Critique of ALM

Apart from its strength in structuring instruction, the audio-lingual method has its limitations. Because the basic teaching method is repetition, students learn to reproduce many things but never create anything original or use patterns fluently in natural speech situations.

 Mechanical drills of the audio-lingual method have been criticized as boring at all levels and judged to be counterproductive when used beyond initial introduction to a new structure. Additional methods were needed to transition students from imitators to initiators of spoken communication, a detail that was often overlooked by teachers in the audio-lingual tradition.

 There was also a tendency to disregard content while manipulating language. Because the method also relied heavily on advanced technologies of the time, including reel-to-reel tape recorders, movie projectors, and language labs, the method created logistical problems for teachers in setting them up for instruction and during occasions when the equipment failed to function during instruction.

Its weaknesses notwithstanding, the audio-lingual method introduced the technological age to bilingual education, ESL, and foreign-language instructional practice, especially through the introduction of the language laboratory. Language laboratories were installed in many high schools and colleges throughout the United States in the 1960s. The National Defense Education Act of 1958 was the funding mechanism, and the impetus for increased interest in foreign language study to ensure national security came about during the post-Sputnik, cold-war era.

Language students used the language laboratory for drill-and-practice sessions that were characteristic of the audio-lingual method's behaviorist and structural-linguistic-oriented approach to good language habit formation via imitation and memorization. The language laboratory generally consisted of rows of stations, each equipped with a headphone and a microphone. Students listened, responded, listened to their recorded responses, and compared their responses with a model response. The teacher sat at a console at the front of the room, where he or she could listen in on individual students and offer additional feedback or guidance.

 The audio-lingual method also introduced important language learning tools, including visual presentations and the use of visual cues to elicit language. In addition, it ushered in the use of a foreign language in the classroom by both teacher and pupil, and the language employed was of greater use for practical purposes than for understanding the great masterpieces of the target language culture in the target language.

Source: SAGE REFERENCE ONLINE