Total physical response

Total physical response (TPR) is a language teaching method developed by James Asher, a
professor emeritus of psychology at San José State University. It is based on the coordination of
language and physical movement. In TPR, instructors give commands to students in the target
language with body movements, and students respond with whole-body actions.
The method is an example of the comprehension approach to language teaching. The listening and
responding (with actions) serves two purposes: It is a means of quickly recognizing meaning in
the language being learned, and a means of passively learning the structure of the language itself.
Grammar is not taught explicitly but can be learned from the language input. TPR is a valuable
way to learn vocabulary, especially idiomatic terms, e.g., phrasal verbs.
Asher developed TPR as a result of his experiences observing young children learning their first
language. He noticed that interactions between parents and children often took the form of speech
from the parent followed by a physical response from the child. Asher made three hypotheses
based on his observations: first, that language is learned primarily by listening; second, that
language learning must engage the right hemisphere of the brain; and third, that learning language
should not involve any stress.
Total physical response is often used alongside other methods and techniques. It is popular with
beginners and with young learners, although it can be used with students of all levels and all age
groups.

Background
James Asher developed the total physical response method as a result of his observation of the
language development of young children. Asher saw that most of the interactions that young
children experience with parents or other adults combine both verbal and physical aspects. The
child responds physically to the speech of the parent, and the parent reinforces the child's responses
through further speech. This creates a positive feedback loop between the parent's speech and the
child's actions.[1] Asher also observed that young children typically spend a long time listening to
language before ever attempting to speak, and that they can understand and react to utterances that
are much more complex than those they can produce themselves. [2]
From his experiences, Asher outlined three main hypotheses about learning second languages that
are embodied in the total physical response method. The first is that the brain is naturally
predisposed to learn language through listening. Specifically, Asher says that learners best
internalize language when they respond with physical movement to language input. Asher
hypothesizes that speech develops naturally and spontaneously after learners internalize the target
language through input, and that it should not be forced.[2] In Asher's own words:
A reasonable hypothesis is that the brain and the nervous system are biologically programmed to
acquire language, either the first or the second in a particular sequence and in a particular mode.
The sequence is listening before speaking and the mode is to synchronise language with the
individual's body.[3]
The second of Asher's hypotheses is that effective language learning must engage the right
hemisphere of the brain. Physical movement is controlled primarily by the right hemisphere, and
Asher sees the coupling of movement with language comprehension as the key to language
acquisition. He says that left-hemisphere learning should be avoided, and that the left hemisphere
needs a great deal of experience of right-hemisphere-based input before natural speech can
occur.[4]
Asher's third hypothesis is that language learning should not involve any stress, as stress and
negative emotions inhibit the natural language-learning process. He regards the stressful nature of
most language-teaching methods as one of their major weaknesses. Asher recommends that
teachers focus on meaning and physical movement to avoid stress. [4]
The main text on total physical response is James Asher's Learning Another Language through
Actions, first published in 1977.[1]

Principles
Total physical response is an example of the comprehension approach to language teaching.
Methods in the comprehension approach emphasize the importance of listening to language
development, and do not require spoken output in the early stages of learning. [5] In total physical
response, students are not forced to speak. Instead, teachers wait until students acquire enough
language through listening that they start to speak spontaneously. [1] At the beginning stages of
instruction students can respond to the instructor in their native language. [6]
While the majority of class time in total physical response is spent on listening comprehension,
the ultimate goal of the method is to develop oral fluency. Asher sees developing listening
comprehension skills as the most efficient way of developing spoken language skills. [4]
Lessons in TPR are organized around grammar, and in particular around the verb. Instructors issue
commands based on the verbs and vocabulary to be learned in that lesson. [7]However, the primary
focus in lessons is on meaning, which distinguishes TPR from other grammar-based methods such
as grammar-translation.[8]
Grammar is not explicitly taught, but is learned by induction. [8] Students are expected to
subconsciously acquire the grammatical structure of the language through exposure to spoken
language input, in addition to decoding the messages in the input to find their meaning. This
approach to listening is called codebreaking.[9]
Total physical response is both a teaching technique and a philosophy of language teaching.
Teachers do not have to limit themselves to TPR techniques to teach according to the principles
of the total physical response method. [10]
Because the students are only expected to listen and not to speak, the teacher has the sole
responsibility for deciding what input students hear. [11]

