Abstract

Much has been said and written over the years about the merit or other of the traditional teaching methods. Most language teaching methods have closely adhered to the ad hoc top-to-bottom listening-speaking-reading-writing order (e.g. the Audio-lingual Method) or have been single-faceted methods which sacrifice many parts of language in favour of one part (e.g. the Reading Method). The Bottom-Up Approach is a revolutionized way of teaching foreign languages in which the traditional order has been reversed. In the current thinking the bottom of language is writing, which is considered secondary to other language skills. However, it is emphasized here that this is a misconception. A major obstacle to foreign language learning is the fear of making mistakes, especially when one presents oneself in public. Writing is a private negotiation with the self. It eliminates fear and anxiety, and creates an atmosphere in the light of which students gain confidence as they progress towards total language.

Introduction:

The English language teaching tradition has been subjected to a tremendous change. The change has either been due to the reaction of learners and / or teachers to a given method or has been due to changes in linguistics and psychology theories. Despite such changes one or two older methods (e.g. the Grammar Translation Method) remain stalwart and impervious to educational reforms. The reason for this could be the shortcomings associated with most modern language teaching methods. Nowadays, for example, there is a lot of talk about communication and developing communicative skills. Unfortunately, however, even this has not solved the language problem of many learners in different parts of the world. The problem may be inherent in the Communicative Method itself, or it could be the result of absence of motivation on the part of learners. Looking at the problem from different angles, we find that lack of motivation is the main cause of learners' apathy towards language learning. Why do learners fail abysmally at the end of a long period of wheelings and dealings in the classroom? The answer: anxiety, fear, lack of privacy.

Nearly all language teaching approaches have emphasized a top-to-bottom methodology; that is, listening-speaking-reading-writing. The Bottom-Up Approach, however, reverses the emphasis of the traditional top-to-bottom approaches, and puts writing at a higher level of focus. The reason is that writing is an independent activity which removes fear and anxiety, and offers privacy and autonomy.

Review of the major past methods

The Grammar Translation Method
The Grammar Translation Method goes back to the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries when foreign language learning was associated with the learning of Latin and Greek. These two languages were supposed to promote their speakers' intellectuality. To this end, it was of vital importance to focus on grammatical rules, syntactic structures, along with rote memorization of vocabulary and translation of literary texts.

Although one can say that the Grammar Translation Method's contribution to foreign language learning has been very meagre, it is still one of the most popular and favourite models of language teaching.

The Direct Method
Francois Gouin's harrowing experiences of learning German gave him insights into the intricacies of language teaching and learning. Observing his three-year-old nephew he came to the conclusion that language learning is a matter of transforming perceptions into conceptions. Later, he devised a teaching method which was premised upon these insights. The Series Method taught learners directly a series of connected sentences which were easy to understand. Nevertheless, this method did not last long and a generation later it was replaced by Charles Berlitz's Direct Method. The basic tenet of the Direct Method was that second language learning is similar to first language learning. Although it became very popular at the beginning of the twentieth century, the Direct Method started to decline for its being difficult to use.

The Audiolingual Method
The decline of the Direct Method led to the emergence of the Audiolingual Method. The outbreak of World War II and the need for Americans to become orally proficient in the languages of their friends and foes alike contributed to the creation of the new method. Bits and pieces of the Direct Method were put together to make it, which was first known as the Army Method. Although the Audiolingual Method takes much from the Direct Method, it adds features from structural linguistics and behavioural psychology.

With the attack on the concept of verbal behaviour (Chomsky 1959) , with the attention of linguists and language teachers to the deep structure of language (Chomsky 1965) , and with psychologists' taking account of the affective and interpersonal nature of learning (Hilgard 1963) the Audiolingual Method was doomed to failure . As a result of this, a new generation of methods emerged. David Nunan (1989) referred to these methods as designer methods which attempted to capitalize on the importance of psychological factors in language learning.

Suggestopedia
Lozanov, the founder of Sugggestopedia, believed that we are capable of learning much more than we think, provided we use our brain power and inner capacities. Relaxation and music played vital role in the method. With classical music in the background and with students sitting in comfortable seats vocabulary, readings, role-plays, and drama were presented. In this way students became suggestible.
Suggestopedia suffered from a major setback. What will happen if our classrooms are bereft of such amenities as comfortable seats and CD players? Evidence shows that this is indeed the case, and most classrooms lack such facilities.

The Silent Way
The Silent Way rested on cognitive rather than affective arguments, and was characterized by a problem-solving approach to learning. Gattengo believed that it is in learners' best interest to develop independence and autonomy and cooperate with each other in solving language problems. The name of the method comes from the fact that the teacher keep silent and refuses to explain everything to learners.
The Silent way came under attack on account of the teacher being distant and the classroom environment not being conducive to learning.

