Evolution and current status of the method - Assignment Example

Critical Reaction Paper to the Evolution and Current Status of the Method Why is the concept of method in the traditional sense no longer preferred? According to Pennycook (589), the concept of method is prescriptive in nature and expresses a patriarchal, progressivist and positivist perspective of teaching. This is mainly from its definition as a rigid set of hypothetical principles and procedures that teachers should be guided by. He further explains that the concept plays a key role in the maintenance of inequities between male academics and female teachers and language classrooms (Pennycook 589). However, as Kumaravadivelu (2001, p. 537) explains, the concept is characterized by limitations and forces L2 teachers and the profession in general to conceptualize an innovative post-method pedagogy. This is mainly because there is no universal method that is appropriate and suitable for all teaching contexts. Rather, different methods will work better, or even worse, in different contexts and equally important, they are all partially valid (Prabhu 161). For instance, the choice of communicative language teaching can be viewed as an ignorant perception that what is suitable for Europe will also be appropriate for Africa simply because it is a documented method. Essentially, that only serves to develop resistance from learners. The approach of method limits the relationship between teachers and theorizers to one in which teachers are not empowered with knowledge, skill and autonomy implying that they may not devise relevant, coherent and systematic methods based on principled practicality (Kumaravadivelu 1994, p. 537). It is further observed by Brown (74) that the concept of method places all responsibility in the classroom environment upon the teacher and effectively barring students from developing their own initiatives and strategies towards learning. Further, the concept also stifles the notion of self-regulation among learners, which means they cannot develop goal-oriented attempts to direct their learning. Rather, what is preferred is pedagogy of practicality that attempts to go beyond the deficiencies that characterize the dichotomies of the theories of theorists versus the theory of teachers by empowering teachers to form their own theories (Kumaravadivelu 2001, p. 541). In the context of learning a second language, the concept of method does not create an environment that enables learners to develop the necessary autonomy. Rather, there is a sense of bureaucracy whereby the learners typically follow structured instruction from the teachers. Such instruction is basically in the form of repeating dialogue, memorizing rules or translating passages (Brown 74). As explained by Kumaravadivelu (1994, p. 29), there are language-centered, learner-centered and learning-centered methods in which teachers, respectively, introduce vocabulary items and grammatical structures, functional and formal items and create conditions that engage learners meaningfully. Viewed from the perspective of Bell (327), method can be termed as an umbrella term that comprises procedure, design and approach. He opines that theoretically, a method is related to an approach; organizationally, it is determined by a design; and practically, it is it is realized in procedure. However, the concept is no longer preferred in its traditional sense because it is not possible to realize any of the three mentioned methods in its purest form in the classroom setting. Kumaravadivelu (1994, p. 29) further explains that this is because none of the methods is derived from either classroom experimentation or experience but are, rather, transplanted artificially into the classroom and alienated from the reality of the classroom. Hence, it is necessary to move out of the constrictions of the concept of method and find alternatives to effective pedagogy strategies while also creating effective models of transmitting teacher education (Kumaravadivelu 2001, p. 537). Kumaravadivelu (2001, p. 539) further explains that all pedagogy is necessarily local and ignoring local demands as is witnessed in methods translates into ignoring lived experiences. What seems to have taken the place of prescriptive methods? Postmethod pedagogy of practicality that comprises of the parameters of possibility, practicality and particularity is apparently rising above the prescriptive methods (Kumaravadivelu 2001, p. 539). This seems to have taken the place of prescriptive methods because it is founded on the concept that the theory of practice can only be applicable and useful if it is developed through practice rather than structured methods. There seems to be a live, continuous and working theory that involves ongoing action and reflection embedded in the postmethod pedagogy of practicality (Kumaravadivelu 2001, p. 541). First, the design of the postmethod pedagogy facilitates the advancement of language in a manner sensitive to context and considers local political, sociocultural and linguistic particularities. Second, it shifts it focus away from the traditional relationship between practitioners and theorists thus allowing teachers to develop their own innovative practice theories. Then, it takes into consideration the participants’ sociopolitical consciousness and facilitates their social transformation and formation of an identity (Kumaravadivelu 2001, p. 539). More importantly, this postmethod pedagogy of practicality allows teachers to generate their own theory of practice with. This is also a