student’s attitude towards

these through his/her own attitude shown in the classroom.

Considering this, we tried to study the student’s attitude towards the teacher. The

results were different depending on their different motivational states, but the average

was rather good, closely connected with the rate of achievement of the students.

Open questionnaire

The less motivated students (21%) took into consideration her less positive

personal features (i.e., to be occasionally angry, to be elitist) rather than her academic

ones in order to explain their dislike for her -although some of them added to this the

type of methodology used (somewhat boring) for the same purpose.

The more motivated ones, nevertheless, looked on her academic abilities to express

both their liking for her (i.e., to teach well, to have a good planning, to bring her training

up-to-date) and their criticism (i.e., limited use of English in the classroom, too

theoretical lessons).

Close questionnaire

In spite of the different points focussed on by these students, their ideal teacher

was very alike, being her/his main characteristics a knowledge of English, an ability to

teach it and kindness to carry out the process. They preferred a teacher who could

master both didactic and academic skills:

Good pronunciation, fluency, clear explanation, fair marking, using new

exercises -especially oral ones-, or helping less advances students; and,

at once, could appear as personally engaging and encouraging the

student’s interest.

Thus, for them, other questions such as either her scientific preparation and

physical appearance, or more precise features such as their homework and the

excessive control of the class were quite irrelevant.

Accordingly, we came to the conclusion that the teacher seemed to have a key role in

the LL process, that both her/his personal and academic features were taken into

account by the students as motivating or disencouraging tokens, and that, although it

was somewhat easy to make up the image of the archetypal teacher, it is really hard to

achieve that perfect worker when so many contextual constraints are involved in the

process.

3.3.4. Secondary Education (4th grade, age 17-18)

“If students aren’t learning it is assumed to be the fault of the method, the

materials or the teacher. Yet the success of a learning program involves far

more than the mere act of teaching” (Richards, 1990:1).

An in-depth study of the motivating forces in a group of language students

should prove to be a very useful tool in understanding important attitudes for language

learning. The study may be conducted at the beginning of the course, in which case it

will provide information vital to the teacher conducting needs analysis, or mid-term for

the teacher to take stock of the situation and effect any changes deemed necessary in

the light of the results, or at the end of the course to investigate past methodology. The

results, if studied carefully, will offer insights that should not fail to be revealing.

Pág. 498

This study of COU students was conducted among a group of 17 State School

pupils in the province of Granada at the beginning of the academic year. It will be

readily understood that these students are studying English because they have to (a

foreign language being a compulsory part of the curriculum) and this may or may not

coincide with their wanting to study a language.

The group had had the same teacher for the two preceding years and some of

them for the whole of BUP. The teacher was placed fifth in order of importance only

ahead of the influence of their parents. This negative attitude towards the importance

of the teacher was borne out by the analysis of their comments on what they

considered to be the qualities of a good teacher.

The overall rating for the teacher was of 1.3 (in a scale ranging from 0 to 2), and

was explained by the students in the following way. Forty per cent stated that the

teacher had shown marked preferences towards certain members of the group (the

good ones) and despised and looked down upon the others. The teacher was also

thought to be impatient, moody, and not to have good teaching methodology by thirtysix

per cent of the group.

Scientific knowledge obtained a rating of 1.8, didactic preparation 1.6,

personality traits 1.5, and physical appearance 0.5 (scale: 0-2). Forty per cent

considered that the language teacher ought to be good-tempered, pleasant, patient and

interesting. Thirty per cent emphasised the importance of explaining well and

assessing fairly, while twelve per cent stressed the importance of knowing the subject

well and being able to maintain discipline.

These results show how a teacher who receives a low rating in the questionnaire

can affect the learners’ feelings about the teacher’s role, and in particular how the

teacher is considered to be a relatively unimportant motivating factor in the language

learning process.

Allwright & Bailey (1991:162) point out that “a teacher may be liked as a person,

and well respected as a professional, and yet not teach in a way that suits everybody in

the class, to the extent that some learners may find that teacher quite useless to them”.

So it appears to be important to discover what activities and learning strategies suit a

particular group as well as to understand what profile they expect in a competent

teacher. This study revealed significant ideas about the language teacher as seen from

the learners’ point of view.

3.3.5. University level (1st year)

Frequently two teacher “types”, known as the instructor, and the socializer, are

described (Brophy 1985). Essentially these are opposites, which we might call the

stereotypes of the university teacher (instructor) and the primary school teacher

(socializer). Characteristically, the former presents academic content and supervises

what is learnt, whereas the latter aims to develop learners’ mental capabilities,

promotes good interpersonal relations and a good inter-group atmosphere, and

prepares learners to be good citizens. Some of the differences in their behaviour are

that instructors emphasize academic input; are impersonal in their relations with

learners; fall back on the head teacher (in the school context) when dealing with

questions of discipline; put the blame for problems on factors other than themselves;

and promote the idea of the teacher as a just, authoritarian figure. In contrast,

socializers emphasize the socializing of learners; pay attention to learners’ personal and

behavioural problems; personalize their interaction with learners; dislike, and are

inefficient when dealing with backward learners; put the blame for problems on the

family or social background; promote qualities of patience, love for learners, and so on,

as being those of the teacher; are more inclined to punish learners, or to reward them;

consider the classroom to be where learning should take place, and where human

relations should be developed.

In the light of this division, this study begins by placing the relevant significance

Pág. 499

of the teacher in context, as a result of the participants comparison of the teacher with

other motivating factors. Then, and always bearing in mind the nature of the sample we

are dealing with (see below), we describe how participants saw their teacher – whether

as an instructor or a socializer - and examine their preferences for an “ideal” teacher, in

the same terms.

The questionnaire was administered to 32 First Year students on the Diploma

course in Translation and Interpreting at the University of Granada School of

Translators and Interpreters. Amongst other subjects, they follow a course in

‘Translation into English from Spanish’ which primarily focuses on FL reading and

writing skills. These learners have all chosen to follow FL studies at university level,

and have gained entrance to this particular course on the basis of their academic

performance.

3.3.5.2. Sources of motivation

Learners rank ordered six given factors in terms of how much they had been

influenced by them. On the basis of the average scores for each alternative we

establish that the instrumental motive is the most important (4.94, out of a possible 6),

the subject matter itself second (4.48), and the integrative motive third (4.32). The

qualities of the teacher ranks fourth, scoring 3.46; and the other two factors are

significantly less important still. Moreover, 25% of the sample did not respond to this

item.

3.3.5.3. The English teacher

Open questionnaire

Participants were asked their opinion of their current teacher, and their

responses gave an average of 2, meaning that the teacher in question was very

popular. The lists of reasons supporting this, and of preferred qualities and

characteristics to be found in a good teacher, show that participants clearly considered

their teacher to be a socializer, with 61.3% of responses falling in this bracket, and only

15.3% in that of the instructor. The remaining responses could be attributed to either

category.

This preference is carried over when the question is depersonalized. Asked to

present their preferred qualities and characteristics of a good teacher, 62.1% of the total

responses can be classified in the socializer category, and only 14.1% in that of the

instructor. Again, the remaining responses could be attributed to either.

Closed questionnaire

This questionnaire offered participants a closed list of qualities and

characteristics of a good teacher divided into four sections: physical appearance,

scientific knowledge, didactic preparation, and personality traits. Average scores of 2,

for didactic preparation, 1.94 for scientific knowledge (more instructor than socializer

characteristics), and 1.88 for personality traits (more socializer than instructor

characteristics) indicate that participants perceived little difference between each of

these. Physical appearance (0.03) was not even considered.

These four general areas are broken down into discrete items and scored in the

same way. In contrast to what was indicated by the responses to the open

questionnaire, the most highly rated characteristics were all of the instructor type. Ten

items were specifically attributable to each type of teacher, and the average percentage

score giving instructor characteristics most importance was 52.6%, with a range from

97% to 0%. For socializer characteristics, the average was 46.3%, with a narrower

range of between 78% and 28%.

A clear and consistent impression of the learners image of a “good FL teacher”

as a socializer comes from the results of the open questionnaire. However, this is

contradicted by their thoughts on the “ideal” teacher prompted by the closed

questionnaire. In order to put this into perspective there are two points that we will

make before drawing specific conclusions. Firstly, it is clear that a highly popular

teacher – in this case a socializer - can distract learners’ attention from their initial

objectives even in an examination-specific class. Two individual negative comments

entered in response to the open questionnaire stated that the relevance of class

activities to exams, and the occasional lack of clear objectives were concerns.

Secondly, on a clearly instrumental course of this type, participants could have been

expected to be concerned about their teacher’s ability to prepare them to work as

translators. However, this does not appear in any responses. Perhaps this clarity is

lacking as learners had yet to verbalise their expectations of the course.

To conclude, perhaps the principal message of this study is that teachers,

whichever their personal style, should be aware of the needs of their learners, and that -

particularly at university level – they should be able to broaden their approach so as to

provide learners with both socializer-type and instructor-type teaching.

Pág. 500

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allwright, D. & K.M. Bailey (1991). Focus on the Language Classroom. CUP.

Ames, C. and Ames R. (1985). Research on Motivation in Education, vol 2: The

classroom Milieu. Academic Press, Inc

Brophy, J. E. (1983). “Classroom organization and management”. Elementary School Journal, 83 (4),

265-286.

Brophy, J. E. (1985). “Teachers’ expectations, Motives, and Goals for Working with problems

Students” in Ames, C and Ames R. (1985).

Dunkin, M. J. and Biddle, B. J. (1974). The Study of Teaching. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Finocchiaro, M. (19889. “Teacher development: a continuum process”. English Teaching Forum, vol

XXVI, 3, 2-5.

Gage, N. L. (1978). The Scientific Basis of the Act of Teaching. New York. Teachers College Press,

University of Columbia.

Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of Attitudes and

Motivation. London: Edward Arnold.

Madrid. D., Ortega, J. L., Jiménez, S., Pérez, Mª. C., Gomis, A., Fernández, J., Pérez, Mª. B., García Mª

M.,

Hidalgo, E., Verdejo, Mª. J. and Robinson, B. (1993). “Sources of motivation in the EFL classroom”, VIII

Grenada Teachers Association Conference (GRETA).

Good, T.L. (1979). “Teacher effectiveness in the elementary school: what we know about it now”. Journal

of Teacher Education, 30, 52-64.

Prodromou, L. (1991). “The good language teacher”. English Teaching Forum, vol. XXIX, 2, 2-7.

Richards, J.C. (1990) The Language Teaching Matrix. CUP.

Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford University Press.

Wittrock, M. C. (1986). Handbook of Research on Teaching. New York: MacMillan.

st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
<!– /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:”"; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} h1 {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; mso-outline-level:1; font-size:24.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; font-weight:bold;} h2 {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; mso-outline-level:2; font-size:18.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; font-weight:bold;} p {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} /* List Definitions */ @list l0 {mso-list-id:402264182; mso-list-template-ids:1257173770;} @list l0:level2 {mso-level-number-format:bullet; mso-level-text:o; mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in; mso-level-number-position:left; text-indent:-.25in; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; font-family:”Courier New”; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} @list l1 {mso-list-id:894044569; mso-list-template-ids:-436576026;} ol {margin-bottom:0in;} ul {margin-bottom:0in;} –>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:”";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-ansi-language:#0400;
mso-fareast-language:#0400;
mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

“The appeal and poverty of CLT” by Robert O’Neill [March, 2000]

“the belief, so widely held and so frequently repeated that “language is (a means of) communication” is wrong in a way that has been devastating to any adequate conception of what humans are and how they differ from other species. Communication is just one use to which language can be put (and distinguishing between a thing and its uses should surely form the most basic step in any analysis.)”

Derek Bickerton; Language & Human Behaviour (London, UCL Press, 1996)

Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) has enormous intuitive appeal. Despite this, I have come to believe that at the heart of CLT – especially in fundamentalist versions of it – we find a naive, even impoverished view of language. To demonstrate what I mean, let me examine six propositions upon which I think CLT is based. I am going to argue that if these propositions are true at all, they are only superficially and trivially true – and true only in essentially uninteresting ways. In other words, they are just as true as statements like “When people speak, they use words”. Such a statement tells us nothing about what kinds of relationships there may be between words, how people learn to assemble them into larger units, or what else they do to construct or interpret meaning. I will try to show this through six counter-propositions. Then – finally -I will briefly suggest an alternative – and also suggest reasons why pluralist methodologies are more likely to be successful than any single orthodoxy.

Six fundamentally “trivial” propositions inherent in CLT

1. Language is primarily a tool of communication. Learning a language means learning to perform communicative speech acts with it.

In CLT, “communication” means using language to make requests, give advice, agree and disagree, complain, praise, to try to persuade people to do things, and so on. The focus should be on meaning, not on form. Some supporters of CLT, like Geoff Thompson argue that this is a misconception of CLT. However, even he admits that there are good reasons for this “misconception”

1. There is something called a “communicative syllabus” which replaces and is superior to a structural syllabus”

It is often argued that a typical structuralist syllabus focuses on the grammatical structure of language rather than on the “communicative” or pragmatic uses of those language For example, so the argument goes terms like “The Present Continuous”, tell us little or nothing about the fact that typical examples of this form such as “You’re standing in my way” or “You’re driving too fast” are complaints, or that one of the most frequent uses of the Present Progressive is not to talk about actions in the present but about pre-arranged actions in the future, For this reason, many CLT supporters used to argue and still do that language lessons should not be about “The Present Continuous” or “The Present Perfect”, but about “Giving and getting personal information”, “Asking for and giving directions”, “Expressing Opinions”, etc.

1. Communicative goals can be specified. We can accurately describe what learners should have learned and be able to do with language at the end of the lesson

An example of a typical “communicative goal is given below.

