English Language Teaching in its Social Context
English Language Teaching in its Social Context
English Language Teaching in its Social Context
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
INTRODUCTION 3learn<strong>in</strong>g, and <strong>in</strong> which ways, is a central question for teachers of language. Patsy Lightbownand N<strong>in</strong>a Spada take up this necessary dualism <strong>in</strong> their account of the cognitive andbehavioural characteristics of what some researchers have referred to as the ‘good languagelearner’. As we will see later <strong>in</strong> the argument of this book, there has to be a third aspect toany such account, namely the <strong>in</strong>fluence of the social conditions of language learn<strong>in</strong>g on theeffectiveness of language learn<strong>in</strong>g. Many learners don’t learn languages <strong>in</strong> classrooms. Theylearn them more or less well or badly, on the street, <strong>in</strong> the community, and <strong>in</strong> the workplace.Certa<strong>in</strong>ly, Lightbown’s and Spada’s territory abuts that of Mitchell and Myles. Factors suchas motivation, aptitude, personality, <strong>in</strong>telligence, learner preferences and learner beliefs, willbe high on any teacher’s list, but so will factors of age, social background, gender andeducational atta<strong>in</strong>ment.Research<strong>in</strong>g second language learn<strong>in</strong>g, and explor<strong>in</strong>g the relationship between research<strong>in</strong>gand teach<strong>in</strong>g is a key element <strong>in</strong> what some have referred to as the teacher as ‘reflective’practitioner. Rod Ellis’ paper on research and pedagogy <strong>in</strong> the context of second languageacquisition squarely addresses this relationship. Questions of decision-driven researchemanat<strong>in</strong>g from practical classroom problems, or knowledge-driven research start<strong>in</strong>g fromtheoretical hypotheses, are but two sides of the same co<strong>in</strong>. At the heart are the practices ofthe classroom, or encounters with the target language <strong>in</strong> other contexts.That these worldsof teach<strong>in</strong>g and research have often been at odds is an issue for this paper, and for this bookas a whole to explore. What Ellis identifies, however, is the importance of mapp<strong>in</strong>g thecultures of teach<strong>in</strong>g and research<strong>in</strong>g and achiev<strong>in</strong>g at least mutual understand<strong>in</strong>g, if not activecollaboration. What is clear after read<strong>in</strong>g Ellis is that it isn’t go<strong>in</strong>g to be enough for teachersto write ‘Here be dragons’ and steer the teach<strong>in</strong>g ship away from the rocky coastl<strong>in</strong>e ofresearch. One useful and productive ground for such collaboration is that of research<strong>in</strong>glearners’styles and strategies <strong>in</strong> language learn<strong>in</strong>g, loolung at what learners do as aspects of theirpersonality, or <strong>in</strong> response to problems and tasks that teach<strong>in</strong>g, or just life <strong>its</strong>elf, confrontsthem. Peter Skehan’s paper has this dual focus and he locates his discussion <strong>in</strong> the key areaof learners’ comprehension of foreign language texts, written or spoken, exam<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g therelationship between <strong>in</strong>put to the learner, what the learner confronts, and what the learnerproduces herself, the output of Icarn<strong>in</strong>g. Important for Skehan, and for our general argument<strong>in</strong> this book, are the ways <strong>in</strong> which learners negotiate mean<strong>in</strong>g, guided by teachers, <strong>in</strong> theirroad towards understand<strong>in</strong>g the foreign language.If negotiation of mean<strong>in</strong>g smacks of the marketplace, then perhaps that is no bad imagefor the exchange of language goods which characterizes both classrooms and social<strong>in</strong>teractions more generally. Estimat<strong>in</strong>g the values to be placed on these goods is, after all,what a good deal of teach<strong>in</strong>g (and learn<strong>in</strong>g) is all about. Leo van Lier’s, Celia Roberts’and Michael Breen’s papers are all sited <strong>in</strong> the markctplace of learn<strong>in</strong>g and teach<strong>in</strong>g. It is time,then, to beg<strong>in</strong> to look at the contexts oflearn<strong>in</strong>g. Now a new set of questions arise. Howlearners <strong>in</strong>teract with each other and other speakers, what do they do when they arc learn<strong>in</strong>ga language, what effect their attitudes, beliefs and feel<strong>in</strong>gs have on language learn<strong>in</strong>g, whatk<strong>in</strong>ds of personal <strong>in</strong>vestment they are prepared to make, how far they can draw on the supportof others, what effects teach<strong>in</strong>g has on learn<strong>in</strong>g, and to what extent the social conditions andpriorities of the social world outside the classroom, and the learners’ places <strong>in</strong> that world,affect what learners do <strong>in</strong> classrooms and how effectively they can learn.Address<strong>in</strong>g these questions suggests a need for some redraw<strong>in</strong>g of the dimensions of thesecond language learn<strong>in</strong>g map. In fact, as we will see <strong>in</strong> the papers which follow <strong>in</strong> thecollection, such questions make us redraw our projection <strong>in</strong> a number of important ways:to take account of the learn<strong>in</strong>g of strategic competence not merely of language competence;of the appraisal of learn<strong>in</strong>g sites, contexts and modes as key variables <strong>in</strong> language acquisition;