Types and kinds of lesson

The problem of typology of lessonshas come into existence because of divergences in definition of what types and kinds of lesson are. The differences are caused by two reasons: 1) ambiguity in understanding what the aim of a lesson is; 2) classifying lessons at different levels of didactic abstraction. To avoid these divergences, it is necessary:

1) to formulate the aim in terms of only one level of didactic abstraction, otherwise the typology would be of a contradictory character. For example, there is not any difference of principle between lessons in habits and skills development and their consolidation or recapitulation. The difference exists only in words of expression, in formulating the aim of a lesson. Lesson objectives can be defined as didactic. Then we will have language material explanation, its training, revision and control. If we regard the objectives from the methodological point of view, then we will treat them as giving our students educational or cultural information, forming speech habits and developing speech skills. Such understanding of lesson objectives reveals the essence of acquisition of L2 to the full, specifies the process of teaching/ learning the language.

2) There are two ways of characterisation possible while solving the problem of lesson typology. They are theoretical and empirical.

At the level of theory, we can speak about the types of lesson. Thus, types of lessons are understood as invariants, i.e. stable, invariable characteristics possessed by a practical class. In other words, a standard practical class is a generalised notion about possible variants of a lesson as an element of the system of lessons.

Old-fashioned syllabuses assumed that language learning was linear; the structures of the language were presented in a single sequence. There came a point when students had ‘done the present perfect’. Nowadays nobody believes language learning is linear; the same language item needs to be studied again and again throughout the course. There are at least three reasons why this needs to be done: a) learners forget, so straightforward revision is necessary from time to time; b) additional uses of a structure need to be studied – irregular past tense forms are needed to form the past simple, but are also needed in many conditional structures; c) as learners advance they need to deepen their understanding. For example, it may be a good idea to teach the present simple for repeated actions and the present continuous for actions at the moment of speaking at one stage of a student’s course, but this is in no sense the reason for using these tense forms. Nor is this an explanation of the fundamental difference between the two verb forms. As students meet uses which contradict that explanation (e.g.: the present continuous referring to future time, I’m playing tennis on Sunday; the present simple to refer to momentary actions precisely at the moment of speaking, Ah, now I see what you mean) it is necessary to re-examine all previous study of, in this case, the present simple/ continuous, so that students gradually build up a comprehensive view of the underlying difference in the use of these forms. It is unreasonable to expect that they will do this by having a particular difference explained to them when they first meet the form, and then allowing students to meet examples of different uses. Language is a system and, if teaching is to reflect this, teachers must be prepared to return again and again to examine certain fundamental problems of the language. This reconsideration is conducted in cycles broadened in a concentric way.

The cyclical nature of language learning is not, however, confined to structure. It relates to all areas of language learning that is done in cycles. According to M.V. Lyakhovitsky: ‘ A methodological cycle is a notion to indicate the operations repeated periodically and systematically, and performed in a strictly determined sequence within the boundaries of previously set and limited periods of time in order to accomplish a definite goal of teaching’. Such cycles of lessons are groups of standard practical classes, united with one teaching task. These groups are called cycles of standard practical classes.

Empirically, we speak about kinds of lesson. With kinds of lessonwe understand the interpretation of the types of lesson in their realisation as practical classes conducted in a definite teaching setting at a certain moment of time. In other words, kinds of lessons are standard practical classes corresponding to kinds of language activity in L2, whereas variants of practical classes are practical class possible realisations differing in teaching techniques, lesson components, teaching aids and the like.

The system of exercises serves a basis for the typology of lessons. Some units of this system can become separate lessons. Any foreign language lesson as such utilises a definite approach to the process of teaching, a methodological concept reflecting the teacher’s beliefs, the aims and content of teaching at each of the three stages (junior, intermediate, senior) of building up a speech skill and the stage of school development in general.

The analysis of methodological literature shows that the main criterion of practical classes typology is the evolvement of the process of forming habits and developing skills on the basis of language material under study. In other words, types of lesson are seen in the light of the teaching/ learning activity character.