By the end of the lesson, students will be able to:

- talk about their own jobs and ask classmates about theirs

-use the Present Simple accurately and fluently in this context

-choose correctly between a/an pronounce the unstressed form of “d’you in their question

1. Good communicative teaching is learner-centred, not teacher-centred.

“Teacher-centred” means “BAD” The teacher doles out formal knowledge of the language like a cook giving prisoners thin soup and stale bread in a Victorian prison. “Learner-centred” means “GOOD”.

This view is best summed up for me by Julian Edge in what I think is the best and most clearly written exposition of CLT principles,

Many classrooms are arranged so that all students face forward to the teacher; the message is clear.

1. • the teacher dominates
   • all information will come from the teacher
   • interaction between or among students is less valued

Edge goes on to describe other seating arrangements which encourage co-operative, communicative pair-work and group-work. In one picture we see ten or eleven young learners, perhaps in their late teens or early twenties, listening attentively to one member of the group talking. In a second picture we see four learners working together. The learners are smiling, eager, interested, entirely absorbed in the communicative task that they are performing. These two pictures seem for me at least to communicate better than any others, the great intuitive appeal of CLT.

1. What matters most is not whether learners learn to use the language accurately. What matters is that they learn to get their message across.

Professor John Trim, one of the founders of CLT, has said that “children learning in school must be taught that language learning is about communicating, not getting things right”. Trim believes in “emphasising the importance of repair strategies and of the acceptance of errors”. He asks “if certain learner errors are so predictable, how much effort is justified in the attempt to put them right, instead of developing different ways of enlarging that person’s communicative range?”. Instead of correcting mistakes, we should be doing things that will extend the communicative range of learners.

1. The classroom and the behaviour of teachers and learners in the classroom should be as similar as possible to the behaviour of people in the “real world” outside the classroom

Strict turn-taking, “display questions”, etc. are “uncommunicative” and do not reflect the “real world” outside the classroom. The classroom must become like the world outside the classroom, where we see people using language spontaneously and communicatively.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Six opposing propositions

How can anyone who is not a reactionary, authoritarian anti-progressive disagree with an approach based on these propositions? To give my own answer to this question, I must express six different propositions.

1. Generative competence the ability to use underlying syntax and structure is one of the foundations of communicative competence. Without it, there is no pragmatic competence worth talking about.

The question “Is form as important as meaning?” is fundamentally mistaken. Form IS part of meaning. It matters whether I say “If I have time I’ll see you” or “If I had time, I’d see you ” just as it matters whether I say “A man attacked a woman ” or “The woman attacked the man. ” The kind of meaning we get from syntactic form tells us essential things, such as “who did what, how, and to whom.” One of the many questions for teachers and materials writers is “How can we make learners aware of how form contributes to meaning?” I will give one possible answer to that question at the end of this article.

It may be possible to communicate very basic messages using words alone, but this is a hollow argument, It is also possible and probably more effective to communicate such messages using no words at all. Hunger, thirst, anger, rage, sexual desire, frustration and interest and most other emotions can all be communicated through gestures with perhaps a few grunts for emphasis. This is not the kind of “communication training” people are prepared to pay money or give up time for.

Language- as Geoffrey Leech argues, has two different domains. There is a GENERATIVE and a PRAGMATIC domain. The generative domain is syntactic and structural. It is possible to state general rules at least about how those syntactic structures are formed. The pragmatic domain is concerned with speech acts. Speech acts cannot be generated without syntax, but speech act theory analyses them purely in terms of their pragmatic effect. Speech act theory tells us nothing about how they are generated, and nothing about how they are learned in the first place.

The “narrow” or fundamentalist version of CLT can easily become a stifling orthodoxy in which things like rote-learning, memorisation, “display questions”, “teacher-talk” automatically mean BAD. None of these things alone is bad. What matters is how, when and why they are done. Although Thompson and Edge have a much broader vision of CLT than the fundamentalist version, it is often that narrow version that prevails among teacher-trainers and other people in strong positions of authority.

1. A language syllabus is more than a list. That is why examples of speech acts cannot be the basis of a syllabus.

Speech acts and functions are important. But in the real world, typical speech acts have to be modified and varied to fit different situations. Typical speech acts typically lead to very unpredictable outcomes. A competent speaker has to know different ways of performing the same speech act. Speakers can do this only if they can generate new examples of the different syntactic structures they need to perform typical speech-acts. That is only one reason a language syllabus has to have a structural as well as pragmatic component . Unfortunately, communicative goals in CLT are usually described so narrowly that it is impossible to study the necessary syntactic forms properly. For example, studying the Present Progressive from the perspective of a single kind of speech act such as “Referring to future plans and arrangements” does not tell us nearly enough about all the other pragmatic uses of the Present Progressive. It may even be better to begin with the structure and to relate it to its most important pragmatic uses. This often makes far better sense than beginning with the speech acts alone. In any case, the same speech act can be performed with very different structures. There is no one-to-one match between them. If we always begin with the speech act, we lose sight of the generative system that makes all speech acts possible.

1. Communicative goals are exercises in illusion rather than reality. It is not possible to specify communicative goals with any precision .

It sounds so neat and convincing to say “At the end of the lesson learners will be able to talk about their jobs” or “be able to give directions”. If these descriptions mean anything, they mean “with some luck and a lot of hard work and good teaching, learners may be able to say a little more about their jobs than they could at the beginning. They may be able to understand stereotypical directions like “To get to the railway station, go down this road, take the first right and then the second left” but in the real world railway stations are rarely so easy to find. Even native-speakers are often unable to give directions clearly or to understand them.

There are no reliable ways of knowing what learners have learned at the end of any lesson, still less of knowing what learners will actually retain in the long term.

Although CLT grew out of a rejection of “structuralism” which was supposed to be based on behaviourism , communicative goals in CLT are all described in typical behaviourist terminology. This implies that language is just behaviour and that communicative competence can be described in simple behaviourist terms.

1. Good teaching requires an understanding of both “whole-class” and “pair/group-methods. Very often far more often than most CLT supporters are prepared to admit competent whole-class teaching is more efficient than pair and group work

In the “real world”, real teachers have to deal with real learners and they are often very different from the eager, motivated learners in the pictures in Edge’s book. Learners in the classrooms I have in mind, typically all speak the same language; Spanish in Madrid, Polish in Warsaw. Japanese in Tokyo, and so on. They do not use English outside the classroom and they rarely if ever hear it used by anybody else. There is only one person in the classroom who has a reasonable command of English who is able to engage them in active use of English in which they also hear someone using that language competently. That person is the teacher and CLT methodology insists that person should “cut teacher-talking-time to an absolute minimum”.

It is true that with so-called “teacher-fronted” methods, some teachers talk too much. It is just as true that the specious description “learner-centred” covers an equally wide spectrum of lazy, ignorant, incompetent teachers who talk glibly of “learner autonomy” and fail to do any of the things that traditional but competent teachers in the past did to help learners towards true autonomy.

