English Language Teaching in its Social Context

48 ROD ELLISuniversity-based rescarchers concerned with knowledge-creation rather than to teams ofresearchers and teachers concerned with solving practical tcaching problems through apooling of expertise.Teachcrs rarely have the time to familiari7e themselves with publishedresearch. Also, the very nature of technical and practical knowledge makes it difficult tointer-relate. Considerable effort and probably prolonged interaction are needed to combinethe analytical skills of the researcher with the holistic and highly contextualized skills of theteacher.Similar problems exist regarding the utilization of practical knowledge in the creation oftechnical knowledge. Practical knowledge is largely tacit and difficult to codify. Consequently,its reliability antl validity cannot be easily assessed. Given the requirement thattechnical knowlcdge is demonstrably reliable and valid, rcsearchcrs generally avoid referenceto practical knowledge. However, as Eraut (1 994) notes, researchers’ own practicalexperiences may often influence their work in subtle and unstated ways.To a certain extent,then, the interaction model may work implicitly.This discussion of technical and practical knowledge helps us to understand whySLA, as it has evolved since its inception, cannot automatically be assumed to be of usein language pedagogy and, particularly, to classroom teachers. The gap between SLA andlanguage pedagogy is a product of both the typcs of knowledge these two fields typicallyemploy and the lack of opportunity to bridge the gap.The SLA researchers’ perspectiveThe nature of the relationship between SLA and language pedagogy has attracted theattention of a number of researchers over the years. A useful starting point in our explorationof how SLA might inform pedagogy is to take a look at what these SLA researchers have hadto say.The application of SLA can take place in two rather tliffcrent ways. As Cordcr (1 977)has pointed out, the starting point can be thc rcsearch itself with the applicd linguist cast inthe role of innovator or initiator, advancing pedagogical proposals on the basis of his/herknowledge of SLA. This corresponds to Wciss’s knowledge-driven model of research use.Alternatively, the starting point can be unsolved practical problems in language pcdagogy,in which case the SLA researcher takes on the role of a consultant who is approached bypractitioners for possible solutions. This corresponds to Weiss’s decision-driven model ofresearch use. We find both types of application discussed in the litcrature but it is probablythe first that is paramount, reflecting, perhaps, the dominance of thc researcher’s perspectiveover that of the teacher’s.In general, SLA researchers with a strong interest in pedagogy have been cautious aboutapplying SLA. Early articles by Tarone et ul. (1 976) and Hatch (1 978) emphasized thc needto be careful. Hatch lamcntcd that researchers have often heen over-ready to makeapplications to pedagogy, pointing out ‘. . . our field must be known for the incredible leapsof logic we make in applying our research findings to classroom teaching’. Tarone et ul.(1 976) advanced a number of reasons why SLA could not serve as an adcquate basis foradvising teachers. Among other points, they argued that the research to date was too limitedin scope, that the methodology for collecting and analysing data was unproven antl that toofew studies had been replicatctl.They also noted that the practices of research and teachingwere very different in nature. Whereas researchers adopted a slow, bit-by-bit approach,teachers had immetliatc needs to meet. In the previous section, we considered this importantdifference in terms of the distinction between technical and practical knowledge.