Chapters 1 and 2 of Kumaravadivelu's Beyond Methods book were a useful read for me at this point in time because we are touching on methods in my 346 class as well. Chapter 1 began by discussing the various roles that a teacher may occupy throughout his or her career as a precursor to the theories of language learning discussed in the chapters. Some of the roles include scientist, manager, psychologist, and counselor. "Each of them captures the teacher's role partially but none of them fully" (Kuma 7). I believe this statement is applicable to the ideas presented in the first two chapters: there are many theories out there for language teaching and the role of the teacher, none of them works in isolation every single time, but instead need to be used in conjunction and altered according to circumstance and need.
Chapter one presents three different theories for the role of the teacher: teachers as passive technicians (which, when I read, couldn't believe), teachers as reflective practitioners, and teachers as transformative intellectuals. The theory of teachers as reflective practitioners takes into account a good point: even with the successful use of the five roles espousing the theory, "Learning to teach does not end with obtaining a diploma or a degree in teacher education but is an ongoing process throughout one's teaching career" (Kuma 11). I have always thought this idea central to my personal teaching philosophy, viewing teachers more as educators. Teachers as transformative intellectuals are committed to social action and world-making. The principles of Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed, which I have encountered numerous times in my study of language teaching and education, come strongly into play here.
Something interesting that I encountered in this chapter while thinking about how teachers can successfully be able to manage and keep in mind their differing roles as educators was this quote: "It has been suggested that there is no substantial difference between common sense and theory, particularly in the field of education" (Kuma 17). I took this to mean that through the extensive training that pre-service teachers receive, the theory is so ingrained in them that it is almost second-nature. Kuma gives an example of this idea, stating that "common sense is different from theory only by the degree of formality and self-consciousness with which it is invoked" (Kuma 17).
In chapter two, Kuma again responds to a question I had been pondering while reading and throughout my time studying methods in language education: With so much to deal with in the classroom, standards to meet, circumstances to weather, etc., how can we as teachers effectively manage different methods successfully? Kuma states that "No idealized method can visualize all the variables in advance in order to provide situation-specific suggestions" (Kuma 28). He also acknowledges that the eleven common methods of language teaching often overlap to the degree that they are really composed of a lot of the same elements and therefore may not truly be different methods at all, and suggests grouping them into three categories: language-centered methods, learner-centered methods, and learning-centered methods.
Finally, Kuma presents another theory about methods (ironic, no?) that provides the worried pre-service teacher with solace when finding language teaching methods somewhat daunting: postmethod pedagogy. This, he states, "allows us to go beyond, and overcome the limitations of, method-based pedagogy" (Kuma 34). By using three parameters (particularity, practicality, and possibility), which are characteristically blurred, they look at methods three-dimensionally, can facilitate the advancement of context-sensitive pedagogy, enable and encourage teachers to theorize from their practice and practice what they theorize, and use it as a quest for identity formation and social transformation.
No comments:
Post a Comment