The issue is not “teacher-fronted” or so-called “learner-centred” The issue is how can teachers learn to vary their methods and approach, sometimes using “whole-class techniques and sometimes pair/group work. When and why is one approach better than another? A methodology that does not recognise this is not capable of providing teachers with the skills they really need.

1. A reasonable degree of accuracy is an essential part of fluency.

This is not at all the same argument as “learners must get things right from the very beginning”. But neither is this the same thing as saying that because many mistakes are predictable, they are not correctable. Trim fails to make an essential distinction, or to ask one of the many serious questions that should be part of any serious discussion of ELT: “What kind of correction strategies seem to work and which do not?” My answer to that question is “regular form-focused practice as well as many different opportunities to use the forms for a variety of pragmatic purposes”

1. There are essential differences between using your own language and trying to use a language you do not know well. These differences help to explain the differences in behaviour of people in the foreign language classroom and in the streets outside the classroom.

The first and most essential difference is that people in the streets outside the classroom are using their own language to communicate. They learned that language through a long and complex process that is part of their natural development. Children in very different cultures begin using language more or less at the same age, and go through very similar stages of development. This suggests very strongly that the process of L1 acquisition is genetically triggered and biologically driven.

The people in the street outside presumably have already learned the language and the complex syntactic relationships they are using so casually. That is why they are outside and not inside the language classroom. Learning and using an L2 – a foreign language – is an utterly different process. It is NOT genetically triggered or biologically driven in ANY way. This is what makes L1 acquisition and L2 learning so enormously different, and also why Chomsky says “you simply cannot teach a language to an adult the way a child learns a language. That’s why it’s such a hard job.”

Many typical forms of classroom behaviour, such as strict turn-taking, teacher-dominated interaction, as so on, make it possible to focus on things that we normally would not focus on in the world outside the classroom because in the world outside the classroom we would not have time to focus on them or even think about them.

An Alternative To CLT

What I am going to suggest works for me – and I believe it may work for many others. But this does not mean it can work for anybody. The principle behind this is that NO single method or approach can work for all teachers or for all students. We recognise that different learners have different preferred styles of learning. If this is true of learners and their learning styles, it is also true of teachers and their teaching styles. There is NO scientific evidence of any kind that proves or even suggests that typical CLT techniques work well or work at all under all conditions and with all learners. In fact, what little evidence there is points to the opposite conclusion. In a case such as this, it is far better to endorse pluralistic teaching strategies and techniques which allow for greater diversity and choice not just for individual learners but also for individual teachers. But what is my alternative – not the alternative?

Teaching as Narrative

As Scott Thornbury has argued, good lessons have an “affective” or “aesthetic” dimension which is just as important as their pragmatic or pedagogic dimensions. For me, this aesthetic dimension fulfils certain conditions or questions.

1. Does the lesson, the format and material arouse interest that goes beyond the language itself?
2. Is there a pleasing and logical relationship between the different parts of the lesson?
3. Is there anything that the participants can look forward to besides the end of the lesson, and the chance to escape and go home?
4. Is the language that was used or generated during the lesson memorable in any way? (There are also a number of “more practical” considerations).
5. Is there something about the format of the lesson that makes it easily retrievable? For instance, if I am the learner, and didn’t understand parts of it or have forgotten it for some other reason, is there some way I could look at or listen to parts of it again as I go home on the bus or tram, or when I am at home the following day?
6. Does the format and material of the lesson not only provide useful “input” for the learner but also lead to “output” and language production by the learner?
7. Does the material and the format help to generate spontaneous language-use that is not easily predictable?
8. Are there features of the language and the lesson format that are likely to stretch the expressive potential of the learners? That is, is there something that helps the learners to improve their generative and pragmatic competence rather than simply use fossilised resources?

My own solution is to adopt a “narrative” approach to the lessons I teach. As it happens, a fairly short text is usually the beginning, but never the end of the lesson. But the lesson would not have a narrative structure at all if that was all I did. And it is quite possible to teach within a narrative structure and not use a “text” in the conventional sense .

A lesson has a narrative structure if the following conditions are met

- The answers to the questions 1-7 are “Yes”

In other words, at each stage of the lesson, the participants have something to look forward to in the next stage; it may be a crucial piece of information they will hear in listening practice. The text might begin with a description of a fairly simple problem, such as someone – let us call her Paula – who feels unfairly treated at work- or as complex as “What led Watson and Crick to believe that the study of viruses could illuminate the secrets of DNA, and how did Rosalind Franklin’s work help them to discover its double helix structure ?”

By the middle of the lesson, learners, – perhaps working in pairs or perhaps as a whole class -should have found out what Paula decided to do about her problem with her boss – or why Watson’s was so intimidated in his first encounter with Rosalind Franklin in a laboratory in the basement of King’s College, London.

By the end of the lesson far more information will have been revealed, such as what happened when Watson met Franklin again or whether Paula solved her problem. The purpose of the narrative structure is not simply to arouse and sustain interest. It is to keep learners involved with the language. If, however, the narrative does no more than keep learners involved with the language, it will still fail as vehicle of language-learning. The narrative has to lead to language-production as well as comprehension. There may be “narrative gaps” that can be interpreted in different ways and which require learners to extend their pragmatic and generative repertoires as they do so. Or perhaps before it is revealed what was done by the person with the problem at work, at least three possible courses of action are described or considered by the class.

Relating form to meaning

In using this narrative approach, I often discover that learners cannot interpret the difference in meaning conveyed by two superficially similar forms, such as “What would happen if you did this?” and “What happened when you did this?” or “I’d like to read this letter to you” and “I’d like you to read this letter”.

The narratives or dialogues were not specially designed to teach such examples. They occurred because they belonged in the text or dialogue. Because they arise naturally, it is also natural to focus on the different meanings conveyed by the different forms. One of the many advantages of using a narrative approach is that the narratives and dialogues make it possible to study a number of things together, and not just one thing, such as grammar, vocabulary or a particular speech act with no context.

Narratives relate different aspects of language to each other in ways, which single speech acts or a set of collocations without context cannot do.

Authentic vs. specially written

Suppose, for example, I want a dialogue in which someone deliberately lies, or threatens someone, or promises to do something and then later fails to fulfil that promise. Where could I find an “authentic ” example of such dialogues? When people know they are being observed or that someone is recording what they say, they rarely behave authentically or normally. Yet all of us know – at least in our own languages -what people are likely to say in such situations. Why should we refuse to use those intuitions in the materials we create or use for our students? Perhaps the products of such intuitions have to be “idealised” in various ways in order to make it possible for non-native speakers to understand them, but this is just as true of “authentic materials”, which are often too long or too difficult or simply not interesting enough for classroom use. Once you adapt such authentic materials, they are no more authentic that a forged signature on a cheque. So I personally have found it far better to create the texts or dialogues myself, often using authentic examples as a guide. When I create such materials, I am only doing what good writers or speakers generally do when speaking to or writing for native speakers. Good writers and speakers do not use language they think their readers or listeners will not understand. The logical conclusion of the “authentic only” argument is that we should treat non-native speakers of English in a way good writers and speakers of English would never treat native-speakers; that is – that we should ignore the problems non-native speakers have with English and speak or write as if those problems simply did not exist. This, by the way, does not mean that we should necessarily avoid language that we think is likely to cause a problem. It means only that we should locate it in contexts that give that language saliency and which also helps learners to infer meaning.

