The Internet TESL Journal

Deductive & Inductive Lessons for Saudi EFL Freshmen Students

Mohammed Y. Al-Kharrat ykharrat [at] yahoo.com King Khalid ni!er"ity# In"titute o$ Engli"h % Tran"lation &A'ha# Saudi Ara'ia(

Abstract
The im)ortance o$ "tudent"* acti!e in!ol!ement in the learning )roce"" i" increa"ingly gro+ing in thi" era o$ in$ormation e,)lo"ion. Educator" continue to unra!el +ay" to a""i"t learner" in de!elo)ing their cogniti!e )otential. -educti!e learning and inducti!e learning +hich hel) "tudent" articulate their mental )roce""e" "eem to incor)orate many o$ the re"earch "tudie" )ro)ounded 'y ESL )ractitioner". The"e a))roache" ha!e )ro!ed to gi!e "tudent" the a'ility to rationali.e +hat in$ormation i" needed and# there'y# to make them con"ciou" o$ the intent and content o$ the le""on" )re"ented to them. Although the"e kind" o$ learning a))ear to 'e +idely u"ed acro"" age grou)"# re)orted e!idence o$ their u"e in college cla""e" ha" rarely 'een $ound. Thi" article de"cri'e" the im)lementation o$ deducti!e and inducti!e method" $or t+o le""on" I actually o'"er!ed o$ /0 Saudi $re"hmen "tudent" +ho )artici)ated in thi" "tudy. Thi" )a)er di"cu""e" the identi$ication o$ the in"tructional goal" along +ith the cogniti!e ta"k" 'y +hich "tudent" internali.e the conce)t" taught. The "tudy conclude" +ith "ome )edagogical recommendation" $or ESL teacher" to con"ider.

Introduction
1e"earch into language learning ha" con"idera'ly enriched our under"tanding o$ the )roce""e" that take )lace in the cla""room and the $actor" that in$luence them. Mo"t re"earcher" agree that# $or o)timal learning to occur# "tudent" need to e,ert a con"ciou" e$$ort to learn. Their teacher" "hould acti!ate the "tudent"* mind" ")ontaneou"ly and in!ol!e them in )ro'lem "ol!ing and critical thinking &Stoller# 2334(. According to Ander"on*" &2330( cogniti!e theory# learner" are 'etter a'le to under"tand detail" +hen they are "u'"umed under a general conce)t. Ander"on $urther "tate" that the 5uality o$ learning de)end" on ho+ +ell the 'a"ic conce)t i" anchored. In "hort# greater "ta'ility o$ the 'a"ic conce)t" re"ult" in greater learning. A num'er o$ re"earch "tudie" ha!e re)orted that learner" need am)le o))ortunitie" $or communication u"e "o that they can integrate "e)arate "tructure" into gi!en conce)t" $or e,)re""ing meaning". S)ada % Light'o+n &233/( hold that thinking "kill" o)erate e$$ecti!ely +hen "tudent" !oice their analy"i" and take )art in the learning )roce"" occurring in the cla""room. Methodologi"t" al"o argue that learner" in the cla""room "hould e,)erience creati!e re$lection" through +hich the teacher )ro'e" their under"tanding to elicit an"+er" $or the 5ue"tion" he or "he )o"e". In thi" +ay# "tudent" can lay the $oundation" $or their internal
1