Communicative Language Teaching
Defining and redefining the construct of communicative competence (Hymes 1972; Canale and Swain 1980), exploring the vast array of functions of language (Wilkins 1976), and relentless need for communication led to the emergence of the Communicative Language Teaching Method. The basic premises of this approach include:

.....(One) Focusing on all of the components of communicative competence: grammatical, functional, pragmatic.
.....(Two) Viewing fluency and accuracy as complementary principles underpinning communicative techniques.
.....(Three) Using the language in unrehearsed contexts

The Bottom-Up Approach: Theoretical Description
The Bottom-Up Approach is based on motivation theory in second language learning. As Dornyei (2001: 116) notes, "… teacher skills in motivating learners should be seen as central to teaching effectiveness." Experience has proved that fear of speaking in public in a foreign language and lack of privacy eliminates motivation of language learning. Tuckman (1969, quoted in Argyle 1969) thinks that a group goes through four stages from its formation. This has important implications for the study of the classroom and the use of group activities during teaching:

Stage 1 Forming: At first, there is some anxiety among the members of the group, as they are dependent on the leader (that is, the teacher) and they have to find out what behaviour is available.
Stage 2 Storming: There is conflict between sub-groups and rebellion against the leader. Members of the group resist their leader and the role relations attending the function of the group are questioned.
Stage 3 Norming: The group begins to develop a sort of cohesion. Members of the group begin to support each other. At this stage, there is cooperation and open exchange of views and feelings about their roles and each other.
Stage 4 Performing: Most problems are resolved and there is a great deal of interpersonal activity. Everyone is devoted to completing the tasks they have been assigned.

Most learners are held down in stages 1 and 2, and do not progress towards stages 3 and 4. Learners feel anxiety whilst speaking publically. The reason is that they do not know what the correct behaviour is in the foreign language, and the principles of the method require them to communicate in the target language or follow teachers' orders at all costs. Thus, there is no balance between speaking publically and requirements of the method.

The latter leads to conflict between sub-groups and rebellion against the teacher. If the conflict is long-lived, it results in demotivation and drop-out.

Unlike other methods, the Bottom-Up Approach attempts to develop, maintain, and increase the motivation needed in language classrooms. The new method uses the process-oriented model established by Dornyei and Otto(1998). The key units of the model are as follows:
.....(1) Creating the basic motivational conditions, which involves setting the scene for the use of motivational strategies.
.....(2) Generating student motivation , which roughly corresponds to the preactional phase in the model
.....(3) Maintaining and protecting motivation , which corresponds to the actional phase
.....(4) Encouraging positive self-evaluation, which corresponds to the postactional phase.

Basic motivational conditions are requisite for the working of motivational strategies. These conditions include appropriate teacher behaviour and good teacher-student rapport, a pleasant and supportive classroom atmosphere, and a cohesive learner group characterized by appropriate group norms.

The learning experience is per se intrinsically pleasant for learners. However, the curiosity to learn may be vitiated by methodological straitjacket. Therefore, unless teachers increase their learners' goal-oriented ness, remove fear make teaching plans relevant for them, and create realistic learner beliefs, they will encounter a classroom environment fraught with lack of cohesiveness and rebellion.

Once learners pass the second stage, it is important to sustain and protect motivation. When the task becomes cumbersome, there is a natural tendency in learners to get tired or bored, and succumb to any attractive distractions which may result in demotivation. Therefore, there should be a motivational repertoire which includes several motivation maintenance strategies. There are two most important of these strategies: (a) increasing learners' self-confidence; (b) creating learner autonomy.

Dornyei (2001: 130) lists five approaches to help learners maintain and increase self-confidence:
(1) Teachers can foster the belief that competence is a changeable aspect of development.
(2) Favourable self-conception of L2 competence can be promoted by providing regular experiences of success.
(3) Everyone is more interested in a task if they feel that they make a contribution.
(4) A small personal word of encouragement is sufficient.
(5) Teachers can reduce classroom anxiety by making the learning context less stressful.

Educationalists (see Benson 2000) argue that learner autonomy can prove beneficial to learning. This assumption is premised on humanistic psychology. Rogers (1991:276) notes that "The only kind of learning which significantly affects behaviour is self-discovered self-appropriated learning."

An important aspect of the Bottom-Up Approach is that it provides full autonomy for language learners. According to Good and Brophy (1994: 228), "The simplest way to ensure that people value what they are doing is maximise their free choice and autonomy." The latter is shared by Ushioda (1997:41), who thinks that "Self-motivation is a question of thinking effectively and meaningfully about learning experience and learning goals. It is a question of applying positive thought patterns and belief structures so as to optimise and sustain one's involvement in learning."
Encouraging positive self-evaluation contributes to successful task completion and self-satisfaction. By employing appropriate strategies, we can encourage language learners to achieve the latter. Dorneyei (2001: 134) explains three areas of such strategies:

(1) Promoting attributions to effort rather than ability
(2) Providing motivational feedback
(3) Increasing learner satisfaction and the question of rewards and grades.