What EFL needs today is writers capable of developing skills that writers in other genres regard as essential: they must be able to develop the kinds of story, plot and character that can keep groups of very different learners interested in the language. The texts and conversations they write must exemplify as naturally as possible how people speak and write outside the classroom. However, the texts and dialogues must also serve the distinct pedagogic purposes that I have tried to categorise here.

REFERENCES:

Some Misconceptions about Communicative Language Teaching; English Language Teaching Journal Volume 50/1 January 96

‘Pragmatic’ in this sense is used in the sense Geoffrey Leech uses the term in Principles of Pragmatics ; the meaning language acquires when used socially, by and among people, in order to perform typical speech acts.

From Beginners’ Choice , Mohamed & Aclam, Longman 1992. I use this example only because it is quoted by Julian Edge in Essentials of English Language Teaching

“Essentials of Language Learning” Longman 1993, p 51 EFL Gazette, December 97

See “the origins of syntax” in Bickerton’s “Language & Human Behaviour“, pp 66-84″ for a discussion of the importance of syntax not only for language but for human evolution and cognition”

Principles of Pragmatics (London, Longman, 1983)

‘Structuralism is one of the major philosophical movements of the 20th Century, and its European form is emphatically not behaviourism’

Language and Problems of Knowledge, The Managua Lectures, The MIT Press, 1988 page 180 (Discussions after Lecture 5)

See for example Wong-Fillmore, L. When Does Teacher-Talk Work As Input? in Second Language Acquisition; Newbury House, (now Pearson Education) 1985.

‘Good lessons share features with, among other art forms, good films. They have plot, theme, rhythm, flow and a sense of ending.’

Scott Thornbury, “Lesson art and design”, ELT Journal, January 1999

see Watson, James. D, “The Double Helix” Penguin, 1968

[My quarrel with CLT 28/03/00 Robert O'Neill]

Setiap pikiran yang terlintas, entah itu baik ataupun buruk, akan membangun karakter anda.  Sama  seperti batu bata yang tersusun satu di atas yang lain, untuk  membangun rumah – demikian pula pikiran anda disusun satu di  atas yang lain.  Setiap saat, setiap waktu ketika anda berfikir. Baik secara sengaja atau tidak.

Siapa diri anda, apa yang anda capai, kepuasan yang anda temukan,  bagaimana cara pandang anda terhadap diri sendiri, semuanya tergantung pada pikiran yang membangun hidup anda.

Setiap pikiran, setiap waktu, dapat memperkuat bangunan diri  anda.  Tak satu pencapaian senilai apapun yang secara tiba-tiba muncul.   Segalanya harus dibangun. Langkah demi langkah.  Dan anda memiliki kekuasaan untuk  membangun hidup macam apa yang anda inginkan.   Kekuasaan itu  datang dari masa tempat anda hidup, dalam pilihan yang anda  ambil, dalam tindakan yang anda kerjakan.

Pilihan anda menentukan bangunan seperti apa yang anda buat.

Saat ini, anda sedang membangun hidup anda.  Saat ini, anda  membuat SEBUAH PERBEDAAN dalam jalan hidup anda.  Saat ini  adalah masa keemasan untuk mengubah masa depan anda.  Sudahkah  anda memanfaatkannya…?

Dunia memberi apa Yang kita

Fokuskan

bila anda memandang diri anda kecil, dunia akan tampak sempit, dan tindakan anda pun jadi kerdil

Namun bila anda memandang diri anda besar, dunia terlihat luas, anda pun melakukan hal-hal penting dan berharga

Tindakan anda adalah cermin bagaimana anda melihat dunia. Sementara dunia anda tak lebih luas dari pikiran anda tentang diri anda sendiri. Read more

Peta Impian

Impian akan mengarahkan kita kemana akan melangkah, bagaimana akan berbuat dan bersikap. Dengan impian kita akan tau dimana titik akhir dari perjuangan. Dan segera setelah mencapai impian itu, kita dapat menggantikannya dengan impian lain yang belum tercapai.

Sahabat, dalam meraih impian, kita perlu strategi dan peta. Sehingga saat berjalan dan bertemu dengan hambatan, kita dapat memilih untuk melompatinya ataukah memutarinya dan mengambil jalan lain. Tanpa mengubah impian, hanya mengubah arah jalan saja.
Read more

Mengasah Kemampuan Diri

Seorang penebang mengasah kapaknya untuk mengumpulkan kayu. Seorang pemburu mengasah pisau dan mengencangkan busur. Seorang penulis meraut pensil. Mereka semua harus memperbarui peralatannya. Mereka itu adalah anda dan saya. Ini adalah prinsip sederhana tentang produktivitas. Tentu, tidak akan banyak pohon yang bisa ditebang oleh kapak yang telah tumpul dan aus. Tidak akan  ada buruan yang mampu ditaklukkan oleh busur yang telah renta. Tidak ada  sebuah kata bisa tertulis dari pensil yang patah. Maka, apa yang harus kita asah agar tetap meraih kehidupan pribadi dan karier yang penuh dan berlimpah? Read more

Kesempatan Dalam Kehidupan

Di sebuah ladang yang subur, terdapat 2 buah bibit tanaman yang terhampar. Bibit yang pertama berkata, “Aku ingin tumbuh besar. Aku ingin menjejakkan akarku sangat dalam di tanah ini, dan menjulangkan tunas-tunasku di atas kerasnya tanah ini. Aku ingin membentangkan semua tunasku, untuk menyampaikan salam musim semi. Aku ingin merasakan kehangatan matahari, serta kelembutan embun pagi di pucuk-pucuk daunku.”

Dan bibit yang pertama inipun tumbuh, makin menjulang.

Bibit yang kedua bergumam. “Aku takut. Read more

Nilai Diri Kita

Pada suatu ketika, di sebuah taman kecil ada seorang kakek. Di dekat kaket tersebut terdapat beberapa anak yang sedang asyik bermain pasir, membentuk lingkaran. Kakek itu lalu menghampiri mereka, dan berkata:

“Siapa diantara kalian yang mau uang Rp. 50.000!!” Semua anak itu terhenti bermain dan serempak mengacungkan tangan sambil memasang muka manis penuh senyum dan harap. Kakek lalu berkata, “Kakek akan memberikan uang ini, setelah kalian semua melihat ini dulu.”
Read more

Waktu Yang Dihabiskan

Bagaimana anda menghabiskan waktu satu jam terakhir..?  Apa yang akan anda kerjakan pada jam berikutnya..?  Apakah di akhir hari ini anda dapat melihat kembali segalanya dengan puas – karena telah tercapai SESUATU ?

