While the ALM is leaps and bounds past the GTM, there are still many issues to be raised about its effectiveness. It seems intuitive at first: to learn how to speak a language, you must repeat it over and over again until you have mastered the pronunciation. In fact, ALM probably generates some of the better pure speakers out of any method. As for the teachers, it greatly simplifies lesson planning. ALM leaves little room for creativity. Instructors must simply come up with a few key phrases each class and have the students repeat them over and over again. But it's not all roses with ALM. It may be easy to teach, but what exactly does it teach? Students are like robots; they continually repeat the same thing, over and over, but without fully understanding the meaning. Is this a productive way to learn a language? If I can speak to a foreigner yet have no idea what I'm saying, does that establish any real human communication? If that fails, what exactly is the point of learning a new language? Overall, ALM certainly has some advantages. The full immersion it suggests and its emphasis on pronunciation are both quite helpful. If used in a limited quantity in an integrated classroom, it can be a valuable tool. If it is relied upon as the main source of learning, however, the student and the teacher are selling themselves short. -Eric DePriester