re)re"entation o$ the target language# +hich can allo+ e$$ecti!e learning to $unction )ro)erly &6ica# 2337(. Many re"earcher" "uch a" 8haudron &2399( $urther document the 'ene$it" o$ in!ol!ing "tudent" in the learning )roce"". The"e in!e"tigator" $ound that "tudent" taught 'y teacher" +ho acti!ely in!ol!ed them in le""on" achie!ed at higher rate" than tho"e in traditional cla""e". The e$$ecti!ene"" o$ deductive and inductive a))roache"# aiming at ma,imi.ing the "tudent"* o))ortunity to )ractice thinking "kill"# ha" 'een in!e"tigated in em)irical "tudie". Deductive learning i" an a))roach to language teaching in +hich learner" are taught rule" and gi!en ")eci$ic in$ormation a'out a language. Then# they a))ly the"e rule" +hen they u"e the language. Thi" may 'e contra"ted +ith inductive learning in +hich learner" are not taught rule" directly# 'ut are le$t to di"co!er - or induce - rule" $rom their e,)erience o$ u"ing the language &1ichard" et al# 239:(. ;armer &2393( a"certain" that the"e t+o techni5ue" encourage learner" to com)en"ate $or the ga) in their "econd language kno+ledge 'y u"ing a !ariety o$ communication "trategie". A num'er o$ re"earch "tudie"# like+i"e# ha" re)orted that "ucce""$ul learner" o$ten ado)t certain learning "trategie" "uch a" "eeking out )ractice o))ortunitie" or mouthing the 5ue"tion" )ut to other learner" &6eck# 2399(. Inducti!e and deducti!e model" o$$er thi" chance to learner" 'ecau"e the"e t+o model" $o"ter a coo)erati!e atmo")here among "tudent". According to 8elce-Murcia et al &2334(# the communicati!e cla""room )ro!ide" a 'etter en!ironment $or "econd language learning than cla""room" dominated 'y $ormal in"truction. Thu"# it i" not at all "ur)ri"ingly that deducti!e and inducti!e a))roache" ha!e met +ith "uch enthu"ia"m< they are intuiti!ely !ery a))ealing. Student" can learn 'e"t once they ha!e achie!ed 'a"ic com)rehen"ion and can acce)t $eed'ack in the $orm o$ their )roduction in meaning$ul di"cour"e. There mu"t 'e o))ortunitie" +hen "tudent" in the cla""room u"e language to communicate idea" and not =u"t li"ten to their teacher". Learning deducti!ely and inducti!ely i" among the communicati!e a))roache" that encourage "tudent" to communicate $luently. In Section 2 and > that $ollo+# I re)ort 'rie$ly on the )roce"" o$ t+o le""on"< one an inducti!e grammar le""on# the other# a deducti!e grammar le""on. Thi" i" then $ollo+ed in Section / +ith a )edagogical o!er!ie+ o$ i""ue" that aro"e $rom my o'"er!ation o$ the"e t+o le""on".

1. The Features of the Inductive Technique Used in a Grammar Lesson

The le""on 'egin" 'y con$ronting the "tudent" +ith a "timulating )ro'lem# and they are then told to $ind out ho+ it can 'e re"ol!ed. The con$rontation i" initiated $ir"t !er'ally# then the teacher +rite" a grou) o$ +ord" on the 'oard linked to the oral di"cu""ion he conduct". A" the "tudent" react# the teacher dra+" their attention to the "igni$icant )oint" he +ant" to )re"ent through hi" 5ue"tioning. ?hen the "tudent" 'ecome intere"ted in# and committed to the le""on# and 'egin to o$$er rea"oned interaction among"t them"el!e" and +ith the teacher# the latter i" a'le to lead them to+ard" $ormulating and "tructuring the )ro'lem $or them"el!e". @inally# the "tudent" analy.e the re5uired conce)t and re)ort their re"ult". A/B

1.1. The Lesson !an a. "once#t to be deve!o#ed$ ;o+ adding C-ingC to an Engli"h +ord con"i"ting o$ one "ylla'le can change it" ")elling. b. Instructiona! Goa!s

&i( Student" +ill con"truct the rule that +hen adding C- ingC to +ord"# the $inal con"onant i" dou'led i$ )receded 'y a "hort !o+el "ound# 'ut not i$ )receded 'y a long !o+el "ound. &ii( Student" +ill )ro!ide the teacher +ith e,am)le" that "ho+ their under"tanding o$ the rule.