Pencapaian bukan sesuatu yang datang sendiri kepada anda. Pencapaian adalah sesuatu yang anda kerjakan dengan menit, jam dan hari yang anda luangkan.  Sekarang adalah waktunya untuk mengerjakan hal itu.
Read more

Membangun Hidup

Setiap pikiran yang terlintas, entah itu baik ataupun buruk, akan membangun karakter anda.  Sama  seperti batu bata yang tersusun satu di atas yang lain, untuk  membangun rumah – demikian pula pikiran anda disusun satu di  atas yang lain.  Setiap saat, setiap waktu ketika anda berfikir. Baik secara sengaja atau tidak.

Siapa diri anda, apa yang anda capai, kepuasan yang anda temukan,  bagaimana cara pandang anda terhadap diri sendiri, semuanya tergantung pada pikiran yang membangun hidup anda. Read more

Sekalipun ada keuntungan untuk menjadi yang pertama, tetapi
terdapat lebih banyak keuntungan dalam menjadi yang terbaik.
Di dunia yang serba instan dan segera ini, layaklah kita melihat
bagaimana melakukan sesuatu secara sepantasnya.

Terburu-buru dan ketidak sabaran adalah bisa berakibat fatal
dan rentan terhadap kesalahan. Pelajarilah nilai kesabaran.
Sekalipun rasanya seperti anda tertinggal jauh di belakang,
tetapi dengan usaha yang terukur dan tekun, lebih mungkin
anda akan berada di depan.

Kesabaran bukan berarti menunda-nunda pekerjaan. Kesabaran
berarti mengambil tindakan SEKARANG, yang akan membawa hasil
di masa depan. Kesabaran berfokus pada hasil terbaik – bukan
pada hasil tercepat atau termudah. Kesabaran berarti mengerti
bahwa perjalanan panjang memiliki hasil yang panjang pula.

Mulailah dari sekarang, dan bersabarlah. Siapa yang mencari
hasil segera – akan segera pula kehilangan hasilnya – itupun
kalau mereka bisa mendapatkan hasil.

Memang makan waktu untuk menghasilkan yang terbaik, tetapi
anda sendiri yang akan menikmati hasilnya…

Namanya Hani. Hani Irmawati. Ia adalah gadis pemalu, berusia 17 tahun. Tinggal di rumah berkamar dua bersama dua saudara dan orangtuanya. Ayahnya adalah penjaga gedung dan ibunya pembantu rumah tangga. Pendapatan tahunan mereka, tidak setara dengan biaya kuliah sebulan di Amerika.

Pada suatu hari, dengan baju lusuh, ia berdiri sendirian di tempat parkir sebuah sekolah internasional. Sekolah itu mahal, dan tidak menerima murid Indonesia. Ia menghampiri seorang guru yang mengajar bahasa Inggris di sana. Sebuah tindakan yang membutuhkan keberanian besar untuk ukuran gadis Indonesia.

“Aku ingin kuliah di Amerika,” tuturnya, terdengar hampir tak masuk akal. Membuat sang guru tercengang, ingin menangis mendengar impian gadis belia yang bagai pungguk merindukan bulan.

Untuk beberapa bulan berikutnya, Hani bangun setiap pagi pada pukul lima dan naik bis kota ke SMU-nya. Selama satu jam perjalanan itu, ia belajar untuk pelajaran biasa dan menyiapkan tambahan pelajaran bahasa Inggris yang didapatnya dari sang guru sekolah internasional itu sehari sebelumnya. Lalu pada jam empat sore, ia tiba di kelas sang guru. Lelah, tapi siap belajar.

“Ia belajar lebih giat daripada kebanyakan siswa ekspatriatku yang kaya-kaya,” tutur sang guru. “Semangat Hani meningkat seiring dengan meningkatnya kemampuan bahasanya, tetapi aku makin patah semangat.”

Hani tak mungkin memenuhi syarat untuk mendapatkan beasiswa dari universitas besar di Amerika. Ia belum pernah memimpin klub atau organisasi, karena di sekolahnya tak ada hal-hal seperti itu. Ia tak memiliki pembimbing dan nilai tes standar yang mengesankan, karena tes semacam itu tak ada.

Namun, Hani memiliki tekad lebih kuat daripada murid mana pun.

“Maukah Anda mengirimkan namaku?” pintanya untuk didaftarkan sebagai
penerima beasiswa.

“Aku tak tega menolak. Aku mengisi pendaftaran, mengisi setiap titik-titik
dengan kebenaran yang menyakitkan tentang kehidupan akademisnya, tetapi juga
dengan pujianku tentang keberanian dan kegigihannya,” ujar sang guru.

“Kurekatkan amplop itu dan mengatakan kepada Hani bahwa peluangnya untuk
diterima itu tipis, mungkin nihil.”

Pada minggu-minggu berikutnya, Hani meningkatkan pelajarannya dalam bahasa
Inggris. Seluruh tes komputerisasi menjadi tantangan besar bagi seseorang
yang belum pernah menyentuh komputer. Selama dua minggu ia belajar
bagian-bagian komputer dan cara kerjanya.

Lalu, tepat sebelum Hani ke Jakarta untuk mengambil TOEFL, ia menerima surat
dari asosiasi beasiswa itu.

“Inilah saat yang kejam. Penolakan,” pikir sang guru.

Sebagai upaya mencoba mempersiapkannya untuk menghadapi kekecewaan, sang
guru lalu membuka surat dan mulai membacakannya: Ia diterima! Hani diterima
….

“Akhirnya aku menyadari bahwa akulah yang baru memahami sesuatu yang sudah
diketahui Hani sejak awal: bukan kecerdasan saja yang membawa sukses, tapi
juga hasrat untuk sukses, komitmen untuk bekerja keras, dan keberanian untuk
percaya akan dirimu sendiri,” tutur sang guru menutup kisahnya.

Kisah Hani ini diungkap oleh sang guru bahasa Inggris itu, Jamie Winship,
dan dimuat di buku “Chicken Soup for the College Soul”, yang edisi
Indonesianya telah diterbitkan.

Tentu kisah ini tidak dipandang sebagai kisah biasa oleh Jack Canfield, Mark
Victor Hansen, Kimberly Kirberger, dan Dan Clark. Ia terpilih diantara lebih
dari delapan ribu kisah lainnya. Namun, bukan ini yang membuatnya istimewa.

Yang istimewa, Hani menampilkan sosoknya yang berbeda. Ia punya tekad. Tekad
untuk maju. Maka, sebagaimana diucapkan Tommy Lasorda, “Perbedaan antara
yang mustahil dan yang tidak mustahil terletak pada tekad seseorang.”

Anda memilikinya?

Some Profound Thoughts

Such as…

Why did I have to go through a divorce?

(Or the Death of a loved one)

What is the meaning behind grief?

Why does life bring us pain?

What is my purpose on Earth?