Procedure
The majority of class time in TPR lessons is spent doing drills in which the instructor gives
commands using the imperative mood. Students respond to these commands with physical actions.
Initially, students learn the meaning of the commands they hear by direct observation. After they
learn the meaning of the words in these commands, the teacher issues commands that use novel
combinations of the words the students have learned. [10]
Instructors limit the number of new vocabulary items given to students at any one time. This is to
help students differentiate the new words from those previously learned, and to facilitate
integration with their existing language knowledge. [10] Asher suggests that students can learn
between 12 and 36 words for every hour of instruction, depending on their language level and class
size.[10]
While drills using the imperative are the mainstay of total physical response classes, teachers can
use other activities as well. Some typical other activities are role plays and slide
presentations.[10] However, beginners are not made to learn conversational dialogs until 120 hours
into their course.[10]
There is little error correction in TPR. Asher advises teachers to treat learners' mistakes the same
way a parent would treat their children's. Errors made by beginning-level students are usually
overlooked, but as students become more advanced teachers may correct more of their errors. This
is similar to parents raising their children; as children get older parents tend to correct their
grammatical mistakes more often.[10]
According to Asher, TPR lesson plans should contain the detailed commands that the teacher
intends to use. He says, “It is wise to write out the exact utterances you will be using and especially
the novel commands because the action is so fast-moving there is usually not time for you to create
spontaneously.”[12]

Advantages:
1. Engaging and fun: TPR activities involve physical movement and actions,
making the learning process enjoyable and engaging for learners. This can
increase motivation and participation in the language learning process.
2. Effective for beginners: TPR is especially effective for beginners or young
learners who may feel intimidated by traditional language learning methods. The
physical actions help to reinforce vocabulary and grammar concepts, making it
easier for them to understand and remember.
3. Contextual learning: TPR encourages learners to associate words and phrases
with specific actions, providing a contextual and immersive language learning
experience. This can lead to better retention and understanding of the language.
4. Low-pressure environment: TPR creates a low-pressure learning environment,
as it allows learners to interact with the language in a non-verbal way, reducing
anxiety and fear of mistakes.
Disadvantages:
1. Limited applicability: TPR is most effective for teaching vocabulary and simple
commands, but may be less suitable for teaching more complex language skills,
such as speaking and writing.
2. Limited interaction: TPR relies heavily on the teacher's instructions and
demonstrations, limiting the amount of interaction between learners. This may
hinder the development of conversational and communication skills.
3. Lack of focus on grammar: While TPR is effective for vocabulary acquisition, it
may not place enough emphasis on the learning of grammar rules and structures,
which are essential for language proficiency.
4. Not suitable for all learning styles: TPR may not be suitable for all learners,
especially those who prefer more auditory or visual learning styles. Some learners
may find the physical actions distracting or uncomfortable.
Overall, Total Physical Response can be a valuable tool for language learning,
particularly for beginners and young learners. However, it is important to
complement TPR with other language learning methods to ensure a well-rounded
and comprehensive language education.

Teaching materials
Total physical response lessons typically use a wide variety of realia, posters, and props. Teaching
materials are not compulsory, and for the very first lessons they may not be used. As students
progress in ability the teacher may begin to use objects found in the classroom such as furniture or
books, and later may use word charts, pictures, and realia.[13]
There are a number of specialized TPR teaching products available, including student kits
developed by Asher and an interactive CD-ROM for students to practice with privately. [14][15]

Research
Asher conducted a large number of scientific studies to test and refine his hypotheses and the
teaching practices in total physical response. When testing children and adults learning Russian,
Asher and Price found that the adults outperformed the children. [16]

Reception
According to the Routledge Encyclopedia of Language Teaching and Learning, TPR is often
criticized as being only suitable for beginning students. [1] However, the encyclopedia goes on to
note that there are several publications available about how to use TPR with intermediate and
advanced students.[1]
According to its proponents, total physical response has a number of advantages: Students enjoy
getting out of their chairs and moving around. Simple TPR activities do not require a great deal of
preparation on the part of the teacher. TPR is aptitude-free, working well with a mixed ability
class, and with students having various disabilities.[17] It is good for kinesthetic learners who need
to be active in the class. Class size need not be a problem, and it works effectively for children and
adults.
However, it is recognized that TPR is most useful for beginners, though it can be used at higher
levels where preparation becomes an issue for the teacher. It does not give students the opportunity
to express their own thoughts in a creative way. Further, it is easy to overuse TPR-- "Any novelty,
if carried on too long, will trigger adaptation."[18] It can be a challenge for shy students.
Additionally, the nature of TPR places an unnaturally heavy emphasis on the use of the imperative
mood, that is to say commands such as sit down and stand up. These features are of limited utility
to the learner, and can lead to a learner appearing rude when attempting to use their new language.
As a TPR class progresses, group activities and descriptions can extend basic TPR concepts into
full communication situations.
Because of its participatory approach, TPR may also be a useful alternative teaching strategy for
students with dyslexia or related learning disabilities, who typically experience difficulty learning
foreign languages with traditional classroom instruction. [19]

Influence
Teachers who use TPR typically use it together with a variety of other activities and
techniques.[20] It is most often used for introducing new vocabulary. [1] This is in line with Asher's
recommendations for using the method.[20]
Blaine Ray, a Spanish language teacher, added stories to TPR to help students acquire non-
physical language, creating the foundation of the method known as Teaching Proficiency through
Reading and Storytelling (TPRS) built on Stephen Krashen's theories of language acquisition.[21]