Week 7 A new PPP

Dear all,

The light at the end of the tunnel seems to get smaller and smaller as post method puts an end to the use of an established method as the be all and end all to second language teaching. As Kumaravadivelu (1994)points out it is a search for something other than another method; promoting teacher autonomy within constraints created by institutions, curricula and textbook materials; and a move from eclecticism to principled pragmatism.

It is the principled pragmatism which is interesting given it is preferred over eclecticism which is “the careful principled combination of sound ideas from sound sources into a harmonious whole that yields the best results” (Hammerly, 1991, as cited in Kumaravadivelu, 1994. Principled pragmatism is preferred because it is related to theory and practice that occurs and it does not exclude segments of existing theories or practices. Therefore, teachers need to have a sense of plausibility, this is their “subjective understanding of the teaching they do”(Prabhu, 1990 as cited in Kumaravadivelu, 1994), to be versed in principled pragmatism,. So where is this leading? To an exploratory pedagogical framework that is developed from classroom experience.

At last, the “coal face” is recognised as the arena for situation-specific and need-based contexts to generate methodological principles. However that is where the fun begins for Mike but confusion follows for others. Consequently, the frames presented in Ellis (2005), Richards (1996), Kumaravadivelu (1994) and Allwright (2005) reinforces practitioners’ self-awareness that there is no best method(s) for teaching and learning (and that there is a lot of ground to cover). It is the classroom practices which are important and central to the development of methodological principles, therefore the reflective and exploratory practices required of teachers, begin to emerge from the ongoing dynamic interactions that are situated in the classroom. As a result teachers need to explore their own language teaching approaches and methods to assess their strengths and weaknesses for further adaption of the complex interactions.

Kumaravadivelu’s (2006) proposes a three part postmethod framework: particularity, practicality, possibility. This involves dealing with the teaching of context sensitivity; encouraging the theorizing of what teachers practice; and macro-social factors that lead to identity and social transformations. Is this the new PPP?


L8tr

Albert

References

Allwright, D. (2005). From teaching to learning opportunities and beyond. TESOL Quarterly, 39 (1), 9-32

Ellis, R. (2005). Principles of instructed language learning, System 33, p. 209-224.

Kumaravadivelu. B. (2006). Understanding language teaching: From method to postmethod. Mahwah:Lawrence Erlbaum.

Kumaravadivelu. B. (1994). The post-method condition: (E)merging strategies for second/foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 28: 27-48.

Richards, J. C. (1996). Teachers’ maxims in language teaching TESOL Quarterly, 30 (2), 281– 296.