Perhaps it may be good to start this page with an essay by Ralph Waldo Emerson, who can express better than I how good things — things we never expect or even fathom — can come out of despair and pain.

I ran across this essay while I was struggling with the pain and hopelessness in my life that came from divorce, and the agony of wondering what was left of my life when my marriage ended at age fifty. When I read it, it touched me deeply. I felt it to be extremely profound, as if it were written just for me.

In his list of calamities that Emerson says are unpaid losses, you may well add divorce, because it is one of life’s most painful losses. Concerning his speaking of death, you would do well to consider and accept that divorce is also a death – the death of a marriage and of a way of life. In this essay, I hear Emerson telling me that, not in spite of, but because of the tragedies that may befall us during our lifetimes, these tragedies can bring about changes in our lives which could ruin our lives, but which, instead, give us the chance to change and grow into a much stronger person who can be of much more value to mankind. This essay is one of my most favorite pieces of literature. It means so very much to me, and I hope it will bring meaning to you and your life as you struggle with your grief.

If you understand the meaning of this essay, it will have a profound effect on you.
If you can’t, I hope that one day you will be able to comrehend its vast wisdom.

There are times when we wonder why we have to go through grief and pain in our lives. If we think about it, we have to realize that grief, pain, mistakes and heartaches are a part of life that we all experience at one time or another if we are to live on Earth. We can’t escape them if we are alive on this earth. And, if we could drop all of our troubles and never see them again, as the below poem wishes, would we remember what we learned from our troubles and pain?

The above essay may be hard to understand, but if you read it over and over, you will begin to see. The Banyan tree is one of the most magnificent trees on earth. It has a huge canopy and a multitude of roots descending from its branches that reach down and give it a wonderful foundation. What Emerson says is true – if you allow them, and if you follow the flow of things, you will see that many of our tragedies end up being blessings even though we don’t see why at the time.

Divorce is one of the most painful things a person can go through. It brings heartache and pain that we don’t like to experience. We wonder why it had to happen to us when other marriage should last a lifetime.

In my case:

I was luckier that most. My life “seemed” untouched by pain until I was nearly fifty. I thought I had a good life, and by most standards it was. I had what I thought was a good marriage. I had two beautiful, wonderful, healthy children. Both of my parents were still alive. I hadn’t suffered from any major losses until then. On the other hand, since I hadn’t experienced grief, I didn’t understand it, so I couldn’t comprehend the pain of others like I should have been able to do. Now I do and can.
Then, I didn’t know how to deal with grief. I managed to deal with it (with difficulty) during my divorce, and I’m sure I will face it again in my lifetime.

In fact, since then, I have lost both parents and a brother, and an aunt I was very close to. As bad a loss as they were, none of them were as painful as my divorce. The divorce was more personal, and affected my very soul. In fact, many people will tell you that a divorce is worse than a death. Death is a natural part of life. It doesn’t affect your self-esteem or self-worth. There isn’t a living person walking around to remind you of your failure. You weren’t told that you aren’t lovable. You weren’t rejected.

In my marriage, I had dealt with job problems, daily struggles, marital disagreements (some quite large). We had the usual “in-law” strife’s that many couples have. We had some problems, but always managed to live a fairly good life. When it came to real trouble and pain, I got a late start with real life.

When Real Life hit, it hit hard.
And I had to learn how to deal with it. In doing so, I learned a great deal about pain and compassion, lessons that were sorely needed.

Nobody gets married with the expectation that their marriage will end. When I got married, we were very much in love. My husband did loved me. We made endless vows and declarations that we would grow old together and love each other eternally. We each considered the other to be our best friend. Things were good for a long time, although, looking back, had I been aware of the “red flags”, I would have been more prepared for what would eventually happen.
I was proud that we were still together after other marriages we knew of had failed. On the surface, his mid-life crisis did us in.
In reality, it was a number of things.
In the end (and this took me a long time to realize), we just weren’t good or right for each other.

Finally, our marriage ended, not by my choice, but by his. I did everything I could to to try to make it work, including going to therapy and trying to get him to go with me to counseling. He didn’t think he needed either – he intimated that all of the problems were mine. By that time, there had been too much water under the bridge and too much emotional damage, and the marriage couldn’t be repaired. I learned that it takes two people to be committed to a marriage to make it work. If either person doesn’t want to work at it, the other can’t fix it by his or herself. When one doesn’t want the responsibilities and commitments that go with marriage, no matter what the other wants or tries to do, the marriage can’t be saved.

Since the marriage didn’t last, should we feel that we should have never gotten married? Or that we were wrong to get married?
No, most of us should not feel that way about our marriage. In another page, I talk about our marriage being part of a plan that we were meant to be a part of in our evolution through life.
I eventually came to terms with the failure of my marriage, and eventually understood the reason for our marriage.
In the beginning, we were in love. We had wonderful goals and plans for our life together, and we looked forward to a lifetime of being together. We each had needs, and we found the person who met our needs at that time. We thought we had the person who met the criteria for being our lifetime mate. We had two children who otherwise wouldn’t have been created – children who have a purpose; we pursued career goals; we had fun times; and we had a fairly good sexual relationship. There were financial struggles at the beginning, but we breezed through them knowing we would make it. We never got rich, but we did O.K. And I have decided that the time we were together fulfilled our destiny for that period of our life. It’s important to realize and acknowledge this. Our marriage wasn’t a mistake. It was what we were meant to do and where we were meant to be at that time in our lives. Consider this:

If we were doing the right thing at the time, why didn’t our marriage last? Well, as in a good many marriages, things can change. People change. Values change. As life progresses, things from our childhood crop up and create problems. Strife creeps in, issues build up, jobs create problems and insecurities, hurts add up, issues don’t get resolved, needs don’t get met. After awhile, it gets so bad that it it can’t go on or it would destroy both people, not only physically, but mentally and emotionally.

Sometimes the choices we make in earlier years, which were right at the time, become the wrong choice later because of a number of uncontrollable forces. They might have even been controllable forces if we had been aware of them at the time, but we weren’t. It is important to realize that we did the right thing based on what we knew at the time. It wasn’t a mistake.

What I thought was a good marriage turned out not to be a lasting one. But was it a good marriage? Looking back, I always felt that there should have been something more. We didn’t seem to have the devotion to each other that should have been there.
I was skeptical and even cynical of those “perfect” marriages in books and movies; I didn’t think they existed in real life. The husbands who loved their wives more than life itself, the husbands who cherished their wives, defended them, the wives who looked up to and respected the husbands, the couples who always got along fantastically — those were fairy-tale marriages. I didn’t think they could be real. I didn’t realize that what our marriage was lacking was the things that it should have had… the forever-after qualities. One of us certainly didn’t have the quality of sticking through both the good and the bad times, for it was during a particularly bad time that it ended.