1.%. &e#ort on the "o'nitive Under#innin's of the Lesson a. "once#t Formation Introduction Ste# 1$ The teacher "tarted hi" le""on +ith a +arm-u) e,erci"e making "tudent" recogni.e the di$$erence 'et+een a "hort !o+el "ound and a long !o+el "ound. ;e ga!e e,am)le" o$ "hort !o+el" likeD EeE a" in get# EiE a" in 'in# EAE a" in 'ut# and long !o+el" EeeE a" in meet# EooE a" in moon# EaiE a" in my. Data #resentation Ste# %$ The teacher continued the le""on 'y +riting rele!ant +ord" on the 'oard that contain "hort !o+el" and long !o+el" "uch a"D cut, wed, map yawn, fight, tour ;e )rom)ted the "tudent" to re")ond to +hat he had +ritten 'y a"king "e!eral 5ue"tion"# "uch a"D Phonetically speaking, can you tell me something about these words? Which words belong together? Why? How would you group these words?

What did you notice?

The"e o)en-ended 5ue"tion" got all the "tudent" to )artici)ate< thu"# "tudent"* attention +a" con"tantly maintained. b. Inter#retation Ste# ($ Identif)in' "ritica! &e!ationshi#$ The teacher )o"ed 5ue"tion" that +ere $ocu"ed on the notion that all the !er'" concerned had one "ylla'le# "ome o$ +hich contain "hort !o+el" +hil"t other" contain long !o+el". A$ter eliciting good an"+er" $or the 5ue"tion" )o"ed# he then added additional letter" to the +ritten +ord" that# again# led the "tudent" to recon"ider their deci"ion". The li"t on the 'oard a))eared a" $ollo+"D cutting, wedding, mapping yawning, fighting, touring
3

Again# the teacher generated ne+ o'"er!ation" and di"cu""ion that made the "tudent" "ee the di$$erence and identi$y the critical relation"hi) 'et+een +ord" containing "hort !o+el" and their ")elling in their )re"ent )artici)le $orm. Some o$ the )ro'ing 5ue"tion" he a"ked +ere a" $ollo+"D What happened to the words after adding "-ing"? What does this tell us? What can we conclude about similar verbs? A" the le""on )roceeded# the )roce"" o$ o'"er!ing and de"cri'ing e!ol!ed naturally into making com)ari"on" and in$erence". Thu"# the "tudent" reached the de"ira'le conclu"ion their teacher +anted them to com)rehend and a))ly. c. A##!ications of rinci#!es Ste# *$ ;a!ing made "tudent" under"tand the rule# the teacher in"tructed them to relate +hat they $ound out in the le""on and to gi!e him e,am)le" o$ their o+n. Then# he di!ided the cla"" into "e!eral grou)" and had them a"k each other to !eri$y the rule and gi!e rea"on" $or their !eri$ication. @inally# an a""ignment +a" gi!en to 'e turned in and di"cu""ed $or the ne,t day. Thi" a""ignment con"i"ted o$ a "hort "tory containing numerou" e,am)le" o$ the "tructure concerned# and "tudent" +ere a"ked to identi$y the rele!ant !er'"# e,)lain their meaning"# and )re"ent them in !ariou" $orm" &$ir"t )er"on )re"ent continuou"# gerund# third )er"on )a"t continuou"# "ee figure 2 and c$. A.ar# 233/(. "ommon Uses of the Structure

@igure 2

%. The Features of the Deductive Technique Used in a +ocabu!ar) Lesson

Thi" model i" the inducti!e model*" counter)art. The le""on 'egin" 'y a )re"entation in +hich the teacher introduce" the conce)t to 'e taught directly. The "tudent" "hould not ha!e di$$iculty dige"ting the conce)t due to the teacher*" clari$ication o$ it. To rein$orce "tudent"* under"tanding and make "ure that the "tudent" are $ollo+ing# the teacher +rite" e,am)le" and non-e,am)le" o$ the conce)t" on the 'oard. An e,)lanation i" o$$ered a" to +hat the rule entail"# and "tudent" are gi!en the ta"k o$ identi$ying the correct e,am)le". @inally# the teacher a"k" "tudent" to generate their o+n e,am)le"# and re)ort 'ack their $inding" to the cla"".

