English Language Teaching in its Social Context

308 MICHAEL P. BREENThe apparent assumption in thcse deductions is that “L2 achievement”, “acquisition” or“natural language development” can somehow occur almost regardless of contextualvariables. In this chapter, however, I want to suggest that, if we look morc closely at theclassroom as context, such a focus will reveal that the intcraction between learner and dataand the differential outcomes from this interaction will be significantly moulded andcircumscribed by that context. If we discovered and could implement in the classroom allthosc ideal conditions which we may deduce from currcnt SLA research as optimal forlanguage learning, learners will still differcntially achieve. They will continue to learn mostlydifferent things, at different rates, and to different levels of proficiency. Clearly a part ofthis variation in outcomes will bc duc to diversity in the contributions of the lcarncrs tothe process. But variation will also have to lie explained with rcfcrcncc to the particularcontext in which the learning occurred so that input, process, and outcomes are seen asfunctions of how thc learners variously defined that context and acted in it. If we areconcerned with trying to increase the likelihood of success in languagc learning in theclassroom, then we nced to take a socially situated perspcctivc on the interaction betweenlearner and data. In order to justify such a claim, I will begin by offering my interpretationof the context of Icarning.Second Language Acquisition in contextThere is little doubt that the history of SLA not only grew out of the roots put down bystudies of first languagc acquisition and has, over the last twenty years or so, sent up its ownshoots and branches in the shadow of this area of research. Building on the influences ofsociolinguistics, discourse analysis and the work ofvygotsky (1986), there is a significantbody of first language acquisition research which explicitly recognises the interpersonalcontext of learning as the crucible of the whole process of language development(Donaldson 1978, Bruner 198 I , Lock 1980, Schiefelbusch and Pickar 1984, Wells 198 1and 1 985, Foster 1990, inter alia). Evelyn Hatch brought this kind of perspective into SLAresearch in revcaling how learners extend their grammatical repertoires on the basis of the“scaffolding” providcd for them by proficicnt speakers during conversations (Hatch 1978and 1992, Hatch et al. 1990). Her work has had an indirect influence upon those in SLAresearch who claim a “social interactionist” perspective in seeing speech modifications duringcommunication between learners or learners and their teachers as central to thc acquisitionprocess (Long 1981, 1985 and 1996, Lightbown 1985, Pica et al. 1986 and 1987).Only very recently have a number of SLA researchers returned tovygotsky’s complexideas which insist on learning as embedded within, and inseparable from social activity.These researchers propose an extension of investigations into SLA to include a“sociocultural” perspective (Lantolf 1994, Lantolf and Appel 1994). Such a perspective isfairly rcpresented by Leont’cv who, like Vygotsky, saw lcarning as an interpsychologicalundertaking between thosc in society who have mastered knowledge or capability and thosewho are discovcring such knowledge or developing such capabilities. Leont’ev idcntifiedlearning as directly equivalent to othcr social activities in the wider world such as work, orfamily life, or participation in various everyday situations and institutional settings. ForLeont’cv, when we read a text, listen to music, or paint a picture, even when not in thepresence of othcrs, wc are participating in a process that is socially constructed:if we removed human activity from the system of social relationships and social life,it would not exist and would have no structure. With all its varicd forms, the human