Book Critique of Teaching by Principles, an Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy

This book provides a significant coverage of the principles of language learning and teaching which are necessary to build an approach to interactive language pedagogy and accomplish communicative objectives. This work is intended to prospective and new teachers who are immersed in second language contexts or English-as-a-foreign-language situations as well. In Douglas Brown’s (2001) words, “Teaching by Principles is a book that helps teachers to build a repertoire of classroom techniques that are firmly embedded in well-established principles of second language acquisition” (p. xxii).

The textbook is divided into six sections, each of them containing a different number of chapters which devote study about that particular topic. The author provides definitions, descriptions and analysis of aspects which go from the history of methods used in teaching English and the cognitive, affective and linguistic principles which form the core of an approach to language teaching; to more practical matters such as how to plan a lesson, integrate the four skills in the classroom and design appropriate tests in order to assess students’ performance. The final section of each chapter offers supplementary material, providing the reader with topics for discussion, action and research and suggestions for further reading as well.

The positive aspects of this written work are numerous. By means of using plain understandable language, Douglas Brown succeeds in making valuable contributions as regards motivation and interaction in the classroom and students’ levels and age. He also provides practical lesson observations and clear charts offering a step-by-step approach to teaching, which are used to emphasize the importance of following an “enlightened approach”. Especially noteworthy is the stress the author lays on this concept because he considers that teachers must employ an eclectic blend of tasks which are built upon what we know about second language acquisition, however, tailored for a particular group of learners in a particular context (Douglas Brown, 2001).

On the other hand, Douglas Brown fails to expand more on some significant topics connected with critical pedagogy. Had the author dealt in depth with issues such as violence, racial/ethnic discrimination or multiculturalism, t he reader would have had tools to engage with these subjects which are constantly present in our classrooms. In other words, not only do books need to provide guidance about methods, approaches and theoretical foundations but it may also be crucial to include professional tools for non-experienced teachers to be able to manage everyday incidents in the classroom.

By and large, it is an interesting book which develops and expands on the theoretical foundations and practical implications of teaching English as a second language; promoting reflection and assessment of our own teaching and role within a society. Moreover, it provides educators with the necessary information to face the challenge of teaching a language. It is definitely worth reading.

Reference

Douglas Brown, H. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy (2^nd ed.). NY: Longman.

Acceptance in the Classroom

I can remember the first day I worked at a Primary School as if it had been yesterday. I was introducing myself to the twenty- five students of sixth year, when I first noticed student X. He was sitting at the front and alone, staring at me and making some questions in a very loud voice. At that moment, student Y  stood up and approached me in order to ask me something. I could not listen to his enquiry because as he was passing X’s chair, he accidentally touched his bag. I did not even imagine that this was going to be the first of several incidents connected with this student.

Everything took place in a couple of minutes; X jumped from the chair and started to hit his partner in his face, Y reacted angrily and I had to stand between the students trying to separate them. What impressed me the most was X’s blind anger, which prevented him from noticing my presence. Fortunately, the head teacher entered the room and tried to hold X in her arms to stop the fight. Even though he did not pay attention to her at first, she managed to persuade him to leave the room with her.

Later, I was informed that X had slight maturational problems. Besides, his partners did not accept him as a peer and constantly laugh at him because he was Paraguayan and his parents were “cartoneros”. To top it all, there was a significant absence from the part of his parents, who were still living at the same house but were not a couple any more. Although Marcelo was not the only child who experienced family problems in the classroom, his discomfort, lack of joy and hostility towards the school was unique among his partners. As Mayer (2008) has suggested, for some children who are struggling to cope with problems at home, school becomes another source of stress and anxiety (p. 125).

I took the situation as a challenge and a chance to show X that there was a different possible reality for him, at least at school. In Wiseman’s (2008) words, respect and cooperation are encouraged by the inclusion of the students’ backgrounds in the classroom.

Therefore, I decided to change the order of the units from the textbook and start by the one about “Recycling Trash” and I also proposed dividing the class into groups to prepare the celebration of the Cultural Diversity Day . Discussing many topics which were really familiar to X made him feel confident enough to express himself freely. Besides, I tried to promote tolerance and a sense of respect towards different cultures. I could observe how X and his mates’ attitude started to change.

Mayer (2008) stated that “for some children, school is the only stable environment in their lives. It becomes a daily place to go and forget about their troubles, where they are accepted by friends, and are positively reinforced for their efforts and behavior by adults” (p.125). X could not ask to be accepted if he did not accept himself first; and I felt very pleased of having, in some way, contributed to this.

Reference

Mayer, D. (2008). Overcoming School Anxiety. New York: Amacom.

Wiseman, D., Hunt, A. (2nd ed., 2008). Best Practice in Motivation and Management in the Classroom, United States of America: Charles C. Thomas Publisher.

