English Language Teaching in its Social Context

104 LEO VAN LIERLearners need, in addition to peer interaction, direct intcraction with the teacher, providedit is quality interaction. If we ask learners, many will say that they want lectures, explanationsand other forms of cxplicit teachcr guidance. And wc should never neglect the universalpower of stories (Egan 1986).The answer to a disproportionate amount of highly controlling and depersonalizedteacher talk is not to minimize all teacher talk per se but to find ways to modify it in morccontingentdirections. In addition, teacher-learner interaction, such as the IRF, that isdesigned for scaffolding learners’ language use (cognitively or socially) must contain withinit the sceds of handover (Bruncr 1983), that is, the teacher must continually be on thelookout for signs that learners are ready to be more autonomous languagc users.The classroom must regularly provide lcarners with opportunities to engage insymmetrical interactions, since such interactions immersc learners in contextuali7ed andcontingent talk, and since these interactions are intrinsically motivating and attentionfocusing. Symmetrical interactions are most easily achieved when interlocutors are equalin status and profcicncy, but equality is not always essential. Research byYule suggests thatinequality in proficiency can be counterhalanced by having the less proficient speaker carrythe main burden of information transfer.Teachers can also cxpcriment with ways of counterbalancing thc inherent inequality oftheir talk with learners (though in most institutional and cultural settings it would be absurdfor them to pretend that status differences between them and their learners do not exist).In a documentary video, classcs in various British schools set up links with classes infar-flung places like Finland, Greece, and Portugal (Twitchin 1993). At one point, a faxcame in from a class in Greece; it contained drawings and descriptions of weavingtechniques, with labels and cxpressions in Greek. The teacher and learners were naturallyat the same level with respect to this text, and interaction among thcm became symmetricaland exploratory. When a parent who knew Greek was found and invited to class to explainthe text, the teacher and his students were all learners.Taking guidance from these and other cxamples, the thoughtful teacher-researcherlooks for ways to make classroom interaction varied and multidirncnsional. In the world oflanguage, we all embody different voiccs on different occasions (Bakhtin 198 1 ; Wertsch199 1 ; Maybin 1994). It is useful for lcarners to find that their teachers have various voicesand that the learners themselves can cxperiment with multiple voices in the target language.Such experimentation is crucial if they arc to find their own voice, and this is the truepurpose of language education.I thank Kathi Bailey for insightful comments on an earlier draft.1 I realize I gloss over the problems that are inherent in the concept of rulc and that havebeen highlighted in much of thc work of Wittgenstein, for example, PhilosophicalInvestigations.2 While the problcm of poor teacher-student communication cannot be solved by just anycomputer work, there is certainly cvidcnce that innovative use of computers can enhanceinteraction, for cxample, through interactive writing programs and collaborative projectwork (for extensive discussion, see Crook 1994; van Lier 1996).3 Wells distinguishes betwecn third turns that cvaluate or provide follow-up (29-30). Seealso Barnes (1976).4 Symmetry and contingency are closcly related but not synonymous. Symmetry is a