English Language Teaching in its Social Context

68 ROD ELLISin a way that makes them researchable. In so doing, however, it must not impose issues onteachers but rather act as a resource by which teachers can refine questions derived from theirown experience. As Widdowson (1 993) puts it, theorizing must be client-centred.SLA can help in another way. It can providc tcachcrs with information about the kindsof instruments and procedures they will necd to usc in order to collect and analyse data. Somehrty years of researching L2 acquisition have led to the development of a number of researchtools (see Larsen-Freeman and Long 1991 ,AllWright and Bailey 1991), many of which canbe used by tcachers in their own classrooms.As we noted earlier, the idea of the tcachcr as rcsearcher will not always be welcomedby teachers. For some teachers, at least, however, SLA can be made real through thcdiscoveries they make about how their own learners learn a second language.From an applied linguist’s perspective, thcn, SLA is rclcvant to language pedagogy ina number of ways. It can contribute to the appraisal of pedagogic issues. To this end, thcapplied SLA worker can assist by making rcscarch accessible to teachers, by developingtheories of instructed L2 acquisition and by advancing pedagogic proposals based on thesetheories. SLA also has a role in application.The applied SLA researcher can scck to illuminatepedagogic problems and their possible solutions through conducting experimental andinterpretative studics in and, particularly on L2 classrooms. Finally, the SLA worker can actas a facilitator of teachers’ own research by helping thcm formulate research questions andchoose appropriate rcscarch methods. These functions can be sccn as strung out on acontinuum with‘outsider activity’ at onc pole and ‘insider-activity’ at the other.While it canbe argued that the relevance of SLA incrcascs as one moves along the continuum, outsideractivity should not be disparaged, as has become fashionable in some quarters. Teachers canand do benefit from an understanding of the issues discussed in SLA. Howcvcr, the determinationof relevancc is ultimately the duty of the tcachcr, not the applied SLA worker,although the lattcr can aid the process and, doubtlessly, should try to do so.Finally, it must be clearly acknowledged that SLA does not constitutc a body ofknowledge that is necessary for the development of effective teaching skills. As Brumfit(1 983: 61) has observed, ‘learning to pcrform competently is never the samc as learning howto understand the process of performancc and to explain it’. SLA can contribute to teachers’undcrstanding; it cannot ensurc competent practice and, to quote Brumfit again, ‘there isalways the possibility that practicc will run ahead of theory, as wcll as the reverse’ bid. : 68).Notes1 The failure of the comparative method studics to demonstrate the superiority of onemethod over another did not lead to thc abandonment of classroom research based onpedagogical constructs, however. Rather it led to a focus on particular aspects of teaching,such as error trcatmcnt or learner participation. Allwright (1988) describes how the globalmethod studics gave way to the detailed study of classroom processes.2 SLA researchers who began their careers as teachers include Vivian Cook, Pit Corder,Mike Long, John Schumann, ElaincTarone and myself.3 Precisely what counts as a relcvant ficld of enquiry in SLA where language pedagogy isconccrned is, of course, debatable. In Ellis (1999, I argue the case for the irrelevance ofUG-based research and theory. Another area in which I have personally been able to findlittle relevance is language transfer.The competition model (Bates and MacWhinney 1982)has proved productive in promoting research but to date has had little to say to teachers.However, this failure to find rclcvance should not be perceived as a criticism of these areas