reflection of the opinion that practicing teachers are best placed to explore and develop practical theories and as Kumaravadivelu (2001, p. 541) points out, practice theories are conceived in situations where thought and action are consolidated. Unlike prescriptive methods, postmethod pedagogy of practicality is derived when the thoughtfulness of teachers is fed and feeds simultaneously their reflective capabilities. Effectively, this facilitates their identifying and understanding of issues and evaluating of information. This approach can also be said to have better results than prescriptive methods because through it, teachers are able to assess options and then select the most appropriate alternative. Agreeably, learners tend to be fully dependent on their teachers in the initial stages of learning, which is a typical attribute of the concept of method. However, as Brown (75) notes, teachers are in recent times helping the beginners to develop within themselves a sense of autonomy by training them in strategy and guiding their practice as is witnessed in postmethod pedagogy of practicality. From this view, it becomes apparent that there is a shift away from the traditional focus prescriptive methods had on teachers and the learners are increasingly getting involved in the teaching/learning process. Essentially, self-regulation is maximized in second-language classrooms as teachers implement activities that encourage creativity but do not exceed the learners’ capacity as they gain confidence. It can also be seen that the prescriptive methods are or have been increasingly getting replaced by the postmethod pedagogy of practicality as teachers strive to help learners gain awareness of their own weaknesses, strengths, preferences and styles. Further, in the context of self-regulation, learners are encouraged to set goals for their learning by, for example, being encouraged to try a language that is slightly beyond their capacity at any particular time. However, it is important to note that as Bell (327) points out the concept of method may have its own shortcomings but still remains a prominent approach for classroom teachers. Essentially, more research is required on both the concept of method as well as the postmethod pedagogy of practicality. In your opinion, what should guide a teacher’s methodological decisions and actions? A teacher’s methodological decisions and actions must be guided by considering the social, political, cultural and linguistic details of their learners. Basing on rigorous and critical testing and debate, new approaches should be used alongside modified pedagogic strategies such as, but not limited to, e-learning for the sake of achieving improved learning. This means that they must explicitly have supportive attitudes towards their learners and also display an understanding that they are capable humans in a struggle to acquire a multifaceted set of proficiency in the form of a new language. Rather than simply abiding to a given method, it is imperative that teachers also consider their learners’ vulnerability and lack of power as they seek membership to a new community through language. Ideally, they should closely consider the development of their learners’ identities. The teachers’ methodological decisions and actions should be guided by the knowledge that appropriate methods result from the interactions of teachers, learners and the activities they conduct and materials they use. This means that their decisions and actions should be informed by rationalized teaching practices rather than earlier set prescriptions that are given by other sources. It is also imperative to welcome new and open problem-solving enquiry to not only work alongside but also compete with and criticize conventional methods. Hence, they must consider self-realization, self-regulation, socioaffective factors, autonomy and learner validation in making decisions. The teaching approach should not stifle the learners’ and teachers’ approach to the teaching/learning process or contribute to the lack of depth in understanding. Rather, teachers should design their approach basing on active learning. Their methodologies should be informed by the need to create solutions that will solve educational issues through critical realism. Ideally, teachers should have genuine interest in discovering if creative and personalized innovations are effective in solving educational problems, hence the need of critical rationalism. Equally important, teachers must acknowledge that their knowledge is not immune to imperfection, therefore, they must practice a rational approach in their experimentation, developing testable hypotheses and attempts at repudiation. This demands the ability to be able to distinguish between realistic experiences in the context of education from ill-founded methods. Therefore, their actions and decisions should be driven by hypothesis rather than data provided by conventional methods. Works Cited Bell, D.M. “Method and Postmethod: Are they really so incompatible?” TESOL Quarterly, 37.2 (2003): 325-336. Kumaravadivelu, B. “The postmethod condition: (E)merging strategies for second/foreign language teaching.” TESOL Quarterly, 28.1 (1994): 27-48. Print. Kumaravadivelu, B. “Toward a Postmethod Pedagogy.” TESOL Quarterly, 35 (2001): 537-560. Print. Pennycook, Alastair. “The Concept of Method, Interested Knowledge, and the Politics of Language Teaching.” TESOL Quarterly, 23.4 (1989): 589-618. Print. Prabhu, N. “There is no best method: Why?” TESOL Quarterly, 24.2 (1990): 161-176. Print. Read More