Critical Incident Technique: Promoting a Match between Theory and Practice

As a former student of a Teaching Englush as a Foreign Language (TEFL) College, I can remember that my partners and I expected to find, during the years of teacher education, the answers to our inquiries in order succeed in teaching and to compensate our inexperience as regards the teaching-learning process and its context. However, as time passed by and a bit of experience was gained, I realized that theory was sometimes not enough and that it would have been positive to learn how to reflect and solve unexpected conflicts in the classroom during my years at the TEFL College.

Taking into account the significant number of situations which may arise in the classroom, is theory about approaches or methodologies enough when dealing with people, who are by nature unique and can respond in a particular way to the process of learning? In connection to this question, Fernández, Elórtegui and Medina (2003) proposed Critical Incident (CI) as a “pre-service and in-service teacher education strategy.” (p.101). Fernández  and Fernández (1994) added that teachers were asked to take decisions according to the information given in different written situations. (as cited in Fernández, Elórtegui & Medina, 2003).

I think the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) gives us the possibility to reflect upon different plans of actions for incidents such as lack of pedagogic materials or misbehaviour; but without the pressure of being in the classroom itself. As Gil (1991) and Torre (1997) have pointed out, “puede parecer que para enseñar basta con saber” (as cited in Fenández, Elortegui & Medina, 2003, p.102). However, teachers “además deben (...) aplicar decisiones idóneas nuevas sobre el planteamiento de problemas de aula” (Tejada, 2000; as cited in Fernández, Elórtegui & Medina, 2003, p. 102). In other words, teachers can make use of hypothesizing as a resource for future professional decisions without only relying on their common sense.

References

Fernández González, J., Elórtegui Escartín, N., & Medina Pérez, M. (2003). Los incidentes críticos en la formación y perfeccionamiento del profesorado de secundaria de ciencias de la naturaleza. Revista universitaria de Formación de Profesorado, 17-001. Zaragoza, España: Universidad de Zaragoza. Retrieved October 2011, from http://caece.campusuniversidad.com.ar/mod/resource/view.php?id=12816

Defining a Discourse Community

Swales (1990) proposes six different requirements which must be present in any discourse community: common goals, participatory mechanisms, information exchange, community-specific genre, highly specialized terminology and high general level of expertise. The purpose of the present paper is to analyze four articles in order to provide evidence to Swales’ (1990) view of discourse community for a group to be defined as such or not.

Wenzlaff & Wieseman (2004) described teachers as a team working toward the same goal and believed that having others around them with similar goals helps to keep a clear focus. As regards participatory mechanisms, reference to Hoffman-Kipp, Artiles and Lopez-Torres (2003), reveals that whether through writing, speaking, or simply listening as a peripheral member of the activity system, teachers are participating in the construction of knowledge as well as crafting identities within the activity system of this inquiry group.

Furthermore, the group needs to be intercommunicated to guarantee their success. As regards this characteristic, McLaughlin & Talbert (1993) states that a discourse community cannot exist in the absence of a collaborative culture and an environment that supports risk-taking (as cited in Wenzlaff, T., 2004). Similarly, the group’s association will be defined by the use of certain specific genres: “Traditional texts that are vested with high authority and still continue to exert their influences by repetition and reiteration within the discourse community” (Foucault, 1984; as cited in Kelly-Kleese, C., 2001).

Taking into account the specialized terminology, “teachers strive to acquire and continually transform a social language. A social language is a discourse peculiar to a specific professional or ethnic group at a given time” (Holquist & Emerson, as cited in Wertsch, 1991, p.57). Finally, the group should achieve a certain level of expertise. In connection with this, Kelly-Kleese (2004) suggests that the power to name “what is” comes also from one’s level of prestige within the community.

To conclude, taking into account the study of different groups which experts provide in the analyzed articles; it can be stated that the authors agree as regards the presence of common aims, particular discourse, intercommunication and a significant understanding of the area of knowledge within the mentioned communities. Thus, there is vast evidence which shows that varied groups can be recognized as a discourse community as they meet Swales’ requirements.

Reference

Hoffman-Kipp, P., Artiles, A. J., & Lopez Torres, L. (2003). Beyond reflection:

teacher learning as praxis.  Theory into Practice.  Retrieved September 2011, from

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NQM/is_3_42/ai_108442653

 Kelly-Kleese, C. (2001). Editor’s Choice: An Open Memo to Community

College Faculty and Administrators.  Community College Review. Retrieved

September 2011, from 

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_29/ai_77481463

 Kelly-Kleese, C. (2004). UCLA community college review: community

college scholarship and discourse.  Community College Review. Retrieved

September 2011, from 

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_32/ai_n6361541

Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Wenzlaff, T. L., & Wieseman, K. C. (2004). Teachers Need Teachers To Grow.

Teacher Education Quarterly. Retrieved September 2011, from

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3960/is_200404/ai_n9349405

Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the Mind: A Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.