The Method
Although the Bottom-Up Approach gives prominence to writing, it views language as a total entity. Writing provides privacy and self-negotiation for learners, and becomes a channel through which learners overcome their fear and anxiety, achieve some degree of autonomy, and kill causes of demotivation.

The method is especially beneficial to lower intermediate, intermediate, and advanced students; that is, those who have to some extent developed writing and reading ability. Therefore, a basic knowledge of the target language script is necessary for the method to work.

To start with the teacher specifies a type. A type includes the things that surround learners from without and within, from every day life chores to emotional changes, merry-making and qualms. For the type to be specifically targeted, learners need certain specialized and general vocabulary. It is the job of the teacher to supply the necessary words. The words are presented in written form on the blackboard or an overhead projector may be used. Then he/she asks learners to have a pen and paper handy. Learners should write either the answers to certain questions, or should follow orders in writing. Once all the questions and answers are complete , and all the orders are followed and done in writing , the teacher calls on learners to sit back and think for a while.

The purpose is to allow learners to negotiate with the self and arrange the answers and orders in the form of a well-organized and well-thought passage. Next come checks and balances. The teacher asks learners to exchange their compositions with their neighbours. Again, the teacher calls for learners' silence. They sit back and check out their neighbours' work very carefully. Once finished with the latter, he/she asks them to read their neighbours' compositions loudly. While they read, the teacher corrects them for their pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, and style errors. Immediately after smoke is cleared, students should present their own compositions orally with other students listening attentively. At this stage, students are asked to take notes. From the notes taken from a read composition of their own choice, they may form questions, and the student in point may answer them.

Class time and arrangements are important. Each session of training will be two hours with a 15-minute break. There may be two or three sessions per week. The duration of a course may last anywhere between two to three months. Circle classes are preferable, as students can face each other and the exchange of ideas will be smoother. The teacher's seat can be anywhere in the circle. He/she may stand up and move around with ease. Relevant equipment may be used. This depends on the type in action. For a social type, for example, displaying a video film with people interacting and socializing may invoke fresh ideas for students to compose their thoughts and form questions or answer questions.

Discussion
The Bottom-UP Approach is compatible with the proposed method. At the first stage , with the teacher providing the necessary words for a given type and asking questions in the target language and allowing learners to take their time in writing answers , anxiety in learners and conflict between sub-groups and rebellion against the teacher are partially eliminated. Anxiety and fear is fully removed at the second stage when learners put their answers together, negotiate with the self, and develop self-reliance. The following stages contribute to a great deal of interpersonal activity. Such interpersonal activity creates necessary conditions which generate and maintain motivation in learners. It finally results in positive self-evaluation, and further self-reliance.

The method also promotes individualism and autonomy which in part give rise to creativeness and inventiveness. Individual feeling of success creates favourable self-conception and increases interest in the task. This, in turn, encourages students to have more learning experiences.

Conclusion
Teaching English as a foreign language has always been a controversial issue. Various teaching methods have come into vogue and disappeared. Most of these methods have followed the traditional top to bottom approach; i.e. listening has been placed on the top and been given a major priority, but writing has been sent down to the bottom and been rid of its important role in learning foreign languages. The Bottom-Up Approach has reversed the traditional order of language teaching and has put writing in focus.

The shift of the order is based on the theory of motivation. Anxiety and fear are two major terminators of motivation in foreign language learning. Without learner motivation no method can succeed. Anxiety and fear stem from lack of privacy and autonomy. The new approach creates moments of privacy for learners to negotiate with the self and gradually progress towards total language.

References:
Argyle, M. 1969. Social Interaction. London: Tavistock Press.

Benson , P. 2000. Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. London: Longman.

Canale, M. and M. Swain. 1980. "Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing". Applied Linguistics
1:1-47.

Chomsky, N. 1959. "A review of B.F. Skinner's Verbal Behavior." Language 35: 26-58.

Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge: M.I. T. Press.

Dornyei, Z. and I. Otto. 1998. "Motivation in action: A process model of L2 motivation. " Working Papers in Applied Linguistics 4: 43-69.

Dornyei, Z. 2001. Teaching and Researching Motivation. England: Pearson Education Limited.

Good, T.L. and J.E. Brophy. 1994. Looking in classrooms (6th edition).
New York: Harper Collins.

Hilgard. E. 1963. "Motivation in learning theory." In S. Koch (ed.) Psychology: A Study of Science. Volume 5. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Hymes , D. 1972. "On communicative competence "in J.B. Pride and J. Holms (eds.) Sociolinguistics. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Books.

Nunan, D. 1989. Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rogers, C. 1991. On becoming a person. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Ushioda, E. 1997. "The role of motivational thinking in autonomous language learning" in D. Little and B. Voss (eds.) Language centers: Planning for the new millennium. Plymouth: University of Plymouth.