Induction is a reasoning progression that proceeds from particulars
(observations, measurements, data) to generalities (rules, laws, theories). Deduction
proceeds in the opposite direction. In inductive presentation of
classroom material, one makes observations and infers governing or correlating
principles; in deductive presentation one starts with axioms, principles,
or rules, deduces consequences, and formulates applications. As with the
previous dimensions, students may have moderate or strong preferences for one
or the other presentation mode; in particular, they may
prefer deductive presentation because of its relatively
high level of structure.
A large percentage of classroom teaching in every
subject is primarily or exclusively deductive, probably because deduction is an
efficient and elegant way to organize and present material that is already
understood. However, there is considerable evidence that incorporating a
substantial inductive component into teaching promotes effective learning.
Inductive reasoning is thought to be an important
component in academic achievement (Ropo 1987). Current cognitive research emphasizes
the importance of prior knowledge in learning (Glaser 1984); introducing new
material by linking it to observed or
previously known material is essentially inductive. The benefits claimed for
inductive instructional approaches (e.g., discovery or inquiry learning) include
increased academic achievement and
enhanced abstract reasoning skills (Taba 1966),
longer retention of information (McConnell 1934; Swenson 1949), and improved
ability to apply principles (Lahti 1986). Insofar as foreign languages are
concerned,
we propose that the distinction between
induction and deduction is akin to the distinction between language acquisition
and learning.
To acquire a language means to pick it up gradually,
gaining the ability to communicate
with it without necessarily being able to articulate
the rules. Individuals absorb what they can from the abundant and continuous input
that bombards them; they cannot grasp all they hear, but each day increases
their ability to understand, retain, and use in conversation what they have
taken in. Throughout the process they gain in their ability to transfer
strategies, make assumptions about the new language system, formulate and test
rules, and either keep or abandon them. They continue this process (most of
which is subconscious) until they fossilize, which they may do as soon as they feel
they have learned what they need to in order to communicate in the language (Coulter
1983). In its progression from specifics to generalizations, acquisition is an
inductive process.
On the other hand, language learning is a largely
conscious process that involves formal exposure to rules of syntax and
semantics followed by specific applications of the rules, with corrective
feedback reinforcing correct usage and discouraging incorrect usage. The flow
of the learning process from general to specific suggests its characterization
as a deductive process.
Three well-known approaches illustrate
deductive and inductive approaches to language instruction. The first is the grammartranslation
method, rooted in the formal teaching of Latin and Greek that prevailed in
Europe for many centuries (Rivers 1968). This method
involves the translation of literary texts followed by explanation (in the
students’ native
language) of rules of grammar. As Corder notes,
grammar-translation is “the most deductive approach” (Allen & Corder 1975, 13).
A later approach is the direct method, in which classes are taught
entirely in the target language; grammar is taught inferentially and plays a
secondary role to oral communication.
This approach, which was in vogue in many countries
throughout the nineteenth century (Allen & Corder 1975, 18), is almost
purely inductive. The third approach is the audio-oral method, according
to which language is a set of habits with vocabulary being of secondary
concern. In this method, which was influenced by behavioral psychology and
structural linguistics, students learn by repeating structural patterns and
eventually automatize the structures, aided by positive reinforcement
0 comments:
Post a Comment