The major criteria for lesson typology are lesson objectives and the level of speech habits and skills development As additional, the following criterion can be traced: the degree of learners’ autonomy in a teaching communicative situation because it is closely connected with the character of teacher-student relationship. The relationships between a teacher and his students are a decisive factor to determine the students’ motives of learning and their involvement in speech activities within the boundaries of the teaching process.

There are usually two main types of lesson distinguished in methodology: training (practice output) and communicative (communication output).

Training lessons are mainly aimed at the formation of habits in operating new language input as a means of communication in a narrow context. That is to receive/ produce a separate sentence, a micro-dialogue or a micro-monologue in a limited communicative situational setting. Training lessons can differ in the kinds of reinforcement for practice output. Training can be based on a key pattern, a rule of grammar or reading (including a model to follow) or a text (on a basis of the previously acquired rules and cue patterns withdrawn).

Communicative lessons are characterised by the learners’ verbal activities in the form of communication output. The learners are aimed at expressing the content of speech, which is to correspond to a communicative situation of a wide context adequately (a monologue, a dialogue, a conversation, a discussion). Communication output lessons are differentiated according to a grading principle (the increase of the level of difficulties). The learners’ activities may be conducted on the basis of:

· key elements and logical-semantic scheme of the text (topical content);

· key elements of the text and a set communicative situation;

· Their own communicative experience of usage of previously acquired language means.

Both training and communicative lessons can be based on any of or all four skills and the variety of language input (finely-tuned/ comprehensible) as teaching material. It goes without saying that production output and communication output are usually combined in one and the same lesson in accordance with its objectives. That’s why there can be distinguished a mixed training-communicative type used most frequently in language teaching practice.

In the teaching/ learning process the language input is acquired in certain chunks. Mastering any of these chunks should be brought to the level of skill performance. This task cannot be accomplished momentarily. Firstly, the process of language acquisition goes through certain stages of habit/ skill formation. Secondly, this process takes more than one lesson, lasting 3 to 5 lessons, i.e. the whole cycle. Consequently, at every lesson a certain stage of habit/ skill formation takes place. The stage, in its turn, is made up of definite steps of language acquisition. Thus, we can subdivide the types of lesson into their kinds. The kinds correspond to the stages of training a skill: formation of a speech habit, its development and development of a speech skill as such.

The training type of lesson will include kinds of lesson preparing for the realisation of a speech skill in a kind of communicative activity. Production output will be trained at two levels of activation. In the first case, small chunks of language input (separate language items up to a group of sentences) are usually used to serve the basis for a speech habit formation. In the second, larger pieces of language input are automated (micro-texts). Correspondingly, there are 3 kinds of lesson in forming habits of speaking, reading, listening (rather seldom) and writing (only at the elementary stage of teaching) in isolation: 1) forming a lexical side of a speech habit; 2) forming a grammatical side of a speech habit; 3) forming a pronunciation side of a speech habit (at the elementary stage). As for the kinds of lesson in developing habits, there can be distinguished: lessons in developing habits of oral speech (speaking and listening); lessons in developing habits of written speech (reading and writing); lessons in developing speech habits (synthetic lessons, mainly at the elementary stage of teaching).

The communicative type of lesson comprises kinds of lesson providing the realisation of speech skill in all four kinds of communicative activity. Communication output is realised at the level of discourse, usually a text of dialogic and monologic character. It is improvement of the already automated speech habits, their perfection. Thus, there are kinds of lesson in improving: a) monological speech; b) dialogical speech; c) skill of writing; d) listening skill; e) reading skill. Besides, there can be distinguished two more kinds, which correspond rather to the stage of teaching: testing kind and revision kind. The check-up lesson is more characteristic of the elementary stage of teaching, while revision lessons are characteristic of the advanced learning.

The model of a lesson can be graphically illustrated as follows: