English Language Teaching in its Social Context
English Language Teaching in its Social Context
English Language Teaching in its Social Context
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION 53A number of more recent discussions of the relationship between SLA and languagepedagogy have grappled with this issue. Gass (1 995: 16), for example, suggests that one wayround the <strong>in</strong>sider/outsider problem is for researchers and teachers to work ‘<strong>in</strong> tandem todetcrm<strong>in</strong>e how SLA f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs can be evaluated and be made applicable to a classroomsituation, and to detcrm<strong>in</strong>e which SLA f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs to use’ .The k<strong>in</strong>d of collaborative endeavourGass has <strong>in</strong> m<strong>in</strong>d is one where rcsearchers and teachers seek to understand each other’s goalsand needs and she suggests a number of areas where the concerns of the two groups co<strong>in</strong>cide(c.g. the issue of correction). However, true collaboration <strong>in</strong>volves not just agreement aboutwhat to <strong>in</strong>vestigate but also how. Gass partly addresses this by quot<strong>in</strong>g from Schachter (1 993:181):We need to create a m<strong>in</strong>dset <strong>in</strong> which both teachers and researchers view classroomsas laboratories where theory and practice can <strong>in</strong>teract to make both better practice andbetter theory.The problem here is that whereas researchers may feel comfortable <strong>in</strong> view<strong>in</strong>g classroomsas laboratories, teachers may not. It is also mistaken to imply ~ as Schachter seems to do-that researchers engage <strong>in</strong> theory and teachers <strong>in</strong> practice. SLA and language pedagogy areboth characterized by theory and practice, albeit of different k<strong>in</strong>ds. The issue of howresearchers and teachers can effectively collaborate is complex. It is one that has beenaddressed <strong>in</strong> some depth <strong>in</strong> the education literature. As Gass acknowledges, however, SLAresearchers have paid scant attention to this literature.From this <strong>in</strong>itial exploration of what it means to apply SLA research it is clear thatthere is no easy answer. For some, the immaturity of SLA as a field of enquiry precludesapplications. For others, SLA can only hope to shape teachers’ expectations of what is possible<strong>in</strong> the classroom. Others have developed specific proposals on the basis ofgeneral theoriesof L2 acquisition. Others have suggested that the gap between SLA and teach<strong>in</strong>g can be filledby conduct<strong>in</strong>g research <strong>in</strong> and on L2 classrooms. F<strong>in</strong>ally, some researchers have argued foran approach where they act as consultants address<strong>in</strong>g issues raised by teachers or where theyparticipate <strong>in</strong> collaborative research with t~achers.~As we have seen, each of these approacheshas someth<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>its</strong> favour but none of them is entirely successful <strong>in</strong> clos<strong>in</strong>g the gap betwecnSLA rcscarch and language pedagogy. In the next section we consider the views of a numberof educators on how research can be made relevant to teachers.Educational perspectivesEarlier we noted that the once close connection which SLA researchers <strong>in</strong>itially envisagedbetween SLA and language pedagogy has not cont<strong>in</strong>ued.To understand the gulf that frequentlydivides the theory and practice of research on the one hand, and the theory and practice ofteach<strong>in</strong>g on the other, we need to exam<strong>in</strong>e the guid<strong>in</strong>g pr<strong>in</strong>ciples and assumptions of each. Weneed to consider the culture of research and the culture of teach<strong>in</strong>g.Let us beg<strong>in</strong> with research. It is customary to dist<strong>in</strong>guish two broad traditions <strong>in</strong> empiricalcnquiry ~ the confirmatory and the <strong>in</strong>tcrpretative. The confirmatory tradition is <strong>in</strong>tcrventionist.It is manifest <strong>in</strong> carefully designed experiments, such as the agricultural experimentsof R. A. Fischer (1935) <strong>in</strong> the United States, which wcrc designed to discovcr whichtreatment produced the best crop yields.The key characteristics of the confirmatory traditionare the use ofrandom sampl<strong>in</strong>g (i.e. subjects are randomly distributed <strong>in</strong>to an experimentaland a control group) and the careful control of cxtraneous variables (i.e. those variables that