Segregated Skills vs. Integrated Skills

Segregated Skills vs. Integrated Skills

Itzel Velazquez Cuevas

A Comparative Analysis

English language teaching can be approached in various ways, and two fundamental methods are segregated skills and integrated skills. Both approaches aim to develop students' communicative competence, but they do so in different ways. Below is a comparison of these two methods in the context of English teaching.

Segregated Skills

The segregated skills approach is based on teaching language skills in isolation. This means that each skill (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) is taught and practiced separately, without necessarily integrating them.

2. Easier Assessment

Since the skills are separate, it is easier to assess students' progress in each area independently.

3. Targeted Practice:

1. Specialized Focus

Each skill is addressed with its own methodology. For example, listening classes focus solely on listening activities, while writing classes are dedicated only to writing production.

Students can focus on improving a specific skill without being distracted by others.

Integrated Skills

Simulating Real-Life Situations

Contextualized Learning

Using authentic communication situations makes learning more meaningful, as students can directly see the utility of what they are learning.

The goal is to prepare students to communicate effectively in real contexts, where, for example, one needs to listen and then speak about what was heard, or read a text and then write about it.

Development of Overall Communicative Competence

Challenges in Assessment

By integrating multiple skills into a single activity, students develop more comprehensive and functional communicative competence..

Evaluating progress in integrated skills can be more complex since activities combine several skills and cannot be measured in isolation.

Conclusion Disadvantages and Advantages

Segregated Approach

• Clear and direct focus on each skill; easier to assess individually.

• Does not reflect real language use; may be less motivating due to its repetitive nature.

• Closer to real communication; fosters complete communicative competence.

• More difficult to assess and plan; some skills may be underdeveloped.

Integrated Approach

Both approaches have their merits, and the choice between segregated and integrated skills will depend on the specific goals of the course, students' needs, and the teaching context. A combined approach, using the best elements of both models, could be an effective option to ensure the comprehensive development of students' language skills.