%.1. The Lesson !an ,% a. "once#ts to be Deve!o#ed$ The de$inition o$ antonym" and "ynonym"# and the di$$erence 'et+een them. b. Instructiona! Goa!s$

&i( Student" +ill com)are +ord )air"# namely antonym" and "ynonym"# and the di"tinction 'et+een them. &ii( Student" +ill )ro!ide the teacher +ith e,am)le" that "ho+ their under"tanding o$ the conce)t".

%.%. &e#ort on the "o'nitive Under#innin's of the Lesson a. resentation of the abstraction Ste# 1$ In thi" )ha"e# the teacher "tated the o'=ecti!e o$ the le""on clearly 'y de$ining the conce)t" and a))lying them to ad=ecti!e" +ith +hich the "tudent" +ere $amiliar. The de$inition +ere like thi"D

Synonym i" a +ord )air that mean" the "ame. &+ealthy# rich( Antonym i" a +ord )air that mean" the o))o"ite. &"trong# +eak(

Fe,t# he di")layed the $ollo+ing "tructural outline on the o!erhead )ro=ector to ca)ture the "tudent"* attention# &"ee figure (.

@igure > b. Inter#retation Ste# %$ The a'"traction +a" $urther illu"trated +ith a num'er o$ e,am)le". The teacher $ir"t +rote +ord" on the 'oard in t+o column"# u"ing ad=ecti!e" like famous, cause, confused, alive, upset, wonderful, reason, well-known, dead, calm, lost, and terrible! The"e +ord" re)re"ented a !ariety o$ ad=ecti!e" +hich could 'e "orted out into "ynonym or antonym +ord-)air". ;e then )roceeded to a"k "tudent" +hether the +ord" 'elonged or did not 'elong - to the conce)t" o$ antonym and "ynonym a" had 'een e,)lained at the 'eginning o$ the le""on. ;e a"ked "tudent" to u"e their kno+ledge to match the ad=ecti!e"# a"king 5ue"tion" likeD -o the"e t+o +ord" Crea"onC# Cali!eC belong together? ?hat matche" the +ord lo"t?
5

?hat can +e "ay a'out +ord" like $amou" and +ell-kno+n? "sing our new understanding of word-pairs, what can we deduce about a word-pair like dead and ali!e?

c. A##!ications of the Abstraction$ Ste# ($ Thi" )ha"e i" identical to the a))lication )ha"e o$ Ste) 7 in the inducti!e )re!iou" le""on. Student" +ere a"ked to )ro!ide additional e,am)le" o$ the conce)t" on their o+n. The teacher a"ked the "tudent" "ayingD

Who can give me more e#amples of synonyms? Who can give me more e#amples of antonyms? Ste# *$ The le""on ended +ith the teacher a"king the "tudent" to "um u) +hat they learned throughout the le""on "ayingD
Today, we have learned about word pairs which are divided into ... and ... . Synonyms mean ... and antonyms mean .... Examples of synonyms are ... ,... and examples of antonyms are ...,... .

@inally# an a""ignment +a" gi!en to them to 'e turned in ne,t day. Thi" con"i"ted o$ a "tory +ritten 'y the teacher# rich in "imilar and contra"ting ad=ecti!e". The "tudent" +ere a"ked to $ind the "ynonym" and antonym" contained in the "tory# and to match them.