After a lot of grief, soul-searching and therapy, I (over a period of time) came to acknowledge that his leaving was a blessing. Had he not, I wouldn’t have been given the opportunity to have the life I’m living now, nor would he. I was forced to grow and try to became a better person or stay miserable for the rest of my life. As I grew, I became more spiritual. I learned to be more compassionate. I started learning to like myself. In my marriage I had been made to believe that I was hard to get along with, and that I wasn’t a very nice person.
I grew to realize that was just his opinion.

My standards for the criteria of a mate are much higher than they were when I was younger, for I have changed and my values have changed. My new husband and I have the same values and we feel very comfortable together. Again, he meets my criteria for a life mate, as I do his. But because we both have grown, we think we are very well suited to each other. I think this one will last a lifetime.
We are much more knowledgeable about life and we cherish each other.

The Rule of Thumb is that we are attracted to a person on the same level (socioeconomic, personality, values, goals, and most importantly of all, the same level of function or dysfunctional emotionally and mentally) as we are. That is who we will usually marry. If we want something better, we must become better ourselves in order to attract better. Because I was able to learn and grow and become a better person, I met a man who was on a higher level.

We have to grow and change; we have to learn from our mistakes.
If I had met my present husband years ago, neither of us would be interested in the other for a number of reasons. At the time we came together, we were right for each other. We had both learned from mistakes in our first marriage. We were both more mature and knew what we did and didn’t want. We were more secure in ourselves. We met each other’s needs in a more mature way. We had learned how to love each other unconditionally.

In this marriage, I do feel cherished. I feel as if I’m appreciated, like in the fairy tales. I’ m not criticized or put down. This time we are right for each other. We accept each other’s faults and idiocyncrecies. We complement each other with our strengths and weaknesses. But it’s important to realize that I needed to go through the other marriage in order to get to where I am now.
Everything that happens has a purpose.

Here are some “rules” that, in part, help to sum up
what is to follow.

Rules For Being Human

I believe that we are put on this Earth to become the very best person we can be. In order to do that, we have to learn. We are given lessons in order to learn what we are supposed to learn. Quite often (most of the time, if we are honest), we don’t learn unless there is a reason – either we have a desire to learn, or we are forced to learn in order to survive. We are forced to learn and grow.

We learn best from our mistakes. We don’t tend to learn as well when things are going well – there is no need. The same is true in our relationship with God. In times of trouble, we are brought close to Him. When things are going well, we tend to neglect our spiritual growth.
It was when I was in the most pain that I grew the most spiritually. I had to believe there was a purpose for all of the pain.

The poem, “The Weaving” helps us to understand that everything that we go through in life is part of the ultimate plan for our lives.

I guess that what I have been through has led me to a place where I believe that all of my life’s experiences – the good, the bad, the smart moves and the regretful ones have led me to where I’m supposed to be at this point in my life.
Things aren’t perfect now, either. Things are never perfect. We still have problems and troubles in life. I still have some learning and growing to do.

Imagine This

You don’t have to believe in reincarnation to follow me on this train of thought. I’m not so sure that there might not be such as thing as reincarnation. I’m open to the thought that is might be possible, and I don’t believe that it goes against the Bible. It is said that reincarnation was once in the bible until people throughout history had their hand in adding and removing portions of the Bible.
It is possible that some of us are old souls and some are new souls. We have a journey to make and things to learn in order to become a complete, whole and healthy person.

It is believed by some that if we don’t complete that journey in one lifetime, we get other chances. In some lifetimes, we travel far and learn a lot, moving up the spiral of life faster. We are given obstacles to overcome, hardships to endure, seemingly impossible situations to live with to mold us. We learn a lot in those lifetimes. In other lifetimes, we rest and move more slowly and have easier lives. But in each lifetime, we are given opportunities to overcome our basic “faults”, or to learn the lessons we are meant to learn. If we don’t learn, we have to keep repeating our lives until we do. If we do learn, we move on to the next lesson. When we have learned a lesson, we don’t have to repeat it again in the next lifetime. And so we grow, until we have reached the point where we have become the best person we are supposed to be. I’m not wise enough to know what happens then, but I hope our soul can then rest in Heaven.

Now, if you don’t believe in reincarnation, you can look at it this way. We can learn our lessons in one lifetime, becoming all that we were meant to be, OR we can waste that life and remain a person who hasn’t evolved into his or her best. We won’t get another chance, so we have to grow as much as we can in our one lifetime. Either way, it is up to us to grow and evolve as far as our lifetime takes us. We can learn from our mistakes and try to become a better person, or we can stay as we are, unhappy and unfulfilled. Sometimes circumstances prevent us from doing and being our best, but it is up to us to try to overcome those circumstances and make the best of what we have.
In thinking this way, then we must make the most of the one life that we have.

By doing our best in our lifetime, I believe that we can:

Like Harvell Hendrix, I believe that we are meant to be a part of a couple. Most of us want and yearn to be a part of a couple. I believe that we learn and grow best in a relationship.
I believe that men and women belong together in life.
I also believe that a person should “spend some time in the desert”.
A person needs to live by his or her self to learn to be
an independent person before they get married. If a person gets married right out of high school or college (as they did when I was young), then eventually, sometime during their lifetime, they have to learn to be independent in order to be a whole person. After a divorce,
a person needs to spend time grieving and healing alone.
Like me, some of us don’t get that chance until a marriage fails. I went right from my parent’s home to college to marriage the summer I finished college. I didn’t have a chance to establish an identity or to become a whole person on my own before becoming part of a couple.
After my marriage ended, I had a number of years to learn about myself. I was in counseling for several years. I spent time reading, working through childhood issues, going to therapy, learning about myself, and forming friendships that I didn’t have within the marriage. I spent time reflecting on myself and my life. I purposely wanted to grow. I spent time alone learning about Me and working on Me.
My life isn’t perfect now – I still have some internal struggles with issues that will never go away but that I have learned to deal with. I have had my share of problems. My father was an alcoholic and my mother suffered from bipololar disease. Then came my divorce. Later, I had to deal with an invalid mother in a nursing home and an alcoholic brother who hindered more than helped. When I most needed him, God sent my present husband into my life. He helped me make it through those bad times. Like everyone, I have frustrations at work, I get sick and sometimes wonder if I ever will feel better (I always do feel better, but when I feel “down” it’s hard to remember feeling “up”). We have dealt with death on both sides of our family. We have had problems with our children, and worried about them and their lives. Life goes on.
I look forward to retirement (two years away, when we can relax and travel and have the time to enjoy life more fully. But I’m still living life, and life brings its pain and trouble as well as its joys and contentment.

I hope that this page has helped you to accept your divorce (or your grief, whatever it is), and made you realize that your life isn’t over just because your marriage ended. It isn’t over even if your spouse has died. I hope that this has given you something to work on and look forward to – a better, happier life. We came into this life by ourselves and we will leave by ourselves. It’s just nice when we have a loving person with which to share our lives.

In the end, even though we chose to move through this life with a mate, now or previously, our life and what we do with it is up to us.

jQuery(‘.intro .thumbnail’).each(function(i,e){
jQuery(e).find(‘img’).one(‘error’,function(){ jQuery(e).remove(); });
});