Australian Applied Language Studies
  • ISSN 0155-0640
  • E-ISSN: 1833-7139
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


This paper explores the differences and common ground in the process writing approach and the procedural or process approaches to language teaching put forward by various British applied linguists. Although some important differences exist between the two “process approaches”, particularly in the role of research data as a basis for proposing teaching methods, they have a common view of teaching and learning. This paper argues that, despite giving some useful insights, these approaches devalue, in varying degrees, teaching, meaning and group relations. It is concluded that Australian educators would do well to be less dependent on proposals emanating from overseas and to take their own and others’ theorizing and practices more seriously.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Allwright, R.
    (1979) Language learning through communication practice. In Brumfit and Johnson (1979): 162–182.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ashenden, D. , J. Blackburn , B. Hannan and D. White
    (1984) Manifesto for a democratic curriculum. The Australian Teacher7:13–19.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Breen, M.
    (1984) Process syllabuses for the language classroom. In Brumfit (1984c): 47–60.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Brlndley, G. P.
    (1984) Needs analysis and objective setting in the adult migrant education program. Sydney, Adult Migrant Education Service.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Broughton, G.
    (1968) Success with English. Harmondsworth, Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Brumfit, C.
    (1980) From defining to designing: communicative specifications vs. communicative methodology in foreign language teaching. Studies in Second Language Acquisition3,1:1–9. doi: 10.1017/S0272263100000140
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100000140 [Google Scholar]
  7. (1984a) Communicative methodology in language teaching: the roles of fluency and accuracy. Cambridge, C. U. P.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. (1984b) Function and structure of a state school syllabus for learners of foreign second languages with heterogeneous needs. In Brumfit (1984c): 75–82.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. (ed.) (1984c) General English syllabus design. Oxford, Pergamon.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Brumfit, C. and K. Johnson
    (eds.) (1979) The communicative approach to language teaching. Oxford, O. U. P.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Calkins, L.
    (1983) Lessons from a child. New Hampshire, Heinemann.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Candlin, C. N.
    (1984) Syllabus design as critical process. In Brumfit (1984c): 29–46.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Christie, F.
    (1984) Development of writing programs: putting an interest in language back into schooling. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics7,1:86–102.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Clark, J. L.
    (1986) Curriculum renewal in school foreign language teaching: an overview. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics9, 1:14–42. doi: 10.1075/aral.9.1.02cla
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.9.1.02cla [Google Scholar]
  15. Cleland, B. and R. Evans
    (1984) Learning English through general science. Melbourne, Longman Cheshire.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. (1985) Learning English through topics about Australia. Melbourne, Longman Cheshire.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Corbel, C.
    (1985) Using the system. Melbourne, A. E. Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Crittenden, B.
    (1982) Cultural pluralism and common curriculum. Victoria, Melbourne University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Department of Education and Science
    Department of Education and Science (1969) Situational English for newcomers to Australia. London and Harlow, Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs
    Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1986) The language question: the maintenance of languages other then English. Report prepared by Mary Kalantzis , Bill Cope ad Diana Slade . Vols.1 and 2. Canberra, A. G. P. S.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Edelsky, C.
    (1982) Writing in a bilingual program: the relation of L1 and L2 texts. TESOL Quarterly16,2:211–228. doi: 10.2307/3586793
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3586793 [Google Scholar]
  22. Elliott, M.
    (1984) Students can write in their second language: an approach to writing in ESL courses. Richmond, Victoria, Hodja.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Giroux, H. A.
    (1987) Critical literacy and student experience: Donald Graves’ approach to literacy. Language Arts642:175–181.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Graves, D.
    (1981) A new look at writing research. In Graves (1984): 92–109.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. (1983) Writing: teachers and children at work. New Hampshire, Heinemann.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. (1984) A researcher learns to write. New Hampshire, Heinemann.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Graves, D. and J. Hansen
    (1982) The author’s chair. In Graves (1984): 177–183.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Hannan, B.
    (1985) Democratic curriculum. Sydney, Allen and Unwin. Melbourne, Victorian Secondary Teachers Association.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Hornsby, D. , D. Sukarna and J. A. Parry
    (1986) Read on: a conference approach to reading. Sydney, Martin Educational.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Hughes, C. , A. Barthel and D. Slade
    (1987) Needs-based programming and the provision of English tuition in the Adult Migrant Education Program. Prospect2,2:183–199.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Kinsella, V.
    (ed.) (1982) Surveys 2. Cambridge, C. U. P.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Language and Learning Series. Victoria, Deakin University Press: 1985
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Lo Bianco, J.
    (1987) National Policy on Languages. Commonwealth Department of Education. Canberra, Australian Government Publishing Service.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Munby, J.
    (1978) Communicative syllabus design. Cambridge, C. U. P.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Murray, D. M.
    (1980) Writing as process: how writing finds its own meaning. In Murray (1982): 17–31.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. (1982) Learning by teaching. Montclair, N. J., Boynton Cook.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Painter, C. and J. R. Martin
    (eds.) (1986) Writing to mean: teaching genres across the curriculum. Occasional Papers No. 9. Sydney, Applied Linguistics Association of Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Parry, J. A. and D. Hornsby
    (1985) Write on: a conference approach to writing. Melbourne, Martin Educational.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Paulston, C. B.
    (1981) Notional syllabuses revisited: some comments. Applied Linguistics2,1:93–95. doi: 10.1093/applin/2.1.93
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/2.1.93 [Google Scholar]
  40. Quinn, T.
    (1985) Functional approaches in language pedagogy. Australian Review of Applied LinguisticsSeries S, 2:1–31.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Raimes, A.
    (1983) Tradition and revolution in ESL teaching. TESOL Quarterly17,4:535–552. doi: 10.2307/3586612
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3586612 [Google Scholar]
  42. Roberts, J. T.
    (1982) Recent developments in ELT. In Kinsella (1982): 96–141.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Turbill, J.
    (1982) No better way to teach writing. Rozelle, N. S. W., Primary English Teaching Association.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. (1983) Now we want to write. Rozelle, N. S. W., Primary English Teachers Association.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Sociocultural Aspects of Language and Learning Series. Victoria, Deakin University Press: 1985
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Victorian Ministry of Education
    Victorian Ministry of Education (1985) Ministerial review of postcompulsory schooling (Blackburn Report). Melbourne, Ministry of Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Walshe, R. D.
    (ed.) (1981) Donald Graves in Australia. Sydney, P. E. T. A.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. White, D.
    (1985) Education: controlling the participants. Arena72:63–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. (1987) Education and the state: federal involvement in educational policy development. Victoria, Deakin University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Widdowson, H. G.
    (1983) Learning purpose and language use. Oxford, O. U. P.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. (1984) Educational and pedagogic factors in syllabus design. In Brumfit (1984c): 23–27.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Zamel, V.
    (1982) Writing: the process of discovering meaning. TESOL Quarterly16,2:195–209. doi: 10.2307/3586792
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3586792 [Google Scholar]
  53. (1983) The composing process of advanced ESL students: six case studies. TESOL Quarterly17,2:165–187. doi: 10.2307/3586647
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3586647 [Google Scholar]
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error