(. eda'o'ica! "onsiderations
It +a" o'!iou" that the de!elo)ment o$ thinking and lingui"tic "kill" +a" the ma=or )edagogical goal o$ 'oth techni5ue"# inducti!e and deducti!e. A" the teacher em'arked on the le""on and cla""i$ied e,am)le"# "tudent" +ere encouraged to hy)othe"i.e# com)are# con"truct# and generate. Student"* )artici)ation in 'oth model" indicated their com)rehen"ion o$ the in$ormation 'eing )re"ented. ;ence# it i" )o""i'le to )roclaim# in the light o$ the a'o!e "tudy# that the"e t+o "trategie" can ")ur "tudent" to ha!e con$idence in their target language and e,)loit it $or communicati!e end". Goth techni5ue" relied on clear e,am)le" and 'oth de)ended on the acti!e in!ol!ement o$ the teacher" in guiding their "tudent"* learning. I$ u"ed )ro)erly# 'oth "trategie" +ould )lay an e$$icient role in hel)ing learner" de!elo) 'oth $luency o$ 'eha!ior and under"tanding o$ the $oreign lingui"tic "y"tem. ;o+e!er# it i" "a$e to "ay that an inducti!e method in!ol!e" "tudent" more in an analytical "tudy o$ the language than the deducti!e method doe". In addition# $rom my o'"er!ation o$ the le""on in 5ue"tion# thi" method "eem" to 'e highly moti!ating and e,tremely 'ene$icial $or the "tudent"* under"tanding o$ the material" )re"ented to them. The thinking "kill" that "tudent" em)loyed in the inducti!e model +ere $ar more demanding than tho"e u"ed +ith the deducti!e model. Thi" o'"er!ation 'ring" +ith it the i""ue o$ +hether or not it re5uire" more e,)erienced and ad!anced "tudent". It" e$$ecti!ene"" al"o count" on the teacher a" an acti!e leader in guiding "tudent" +hen they )roce"" the in$ormation.

The deducti!e model# on the other hand# i" le"" o)en-ended than the inducti!e model# and# con"e5uently# it "acri$ice" "ome o$ the moti!ational characteri"tic" inherent in an inducti!e techni5ue. It "eemed to me# $rom my com)ari"on o$ the )roce"" and the )roduct o$ the t+o le""on" that the attraction to a "en"e o$ the unkno+n - +hich i" intrin"ic +ithin the inducti!e method - i" lo"t in the deducti!e model. ;ence# it +a" di$$icult# "ometime"# $or the teacher to reca)ture the attention o$ the "tudent +ho had momentarily +andered. Gut the a'o!e conclu"ion" do not negate the $act that 'oth techni5ue"# inducti!e and deducti!e# are +orth con"ideration 'y all language teacher". E$$ecti!e u"e o$ the"e "trategie" +ould ena'le teacher" to e,)eriment +ith their teaching method" in order to "eek im)ro!ed )er$ormance 'y their "tudent".

&eferences

Ander"on# J. &2330( $ognitive Psychology and its %mplications! Fe+ YorkD ?. ;. @reeman. A.ar# G.S. &233/( $hartbook& ' (eference )rammar * "nderstanding and "sing +nglish )rammar , nd +dition-! 6rentice ;all 1egent". 8elce-Murcia# M.# -ornyei# H.# % Thurrell# S. &2334( Direct 'pproaches in . %nstruction& ' /urning Point in $ommunicative .anguage /eaching? TESIL Juarterly# /2D 272-2:> 8haudron# 8. &2399( 0econd .anguage $lassroom# 8am'ridge A))lied Lingui"tic". ;armer# J. &2393( /eaching and .earning )rammar. Longman. 6eck# A. &2399( .anguage /eachers at Work# 6rentice ;allD International Engli"h Language Teaching. 6ica# T. &2337( 1uestions 2rom the .anguage $lassroom& (esearch Perspective. TESIL Juarterly# >9&2(D 73-43. 1ichard"# J.# 6latt# J.# % ?e'er# ;. &239:( .ongman Dictionary of 'pplied .inguistics! Longman. S)ada# F.# % Light'o+n# 6. &233/( %nstruction and Development of 1uestions in the . classroom! Studie" in Second Language Ac5ui"ition# 2:D>0:->>7. Stoller# @. L.# &2334( Pro3ect Work& ' 4eans to Promote .anguage $ontent! Engli"h Teaching @orum. Kol. /:E7. The Internet TESL Journal# Kol. KI# Fo. 20# Icto'er >000 htt)DEEite"l=.orgE htt)DEEite"l=.orgETechni5ue"EAl-Kharrat--educti!eE